A presente dissertação visa analisar os conceitos de mimesis e tragédia nas diferentes abordagens dos filósofos Platão e Aristóteles. O problema principal que condiciona a análise é a relação entre, de um lado, as obras de arte e, de outro, a realidade e os juízos morais. Esse problema é estudado através de uma análise dos principais textos nos quais os respectivos filósofos elaboraram suas reflexões sobre o tema, a saber, os livros II-III e X da República de Platão e A Poética de Aristóteles. Nessas diferentes obras vemos progressivamente a elaboração da primeira reflexão ocidental sobre a atividade artística em geral, com ênfase especial sobre a poesia trágica. A polêmica platônica em torno da mimesis e da tragédia tem por objetivo servir de pano de fundo para a compreensão da tese aristotélica de que a ação poética é distinta da ação tal como estruturada na vida, e, isso, em função da prioridade “ontológica” concedida à ação trágica com relação aos caracteres. A tese platônica relativa à arte, é de que a mimesis está na origem da perversão da alma intelectiva e racional capaz de estabelecer a verdade a partir da rememoração da Forma transcendente. Como a tragédia é a imitação da aparência visível das coisas, o que o poeta faz é absorver a coisa sensível em uma imagem parcial, isto é, um pequeno pedaço da coisa, visto que ela, quando sustentada unicamente pela posição do olhar do artista, estilhaça-se em uma multiplicidade cambiante de imagens que essa mesma coisa pode fornecer. É apenas a Forma transcendente que pode bloquear essa proliferação incessante de imagens que distorcem a imagem absoluta das virtudes e da verdade. Ao contrário, em Aristóteles, não vemos nada dessa redução da intriga (mythos) trágica aos conceitos discursivos ou aos valores estáveis éticos. Ao estabelecer o mythos como princípio formal da tragédia, Aristóteles subordina as demais partes constituintes da tragédia à ação enquanto disposição dos fatos em sistema. Assim, caracteres, discursos racionalmente articulados, espetáculo, etc., situam-se em uma posição secundária e subordinada correspondente ao princípio material, deixando-se, dessa maneira, determinar-se pela estrutura simultaneamente lógica e emocional da tragédia. Isso tem como consequência interditar a redução e a imobilização da tragédia em juízos morais enfáticos. / This thesis aims to analyze the concepts of mimesis and tragedy in the different approaches of the philosophers Plato and Aristotle. The main problem which makes the analysis is the relationship between, on one hand, works of art and, on the other, reality and moral judgments. This problem is studied through an analysis of texts in which their philosophers developed their thoughts on the subject, namely, books II-III and X of Plato's Republic and Aristotle's Poetics. In these various works gradually we build the first Western reflection on the artistic activity in general, with special emphasis on the tragic poetry. The controversy around the Platonic mimesis and tragedy aims to serve as the backdrop for understanding the Aristotelian view that the action as structured in life is distinct from the poetic action, and this, according to the priority "ontological" given the tragic action in relation to the characters. The Platonic theory on art is that mimesis is the origin of the perversion of the intellect and rational able to establish the truth from the transcendent form of remembrance. As the tragedy is the imitation of the visible appearance of things, what the poet does is absorb the sensible thing in a partial image, ie, a small piece of it, since she sustained only when the position of the artist's eye, shatters into a multiplicity changing images that that same thing can provide. In the transcendent Form is assigned the role of this interdict ceaseless proliferation of images that distort the image absolute virtues and truth. In contrast, in Aristotle, we see nothing that reduction of the tragic plot (mythos) to the concepts or discursive ethical values stable. In establishing the mythos as a formal principle of tragedy, Aristotle makes the other constituent parts of the tragedy to action as the facts available in the system. Thus, characters, speeches rationally articulated, performance, etc., lie in a secondary and subordinate position corresponding to the material principle, leaving themselves in this way be determined by the tragic structure both logical and emotional. This has the effect of banning the reduction and immobilization of the tragedy in emphatic moral judgments.

A presente dissertação visa analisar os conceitos de mimesis e tragédia nas diferentes abordagens dos filósofos Platão e Aristóteles. O problema principal que condiciona a análise é a relação entre, de um lado, as obras de arte e, de outro, a realidade e os juízos morais. Esse problema é estudado através de uma análise dos principais textos nos quais os respectivos filósofos elaboraram suas reflexões sobre o tema, a saber, os livros II-III e X da República de Platão e A Poética de Aristóteles. Nessas diferentes obras vemos progressivamente a elaboração da primeira reflexão ocidental sobre a atividade artística em geral, com ênfase especial sobre a poesia trágica. A polêmica platônica em torno da mimesis e da tragédia tem por objetivo servir de pano de fundo para a compreensão da tese aristotélica de que a ação poética é distinta da ação tal como estruturada na vida, e, isso, em função da prioridade “ontológica” concedida à ação trágica com relação aos caracteres. A tese platônica relativa à arte, é de que a mimesis está na origem da perversão da alma intelectiva e racional capaz de estabelecer a verdade a partir da rememoração da Forma transcendente. Como a tragédia é a imitação da aparência visível das coisas, o que o poeta faz é absorver a coisa sensível em uma imagem parcial, isto é, um pequeno pedaço da coisa, visto que ela, quando sustentada unicamente pela posição do olhar do artista, estilhaça-se em uma multiplicidade cambiante de imagens que essa mesma coisa pode fornecer. É apenas a Forma transcendente que pode bloquear essa proliferação incessante de imagens que distorcem a imagem absoluta das virtudes e da verdade. Ao contrário, em Aristóteles, não vemos nada dessa redução da intriga (mythos) trágica aos conceitos discursivos ou aos valores estáveis éticos. Ao estabelecer o mythos como princípio formal da tragédia, Aristóteles subordina as demais partes constituintes da tragédia à ação enquanto disposição dos fatos em sistema. Assim, caracteres, discursos racionalmente articulados, espetáculo, etc., situam-se em uma posição secundária e subordinada correspondente ao princípio material, deixando-se, dessa maneira, determinar-se pela estrutura simultaneamente lógica e emocional da tragédia. Isso tem como consequência interditar a redução e a imobilização da tragédia em juízos morais enfáticos. / This thesis aims to analyze the concepts of mimesis and tragedy in the different approaches of the philosophers Plato and Aristotle. The main problem which makes the analysis is the relationship between, on one hand, works of art and, on the other, reality and moral judgments. This problem is studied through an analysis of texts in which their philosophers developed their thoughts on the subject, namely, books II-III and X of Plato's Republic and Aristotle's Poetics. In these various works gradually we build the first Western reflection on the artistic activity in general, with special emphasis on the tragic poetry. The controversy around the Platonic mimesis and tragedy aims to serve as the backdrop for understanding the Aristotelian view that the action as structured in life is distinct from the poetic action, and this, according to the priority "ontological" given the tragic action in relation to the characters. The Platonic theory on art is that mimesis is the origin of the perversion of the intellect and rational able to establish the truth from the transcendent form of remembrance. As the tragedy is the imitation of the visible appearance of things, what the poet does is absorb the sensible thing in a partial image, ie, a small piece of it, since she sustained only when the position of the artist's eye, shatters into a multiplicity changing images that that same thing can provide. In the transcendent Form is assigned the role of this interdict ceaseless proliferation of images that distort the image absolute virtues and truth. In contrast, in Aristotle, we see nothing that reduction of the tragic plot (mythos) to the concepts or discursive ethical values stable. In establishing the mythos as a formal principle of tragedy, Aristotle makes the other constituent parts of the tragedy to action as the facts available in the system. Thus, characters, speeches rationally articulated, performance, etc., lie in a secondary and subordinate position corresponding to the material principle, leaving themselves in this way be determined by the tragic structure both logical and emotional. This has the effect of banning the reduction and immobilization of the tragedy in emphatic moral judgments.

Orientador: Alcides Hector Rodriguez Benoit / Tese (doutorado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Filosofia e Ciencias Humanas / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-06T11:44:25Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Pereira_ReinaldoSampaio_D.pdf: 6973767 bytes, checksum: 4adf120b73d1bb84c7c412ebf15ce026 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2006 / Resumo: Advertimos que não temos como propósito a releitura de algum ponto específico de alguma parte da obra de Aristóteles ou uma nova interpretação acerca de alguma passagem, conceito ou 'doutrina¿ do corpus. Pretendemos tão somente estabelecer certo percurso de análise de um dos importantes conceitos da sua filosofia, a saber, o lógos, a partir da investigação de outro conceito de fundamental importância nos seus textos, a potência, percurso esse que conduz a um aparente paradoxo (o qual constituir-se-á no objeto norteador da nossa pesquisa), qual seja, por um lado, de uma perspectiva física, o lógos confere potencialidade para o homem não ficar totalmente sujeito à necessidade do mundo sublunar, permitindo-lhe agir na contingência que este comporta; por outro, de um ponto de vista prático, esse mesmo lógos tende a encerrar o homem em certa necessidade. / Abstract: Not informed. / Doutorado / Historia da Filosofia Antiga / Doutor em Filosofia

Orientador: Lucas Angioni / Tese (doutorado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Filosofia e Ciencias Humanas / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-15T02:14:07Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Terra_CarlosAlexandre_D.pdf: 1626782 bytes, checksum: feb64d7b26a19056d1444d2b74012727 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009 / Resumo: Pretendemos averiguar como Aristóteles concebe a passagem do nosso conhecimento prévio do mundo ao conhecimento científico, avaliando os pressupostos e consequências de sua resposta ao paradoxo de Mênon e atentando para a metodologia científica defendida nos Segundos Analíticos. Quanto ao conhecimento preliminar necessário à edificação da ciência, procuraremos caracterizar seus tipos e também os meios pelos quais ele pode vir a ser adquirido por nós. Buscaremos estabelecer também as propriedades que o conhecimento científico deve possuir em relação à sua necessidade, universalidade e caráter explanatório. Buscaremos marcar, com precisão, a natureza da conclusão científica segundo a teoria científica aristotélica, argumentando que, nas conclusões, o atributo demonstrado, em relação com seu substrato, representa uma propriedade por si concomitante. Pretendemos averiguar como os diferentes tipos de demonstração e definição respondem a diferentes estágios de organização do saber prévio e a diferentes estágios na estruturação das demonstrações propriamente científicas, e, por conseguinte, como esses se organizam de modo a responder as quatro perguntas que toda investigação científica deve abarcar em seus dois estágios. / Abstract: Our aim is to understand how Aristotle conceives the transition of our previous knowledge of the world to our scientific understanding of it and we will do that by means of judging the presumptions and consequences of his answer to the Menon's paradox and focusing on the scientific methodology found in the Posterior Analytics. In relation to the necessary preliminary knowledge to the edification of science, we will try to characterize its types and also the means by which it can be reached by us. We will also try to settle the properties that the scientific understanding must have in relation to its necessity, universality and explanatory nature. We will mark the precise nature of the scientific conclusion according to the Aristotelian scientific theory, arguing that the attribute demonstrated in the conclusions represents a per se concomitant in relation to its substrate. We want to verify how the different types of demonstrations and definitions correspond to different stages in the organization of the previous knowledge and to different stages in the setting of the proper scientific demonstrations and hereby we will try to understand how these different demonstrations and definitions are related to themselves in order to make the scientist answer the four scientific questions that the scientific investigation must contemplate in its two stages. / Doutorado / Filosofia / Doutor em História da Filosofia Antiga

Le présent travail se propose d’écrire l’histoire de l’influence des tragédies grecques en France au XVIe et XVIIe siècles, dans la conviction qu’elle joua un rôle central, par sa présence ou son absence, dans la naissance et le développement de la tragédie française. Le fil rouge qui se dégage de notre travail est de nature religieuse et historique : les auteurs du XVIe et du XVIIe siècle alternent intérêt et désintérêt pour la tragédie grecque en fonction de la période historique et de leurs croyances religieuses, en fonction non pas de préférences littéraires mais à la suite des choix imposés par leur environnement par ce qu’il convient d’appeler la matérialité de l’Histoire : l’accès aux manuscrits, les interdictions du Concile de Trente, la diffusion du grec, etc. À travers l’analyse de plus de quarante pièces, ce fil rouge permet d’expliquer les fluctuations, autrement incompréhensibles, dans la relation à Euripide et Sophocle, le fait que les tragédies grecques monopolisent – par rapport à Sénèque – l’intérêt des traducteurs (tous évangélistes) de la première moitié du XVIe siècle, qu’elles laissent – avec une étonnante rapidité – le champ libre (en apparence du moins) à l’auteur latin pendant plus d’un siècle à partir de 1550, et qu’elles reviennent ensuite au premier plan avec Racine, dont les maîtres jansénistes partagent avec les évangélistes la dangereuse passion pour le grec. Racine se distingue des autres auteurs par sa capacité de retrouver chez Euripide le secret du personnage tragique, fondement d’une révolution dans l’art d’écrire des tragédies, à laquelle il renoncera lui-même à partir d’Andromaque, sous la pression des critiques et du goût du public. / The present work explores the history of the influence of Greek tragedies on France during the XVIth and XVIIth centuries, in order to demonstrate that this influence played a major role in French tragedy’s birth and development. Our work’s guiding thread is religion and history: XVIth- and XVIIth-century playwrights alternated between interest and lack of interest in Greek tragedy depending on the periods in which they lived and their religious beliefs. Their interest or lack thereof stemmed not from their literary preferences but from phenomena imposed on them by their environment, by what we can call the materiality of history: the access to manuscripts, the Council of Trent’s prohibitions, the spread of Greek, etc. Through the analysis of more than forty plays, this guiding thread helps to explain the fluctuations-hardly understandable otherwise-in the relationship with Euripides and Sophocles; the fact that in the first part of XVIth century, Greek tragedies, as compared with Seneca, monopolise the attention of translators (all linked to Evangelism); the fact that after 1550, with astonishing speed, the Latin author takes over (at least at first sight) for more than a century; and the fact that Greek tragedies come back on stage with Racine, whose Jansenist professors shared with Evangelists the dangerous passion for Greek. Racine stands out from the other authors because of his ability to rediscover the tragic hero’s secret, the cornerstone of his revolution in the art of writing tragedies-a revolution he will be forced by critics and audience taste to renounce, after Andromaque.

Le présent travail s’inscrit dans une démarche de reconstitution de la notion de vie au sein de la pensée antique. Il s’agit de rétablir son sens au coeur de la langue et de la culture grecque, et particulièrement, à l’intérieur de la philosophie et de la pensée aristotélicienne. L’étude s’organise autour de deux termes fondamentaux et propres à la langue grecque, à savoir les mots βίος et ζωή. La première partie s’attache à dégager la forme et le sens «original» des mots, et étudie les facteurs linguistiques et culturels intervenant dans la formation et l’évolution de la forme et du sens des mots en question. Les mots βίος et ζωή se présentent donc comme les éléments structurants de cette étude. La reconstitution du contexte historico-linguistique des mots conduit à la deuxième partie de ce travail, où sont analysés le travail de poètes tels Homère et Hésiode, ainsi que des premiers philosophes, usuellement nommés présocratiques. Dans cette partie du travail de recherche, la notion de vie est dégagée de l’enquête naturelle menée par les premiers penseurs, ainsi que des images fournies par la tradition poétique. Après avoir replacé la notion de vie au sein de son contexte historico-culturel et linguistique, on entame l’étude de la pensée aristotélicienne sur la vie. L’interrogation de départ tient au fait de déterminer si la notion de «vie» chez Aristote passe nécessairement et uniquement par l’étude des êtres vivants et de l’âme, ou si elle dépasse la finalité biologique pour embrasser autres domaines de sa philosophie. Cette partie vise une approche intégrationniste et dynamique de la vie à l’intérieur de la pensée aristotélicienne. La reconstitution de la notion de vie chez Aristote amène à une réflexion sur son lien avec l’enquête naturelle menée par les premiers penseurs. En dernier ressort, l’hétérogénéité de cette étude permet de voir de quelle façon Aristote, certes pionnier dans les recherches sur la vie, conserve pourtant toujours une structure de pensée propre à la Grèce antique : Aristote élabore sa pensée à partir et à l’intérieur de son temps et de la tradition qui lui précède. / The reconstitution of the notion of life within the ancient philosophy is the principal idea of the present study. The aim is to re-establish the conception of this notion within the Greek language and culture, especially within the knowledge of early philosophers and the philosophy of Aristotle. The arrangement of this contribution is based on the meaning and relation of the words βίος and ζωή, two fundamental terms, exclusive to the Greek language. The first part of the study shed new light on the formal constitution and «original» meaning of these words. In particular the linguistic and cultural factors which converge in their formation and evolution are investigated in detail. The reconstruction of the historical and linguistic context of the words βίος and ζωή gives rise to the second part of the study by the means of reconstructing the notion of life within the poetical tradition and investigation of nature, conducted by the early philosophers. The third part of the study approaches the notion of life in the philosophy of Aristotle from the principle question at issue: whether the idea of life is reduced to the investigation of living organisms and his theory of soul or if it exceeds the biologic purpose to encompass other categories of his philosophy. This analysis of the notion of life within the philosophy of Aristotle is conducted by an integrating and dynamic perspective. The reconstitution of the notion of life in the work of Aristotle leads to a reflection about the closeness of his ideas to anterior investigations of natural objects and processes done by the early philosophers. Apart from being a pioneer in the investigation of life, he is also tributary to a particular kind of thinking in ancient Greece. Aristotle’s way of thinking, although far-reaching, is based within his period and preceding traditions

The Cognitive Role of φαινόμενα and its Scientific Use in Aristotle’s Treatises of Science”. We examine a classical discussion about the meaning of the term φαινόμενα in Aristotle. We criticize G. E. L. Owen’s interpretation who identifies its meaning with that of opinion (ἔνδοξα). Based on Aristotle’s treatises of science we propound another interpretation about this topic. Thus, we may emphasize the cognitive role that φαινόμενα have; for this, we highlight the functionthat they have while there are source of the knowledge of principles (cf. APr. I 30) as well as that they are judges of theoretical proposal with which they are in contradiction. In effect, one of the problems to be resolved is how is it possible that a contradiction exists between the principles of a science and the φαινόμενα. / Examinamos una discusión ya clásica sobre el sentido del término φαινόμενα en Aristóteles. Criticamos la interpretación de G. E. L. Owen, quien identifica su significado al de opinión (ἔνδοξα). Con base textual en los tratados de ciencia de Aristóteles, proponemos otra interpretación sobre este tópico. Así,podremos enfatizar el rol cognitivo que poseen los φαινόμενα; para ello, destacamos la función que tienen en tanto que son fuente del conocimiento de los principios (cf. APr. I 30) así como en cuanto se erigen en jueces de propuestas teóricas con las cuales entran en contradicción. En efecto, uno de los problemas a resolver es precisamente cómo es posible que exista una contradicción entre los principios de una ciencia y los φαινόμενα.

Public-meaning originalists contend that judges properly interpret the Constitution only when they discover and apply its “original public meaning”—how the public understood the Constitution at the time it was adopted. Public-meaning originalism is premised on the “fixation thesis”—the meaning of any constitutional text is fixed when it is adopted. Concerns of the present, therefore, cannot affect constitutional meaning. Public meaning originalists acknowledge that the search for the fixed original meaning is not always successful, but it is always ontologically “there” to be found, even if epistemologically we sometimes fail to find it. The fixation thesis underwrites the powerful rhetoric of fidelity originalists deploy against nonoriginalists. Originalists insist that judges who interpret the Constitution using nonoriginalist approaches are “making up” constitutional meaning. But if original public meaning does not exist in the past as a fact which present interpreters can objectively retrieve, public-meaning originalists are equally guilty of “making it up.” The public-meaning enterprise thus rises or falls with its ontological claim that original public meaning is a fact in the past which anyone from the present can recover and apply without altering its objective character. Most public-meaning originalists have ignored the philosophical hermeneutic thesis that any investigation of the past is also shaped by the perspective of the interpreter in the present; the meaning of any text is mutually constituted by past and present. In this view, meaning does not exist in the past as a fact, but is created by the very interpretive effort to find it. Only two public-meaning originalists have defended the fixation thesis against this critique. Keith Whittington rejected it outright in his early work, while Lawrence Solum recently argued its compatibility with fixation. Both arguments fail. “Fixed constitutional meaning” and the other purported objectivities in which public-meaning originalists wrap their theory are no less touched by interpretive subjectivity than the theories new originalists attack. Like all human inquiries into proper action in particular situations, constitutional interpretation is necessarily affected by particularities of the judge, the issue before her, and their relation to constitutional history and contemporary constitutional imperatives. None of this is subject to adjudication by a priori rule or objective method, as public-meaning originalists imagine.No one is “faithfully” interpreting the Constitution in the way public-meaning originalists imagine. Everyone is doing the same interpretive thing, trying to connect the exigencies of the present with a document more than two centuries in force. The fixation thesis is false.

Mon travail de thèse a comme objectif de reconstituer la théorie du vivant d’Épicure en clarifiant la relation entre l’âme et le corps. Autrement dit, je vise à comprendre l’explication épicurienne du vivant en vérifiant comment et en quelle mesure l’âme et le corps sont impliqués dans les phénomènes vitaux comme le sommeil, la respiration, la digestion, etc. Pour ce faire : 1) dans la première partie je reconstitue la doctrine psychologique à travers les écrits d’Épicure (Lettre à Hérodote et livre XXV du Peri Physeos), les témoignages épicuriens (notamment Lucrèce mais aussi Démétrius Lacon et Diogène d’OEnoanda) et anti-épicuriens (Cicéron, Plutarque, etc.) ; 2) dans le deuxième partie j’examine le développement de la psychologie, telle que je l’ai reconstituée, sur la base d’une comparaison dialectique avec Démocrite et Aristote ; 3) dans la troisième partie je reconstitue la théorie physio-biologique à partir du livre IV du De rerum natura en montrant ses liens avec la théorie psychologique et je confronte les explications épicuriennes des phénomènes psychobiologiques avec les explications provenant du milieu atomiste, péripatéticien et médicale ; 4) dans la quatrième partie je ferai une comparaison entre les théories psychobiologiques d’Épicure avec celles d’Asclépiade de Bithynie en confrontant leur application dans l’explication des maladies. / My thesis aims at providing an explanation for the Epicurean theory of the living being by accounting for the relationship body and soul entertain in psycho-biological phenomena. In other words, the aim of this thesis is to investigate in which manner and to what extent both the body and the soul are involved in vital phenomena such as sleep, breathing, digestion etc. To this purpose, sections 1 and 2 will deal more closely with Epicurus’ psychological doctrine, while sections 3 and 4 will integrate the discussion with Epicurus’ account of (psycho-)biological phenomena. Accordingly, section 1 will provide a reconstruction of Epicurus’ psychological doctrine through an analysis of Epicurus’ own writings (Letter to Herodotus; Book XXV of the Peri Physeos), Epicurean testimonies (including Lucretius but also Demetrius Lacon and Diogenes of OEnoanda) and anti-Epicureans accounts (Cicero, Plutarch, etc.). Section 2 will offer a dialectical explanation for the development of Epicurus’ psychology (as reconstructed in section 1) in its relationship with the previous philosophical background, Democritus and Aristotle specifically. Section 3 will consider the physio-biological theory from book IV of the De rerum natura and will acknowledge the links this entertains with Epicurus’ psychological theory. In this context, Epicurean explanations of psycho-biological phenomena will be compared with those offered by the atomist, Peripatetic and medical milieu. Lastly, section 4 will offer a comparison between Epicurus’ psycho-biological theories and those of Asclepiad of Bithynia and will examine their respective application in the context of explaining diseases.

In Book VI of the Nicomachean Ethics Aristotle makes the assumption that there are five states of the soul through which we interact with truth. He continues Book VI with a discussion of his intended meaning of each of these states of the soul. In this study the relevant discussions on each state are extracted from the text to enable a clearer understanding of these states, as Aristotle presents them. Subsequently, the role of each state is studied in the context of the entire Nicomachean Ethics. The primary focus is directed at a clearer understanding of Aristotle’s proposed intellectual virtues, and on their respective roles in the ethical life. Simultaneously, the ethical life that Aristotle presents, and its ultimate end eudaimonia, or happiness, are approached from this perspective. Aristotle argues that reason is the distinguishing feature of humans, and that man’s excellence must include the excellent use of this capacity. This study investigates how Aristotle proposes that the rational intellect should reach its completion, and comes to the conclusion that true mastery of the intellect can only result from the cooperation of the five states of the rational soul. It becomes evident that each state of the soul has a different nature and function, and that through directed cooperation they do not compete with one another, but are mutually enhanced. However, Aristotle repeatedly emphasises the importance of extending thought into action. This makes Aristotle’s ethical theory so attractive: he manages to consolidate his theorizing with the value of experienced reality. This is his essential key to happiness, which is experienced both in perception and in action. By approaching the Nicomachean Ethics from the perspective of the five states of the rational soul, an appreciation is acquired for the fine balance by which action and reason may combine to result in man’s fulfilment of his highest potential. It is in this balance that one finds the secret to eudaimonia. / Dissertation (MA)--University of Pretoria, 2011. / Ancient Languages / unrestricted