Talk:Aristotelianism

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Philosophy: Ancient C‑class High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ancient philosophy

Still needs summary

Article needs a summary:

What is Aristotelianism?
How would you describe its central notions to a person who has no background in philosophy?

I am making this new section because I feel like the request got lost in comments the first time. Please do not comment in this section, comment below. brain (talk) 17:37, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article doesn't really describe what Aristotelianism is

It doesn't and being a layman, I've no idea what it is apart from the fact that it originates from Plato and a few other people that further developed it. ... You're not the only one! __earth ^(Talk) 14:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a big enough topic that it can be broken down into sections: definition, history, etc. Aquinas needs his own section since he was the single biggest example of Aristotelian philosophy (he also referred to Aristotle as The Philosopher). Uberveritas 00:50, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if this sounds rude, but I agree with the first post. I read the entire article and still have no idea waht aristotelianism is. Perhaps someone with anyknowledge on this can help with at least a few sentences of summary. 71.219.59.103 03:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A third comment: You're not the only one! Surely someone reading this article has done philosophy and can edit? [sorry, I don't know my IP address, but wikipedia should cater to even the more technologically slow of users surely ...?]

Clarify History of Aristotelianism

There are several problems, or complexities, in the history of pre-modern Aristotelianism that need to be mentioned in this article:

1. The works of Aristotle disappeared from public view in Athens and only reappeared in the later Roman Republic. Between Classical Athens and the later Republic there are centuries of silence.
2. Most commentatators in the Empire, besides Alexander of Aphrodisias and Themistius, were Platonists or Neoplatonists. Thus the attempt by the latter to 'Harmonize' the views of Aristotle and Plato. This harmonization needs to be discussed.
3. The Medieval Monotheists also need to be mentioned - but not only Aquinas; Averroes and Maimonides need to be mentioned too.

Thus there is an initial stage in which Aristotle is (almost entirely) forgotten. Then, upon his 'rediscovery', there were established 'systems' (not the right word) of thought -neo/Platonism, Stoicism, Epicureanism, and later, Christianity, Islam and Judaism- that all commented on the recently uncovered Arostotelian texts. 'Aristotelianism' was never a school unto itself; for the most part it lived within or besides other systems that looked to the logical works or the metaphysics of Aristotle for artillary to use in their own various causes. By the time the Monotheists arrive on the scene there are Neoplatonic tracts like the so-called Theology of Aristotle and the Book of Causes that are mistaken for works of Aristotle. Pomonomo2003 02:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Expand

This important article needs to be expanded urgently. Madhava 1947 (talk) 14:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deverbositize and get to the point.

As said. This article really doesn't address the points of Aristotelianism as derived from... Aristotle. And can we make it less verbose? Lequis 06:29, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict-of-interest / ownership issues with this article

I have just reverted an edit from a London, UK, IP which seems to be part of a campaign of linkspam (see User talk:Kelvin Knight). The trouble is, if you connect the various London IP's in this article's history to Knight, it appears that Knight has substantially written this article by himself, including citations to his own work, and has often intervened to remove competing material added by others. I have just removed much of the trail of spam in other articles, but removing it from this one is a more complex task I can't attempt right now. Add in the general and well-founded skepticism about the article's quality as stated several times above, and I wonder if the encyclopedia would be better off without the article. Perhaps it can be regarded as a fork of Virtue ethics. In any case, the article needs careful attention to the history of additions and removals motivated by a conflict of interest. Wareh (talk) 03:14, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]