Robert Laurence Gallagher

Richard Sorabji, in his introduction to the series, Ancient Commentators on Aristotle, of which this volume is a part, claims that these works "represent a missing link in the history of philosophy: the Latin-speaking Middle Ages obtained their knowledge of Aristotle at least partly through the medium of the commentaries. Without an appreciation of this, medieval interpretations of Aristotle will not be understood". If this remark is true of any volume in the series, it is certainly true of this one, which presents R. W. Sharples' translation of the second half of Alexander's Quaestiones, a group of inquiries, 69 in total, on Aristotle's work and thought regarding the nature of providence, the soul, coming-to-be and passing-away, the finiteness of the universe, the nature of magnetism, and other topics.

Aristotle's discussion of Plato's Republic in Politics II is argued to be, at least in part, peirastic, on the grounds that nine premises that Aristotle uses in his arguments on unity and property in the city of the guardians are premises that Socrates himself proposes in the dialogue. The paper supports this claim with a table of parallel passages from the two works. The paper concludes that Aristotle uses a peirastic treatment of the Republic as an opportunity to work out his own answers to the problems of unity and property.

This book presents a positive account of Aristotle's theory of political economy, arguing that it contains elements that may help us better understand and resolve contemporary social and economic problems. The book considers how Aristotle's work has been utilized by scholars including Marx, Polanyi, Rawls, Nussbaum and Sen to develop solutions to the problem of injustice. It then goes on to present a new Social Welfare Function as an application of Aristotle's theory. In exploring how Aristotle's theories can be applied to contemporary social welfare analysis, the book offers a study that will be of relevance to scholars of the history of economic thought, political theory and the philosophy of economics.

Aristotle holds that there must be multiple forms of human being and those forms constitute a genos, this paper argues. Aristotle advances his claim by arguing that the strength of a polis rests on the existence of a spectrum of useful essential differences among its citizens. The paper rejects the notion that eîdos is a homonym, and argues that it signifies `form,' not `species.' Its theses are based on analysis of passages in the Ethics, Metaphysics, Politics and other works. The argument of the paper is compatible with `individual' or `particular' forms. The paper also proposes a solution to the issue of `natural slavery.'

This dissertation advances a solution to a problem intrinsic to understanding the dialogues of Plato. How are we to understand Plato's thought when he never speaks in his own name in any of his dialogues? Many writers assume that Plato's characters speak for him. With this assumption, they study the thought articulated by Plato's characters as if it were his own, and elaborate a so-called "doctrinal" interpretation. A variety of subjective readings follows, since what Socrates and other characters say in the dialogues is often inconsistent or contradictory. To resolve these problems the dissertation constructs a method for interpreting Socratic dialogue which is true to the genre. Extending the work of Bakhtin, Clay, and Kahn, it develops a metalanguage for specifying the structure, plot, aim , and effect of a dialogue as well as the thought , character , and pathos of its participants, by applying concepts in Plato's dialogues and in Aristotle's Poetics, Ethics, Politics, Metaphysics, Physics, and other works. The dissertation shows that the Republic represents Glaucon as subject to erotic desire and desires for luxury and honor, and that the aim of Socrates' discourse is to induce a catharsis in Glaucon in order to change these states of character. ;To support this interpretation, the dissertation shows: Aristotle does not apply a doctrinal reading to Plato's dialogues; he does not attribute the remarks of the character Socrates to Plato. Irwin's claims in "Plato's Ethics" are not supported by the texts of Aristotle which he cites. Aristotle's treatment of the Republic in Politics II is consistent with a mimetic interpretation of the dialogue. His treatment of the Republic is peirastic: he refutes Socrates' proposals with premisses and arguments that Socrates himself expresses in the dialogue. The dissertation discusses Aristotle's treatment of Socrates' proposals for unity in the city of the guardians, the sharing of women and children, gender, sacrilegious acts and incest, property, and the minimum necessary elements for a city. Aristotle's concept of catharsis can be derived from Sophist 230 and Republic X

Marx's criticism of Aristotle's theory of value is refuted. Aristotle's theory is explained. Marx is shown is be even more indebted to Aristotle than previously thought, but his argument for a strict commensurability of goods is shown to fail. Aristotle's solution to the problem of the incommensurability of goods, i.e., his proposal of “sufficient” commensurability “with respect to need,” is discussed as a possible solution and is shown to be representable mathematically. Aristotle's theory of value has greater explanatory power than Marx's

In just proportional exchange, under Aristotle's theory of reciprocal justice, superior sharers in a community materially assist the weaker, and receive honour as a reward. Aristotle's economic thought is represented with a system of 18 formulae. Explained are: (1) What Aristotle means when he says that it is impossible for two sharers or their erga to be commensurable; (2) The extent to which the variables in Aristotle's proportions can be quantified. (3) What diagonal pairing ( ?ατ δ? ??τ?o? σ ??????) is; (4) How need makes sharers and their erga ?sufficiently' commensurable; and (5) Aristotle's theory of what is just in exchange