The Megaric Possibility Paradox

Author:

Steinkrüger Philipp1ORCID,Duncombe Matthew2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Philosophy II, Ruhr University Bochum , Bochum , Germany

2. Department of Philosophy, University of Nottingham , Nottingham , UK

Abstract

Abstract In Metaphysics Theta 3 Aristotle attributes to the Megarics and unknown others a notorious modal thesis: (M) something can φ only if it is φ-ing. Aristotle does not tell us what motivated (M). Almost all scholars take Aristotle’s report to indicate that the Megarics defended (M) as a highly counterintuitive doctrine in modal metaphysics. But this reading faces several problems. First: what would motivate the Megarics to hold such a counterintuitive view? The existing literature tries, in various ways, to motivate (M) in a way neither trivial nor absurd. But, as we will argue, the main approaches end up attributing an unsustainable position to the Megarics. Second: most historical evidence for the Megaric lineage presents the group’s philosophical practice as dialectical or negative. So why think that the claim reported in Theta 3 presents a positive, and highly controversial, metaphysical claim? This paper addresses these problems by proposing a dialectical (or negative) reading of the Megarics in Theta 3. By ‘dialectical’ we here mean a mode of philosophizing that neither seeks to establish the truth or falsity of certain theses, nor takes a skeptical stance. There are different reasons why a philosopher might want to take up such a mode; in the case of the Megarics we argue that they might have wanted to put pressure on Aristotle’s idea of possibility and the ‘test’ for possibility that Aristotle mentions in several works. Reading, as we do, (M) as (part of) a paradox about possibility and actuality, we argue that the Megarics’ dialectical approach here aims to highlight a shortcoming of an intuitive conception of possibility, which underpins Aristotle’s idea of possibility and which features in his test for possibility.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

History and Philosophy of Science,Philosophy

Reference40 articles.

1. Allen, James. 2019. “Megara and Dialectic.” In Dialectic After Plato and Aristotle, edited by Thomas Bénatouïl, and Katerina Ierodiakonou, 17–46. Cambridge University Press.

2. Bailey, D. T. J. 2012. “Megaric Metaphysics.” Ancient Philosophy 32 (2): 303–21. https://doi.org/10.5840/ancientphil201232228.

3. Bärthlein, Karl. 1963. “Untersuchungen zur aristotelischen Modaltheorie [Zur Diskussion].” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 45: 43–67.

4. Beere, Jonathan. 2009. Doing and Being: An Interpretation of Aristotle’s Metaphysics Theta. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

5. Bobzien, Susanne. 1993. “Chrysippus’ Modal Logic and its Relation to Philo and Diodorus.” In Dialektiker und Stoiker, edited by K. Doering, and Th Ebert, 63–84. Franz Steiner.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3