Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vsgnj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-24T03:39:21.787Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Natural Goals of Actions in Aristotle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 December 2015

HENDRIK LORENZ*
Affiliation:
PRINCETON UNIVERSITYhlorenz@princeton.edu

Abstract:

I argue that there are, according to Aristotle, two importantly different kinds of goals or ends in the domain of human agency and that one of these two kinds has been frequently, though not universally, overlooked. Apart from psychological goals, goals that agents adopt as their purposes, there are also, I submit, goals that actions have by being the kinds of actions they are and, in some cases, by occurring in the circumstances in which they do. These latter goals belong to suitable actions whether or not agents adopt them as purposes and whether or not agents are aware of them. There is evidence both in Aristotle's ethical writings and in his discussion of chance and luck in Physics II.4–6 that he recognizes goals of this latter kind.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © American Philosophical Association 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bonitz, H. (1870) Index Aristotelicus. 2d ed.Berlin: Königliche Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
Broadie, Sarah, and Rowe, Christopher. (2002) Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics: Translation, Introduction, and Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Charlton, William. (1970) Aristotle's Physics Books I and II. Translated with introduction and commentary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Diels, Hermann. (1882) Simplicii in Aristotelis Physicorum Libros Quattuor Priores Commentaria. Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Dudley, John. (2012) Aristotle's Concept of Chance: Accidents, Cause, Necessity, and Determinism. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Freeland, Cynthia. (1985) ‘Aristotelian Actions’. Noûs, 19, 397414.Google Scholar
Freeland, Cynthia. (1991) ‘Accidental Causes and Real Explanations’. In Judson, L. (ed.), Aristotle's Physics: A Collection of Essays (Oxford: Clarendon Press), 49–72.Google Scholar
Irwin, Terence. (1999) Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics. 2d ed.Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett.Google Scholar
Johnson, Monte Ransome (2005) Aristotle on Teleology. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Judson, Lindsay. (1991) ‘Chance and “Always or For the Most Part” in Aristotle’. In Judson, L. (ed.), Aristotle's Physics: A Collection of Essays (Oxford: Clarendon Press), 73–99.Google Scholar
Kraut, Richard. (1989) Aristotle on the Human Good. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lennox, James. (2001) ‘Aristotle on Chance’. In J. Lennox, Aristotle's Philosophy of Biology: Studies in the Origins of Life Science (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press), 250–58.Google Scholar
Leunissen, Mariska. (2010) Explanation and Teleology in Aristotle's Science of Nature. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mai, Angelo, and Zohrabian, John. (1818) Eusebii Pamphili Chronicorum Canonum Libri Duo. Milan: Regiis Typis.Google Scholar
Meyer, Susan Sauvé. (1992) ‘Aristotle, Teleology, and Reduction’. Philosophical Review, 101, 791825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, Susan Sauvé. (1993) Aristotle on Moral Responsibility. Oxford: Blackwell (reissued 2011 by Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Ross, W. D. (1936) Aristotle's Physics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Woods, Michael. (1992) Aristotle's Eudemian Ethics Books I, II, and VIII/Translated with a commentary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar