Pneuma Aristotle Bos

"PNEUMA" AS QUINTESSENCE OF ARISTOTLE'S PHILOSOPHY
Author(s): Abraham P. Bos

Source: Hermes, 141. Jahrg., H. 4 (2013), pp. 417-434
Published by: Franz Steiner Verlag
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/43652882
Accessed: 29-03-2018 13:05 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
Franz Steiner Verlag is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Hermes
This content downloaded from 66.171.203.86 on Thu, 29 Mar 2018 13:05:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HERMES Hermes Band 141 • Heft 4 • 2013
Zeitschrift für klassische Philologie © Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart
PNEUMA AS QUINTESSENCE OF ARISTOTLE'S PHILOSOPHY
Abstract: In this article I argue that the heart of Aristotle's philosophy was his doctrine of
pneuma , which connected his psychology, biology, cosmology and theology, and which was
central to his (lost and extant) works and should be taken into account, even where it is less
explicitly discussed. Pneuma is not a sixth elementary physical body. It is the manifestation
of the divine ether but always mixed with the other four elements within the sublunary sphere.
7. Pneuma as a Problematic Concept in Aristotle's Work
Introductions to Aristotle's philosophy or surveys of his work rarely deal with the
theme of pneuma , if at all. The focus is usually on his logic, his 'hylomorphism',
the psychology of De Anima, his metaphysics and his ethics. His biological writings
and his doctrine of pneuma as the vehicle of vital functions are often disregarded
and neglected.
In addition, modern scholars who have dealt with the subject are uncomfortable
with Aristotle's doctrine of pneuma. Some hold that Aristotle did entertain a theory
of pneuma , but failed to sustain it and finally replaced this doctrine with the theory
of De Anima , in which there is no place for a doctrine of pneuma. (Earlier writings
like the Historia Animalium and the De Motu Animalium , in which pneuma did play
a role, were supposedly left unrevised.) Others consider an opposite hypothesis:
at the end of his life he saw the need for a doctrine of pneuma , started to develop
it, but lacked time to integrate it in his overall system.1
1 J. Annas (1992) 20: 'Aristotle has no overall coherent view of the biological role of pneuma ;
perhaps he would have developed one if he had lived longer.' Cf. also D. Bronstein (2006) 426:
The De anima definition focuses on the soul's relation to the visible body, while the biological
works emphasize pneuma' ' R. King (2007) 323: 'Now, there is hardly a whiff of pneuma in De An.'
In a more general sense I. Düring (1966) 343-4: 'Viele Gelehrten haben versucht, entweder eine
aristotelische Theorie über die Lebenswärme oder eine über das Pneuma zu rekonstruieren. Keiner
dieser Versuche hält eine Gegenüberstellung mit den vorliegenden Aussagen des Aristoteles stand,
wahrscheinlich deshalb nicht, weil Aristoteles die Aufstellung einer konsequenten Theorie nie zu
Ende geführt hat'; M.C. Nussbaum (1978) 143: 'One of the thorniest exegetical problems confront-
ing an interpreter of MA is the theory of the symphyton pneuma , or innate breath, presented in the
treatise's penultimate chapter. The theory is internally obscure, one of a series of cryptic pointers
towards a fuller account of this pneuma that Aristotle may have planned, or even composed, but
which does not survive'; ibid. 161 : 'But in the absence of the detailed account of its operations that
we suspect Aristotle at some point either wrote or planned, they strike us as a somewhat incredible
promotional effort'; ibid. 163: 'We had better regard the theory as one in the course of development
and pneuma as a hypothetical gap-filler whose workings cannot be scrutinized too closely', with a
reference to F. Solmsen (1961) 177; G.E.R. Lloyd (1996) 46: 'What little Aristotle has to say on
418 Abraham P. Bos
In this article I argue that the heart

of pneuma which bound together his
which was central to his (lost and exta
even where it is less (explicitly) or no
Why is it so difficult to ascribe a doc
philosophical school of the Stoa, after
fluential philosophical tradition, assign
this has to do with the dominance of A
tion of the treatise Ilepi IIveú|LiaTOÇ
in his famous paper 'Das Pneuma im
was regarded as Aristotle's standard wo
from 200 AD in the way Alexander of
that view De Anima defended a 'hylom
was taken there as the immaterial form
(oa)|iaxoç ÒQyavixoí) -Anim. II 1 , 412b
De Anima does not directly address or
In a large number of other Aristotelia
On the other hand, the term ' pneuma ' d
tle but generally regarded as not authen
by the Stoa. These works are De Spiri
Another difficult aspect of pneuma is
a 'body' (soma), but in another has pro
ity. For it seems able to be present in
of a 'power' (dynamis) than of an inde
the subject of pneuma is notoriously obscure

(2007) 140-1; S. Berryman (2002) 93: 'Nussba
to the aithèr. . is introduced to perform a spe
Corcilius (2008) 332: 'Aristoteles' Äusserungen
schwer unter einen Hut zu bringen'; R. Bee
"angeborenen Pneuma" (ai)pxļ)UTOV bzw. £Lí(1
(eûļnjTOV Oeqîóv) lässt sich kaum eine ges
112: 'Now, scholars are in general agreement tha
of connate pneuma. Therefore, the task which
to what Aristotle intended to accomplish by i
gy: What, we should ask, were the problems
on p. 136: 'Aristotle apparently groped towar
to describe the physiology of all soul-funct
pneuma was a grand, ambitious and perfectl
F. Buddensiek (2009) 311: 'Das Pneuma ist, a
D. Charles (2009) 304-7.
2 Cf. S. Berryman (2002) 93: 'It (sc. Pneuma - APB) appears late in the account of animal
motion: some think he has already given a complete account of animal motion at De anima 3. 9.'
3 Cf. Gener. anim. III 1 1 , 762al9-20 - cited below; Spir. 2, 481bl9; 3, 482a33; Mu. 4, 394b9-12.
But see Anim. I 5, 409b2: '... if the soul is present throughout the whole percipient body, there
Pneuma as Quintessence of Aristotle's Philosophy 419
Moreover, we know Aristotle as the man famed for his introduction of a 'fifth
element', as distinct from the four Ordinary', sublunary elements. However, his
cosmology does seem to allow margin for four sublunary elements plus ether as
a fifth, but not for a sixth.
And if pneuma can be particularly associated with vital phenomena, it follows
that Aristotle was a kind of materialist or at least a hylozoist, who attributes a
material vehicle to vital phenomena. But the hylomorphistic interpretation of De
Anima (that we mentioned above) seemed to rule this out.
The conclusion is almost inevitable: if our outline of matters is correct, Aris-
totle's doctrine of pneuma seems incompatible with a number of important ele-
ments of his philosophy. If that is indeed the case we will have to conclude that
the pneuma concept only temporarily formed part of his philosophical system and
so involved a 'development' in Aristotle's thought (a development away from a
doctrine of pneuma or towards a doctrine of pneuma). Or we should regard it as a
doctrinal boulder which Aristotle picked up from the pre-Socratic and Hippocratic
tradition but was unable to integrate fully into his system.
2. The Developmental Hypothesis Rejected
This solution needs to be rejected. Aristotle's philosophy is so carefully constructed

and developed in his writings as to render absurd the notion that he included
non-integrated fragments of tradition. Especially in his ÍIeqí Zcbcov revéoeœç
(Generation of Animals) the pneuma- doctrine is fully integrated in and crucial
for his philosophy of all levels of living entities. In addition, the hypothesis of a
'development' in Aristotle's philosophy suffers from the serious drawback of as-
suming that Aristotle simply retained superseded positions in earlier texts, even
after taking a different view. No matter how generally accepted a developmental
hypothesis has become since the famous study by W. Jaeger (1923), it is funda-
mentally weak and improbable.4
So what is a negotiable route? It is an approach to Aristotle's work as a unity, not
just of his extant writings (which seem largely to reflect his personal notes used in
his lectures in the Peripatos from the years 336-323 BC), but also of his dialogues,
which he circulated during his life and which built him a strong reputation during
his lifetime. (It is unlikely, again, that these reflected a philosophy which he later
must, if the soul be a kind of body, be two bodies in the same place' - E'ùjîeq ... èoxiv fļ ijJUX1!
èv navet x(î) aLoBavojiévci) acbîaxi, àvayxaíov év xœ aûxo) ôúo eÎvcxi aœîaxa, el ocbļia xi fļ
iļru/Tl and II 7, 4 18b 17: 'two bodies cannot be present in the same place' - oùôè . . . ôúo oœpnxa
äîa ôuvaxòv év xü) aùxo) eivai.
4 1. Düring (1966) 554-61 usefully criticized several elements of this hypothesis. The study by
C. Lefèvre (1972) is totally devoted to the question whether a development in Aristotle's oeuvre
is demonstrable.
420 Abraham P. Bos
abandoned altogether, because this w

written version of his final views to
3. Pneuma is not a Sixth Element ,
The heart of my alternative approac

presses the proposition that pneuma
reason to postulate, with G. Freud
fewer than five elements. Our starti
celestial, imperishable, orbital elemen
air, water and earth.
Pneuma should be understood within
of five elements and always regarded a
pneuma is not identical with any of
the divine, fifth element than to the
In the crucial passage of Generat
emphatically contrasts pneuma with
earth) and relates it to 'a different k
scription of pneuma here occurs in a
náorjç . . . ôúvapiç éxéqou oœpaxoç

xaX.oufj£vcDv oToixEiov- (bç ôè ôia<
xoiai)xiļ ôia(|)éQEL <1)úoiç. TiávTCjv jièv yàQ
xà ojiEQ^Laxa, xò xaA,oúp£vov 0eq|íóv. x
xò E|jjiEQiX,apßav0n£vov èv xâ) ojiÉQpaxt
(1)í)oiç, àváXoyov ovoa xü) xcöv äoxQCDV
' . . . , the dynamis of every kind of soul ha

so-called "elements" and more divine than the
scale of value, so does that substance differ
itself that which causes it to be fertile - wh
nor a fire-like power, but the pneuma which
nature which is in the pneuma ; and this natur
Aristotle says here that 4 the power (

of a different kind of and more divine
quality of a soul, that corporeal subst
5 Cf. T. Kouremenos (2010) 71.

6 In Anim. II 4, 415b7 semen is called 'an i
included in any modern text edition but wh
'A Lost Sentence on Seed as Instrument of t
138 (2010) 276-87.
7 In Anim. II 1 , 412a6-l 1 Aristotle distingu
characterizes hylè as the dynamis of the sou
Aristotle's argument is not that the capacity of every soul partakes of pneuma and
that he refers to this as a 'more divine element' within the sublunary sphere,8 but
that the capacity of every soul participates in ether through the agency of pneuma ,
though pneuma is not identical with ether. And the fact that the corporeal vehic-
le of the soul-principle may differ in functionality can only be explained by the
hypothesis that this corporeal vehicle is never identical with one single substance
but is always the result of mixture. Pneuma manifests the presence of the divine
ether within the sphere of genesis. Aristotle, in fact, is saying here what he is also
saying in De Anima II 1, 412b5-6, that every soul has 'a natural body' which is
the 'instrumental body' of the soul for its specific tasks, and in the case of those
living beings which belong to the sphere of coming-to-be and passing-away this
natural body is pneuma .9
Because Aristotle in that same Generation of Animals also relates the differ-
ence between plants, fish and quadrupeds to earth, water and air,10 these two texts
together warrant the conclusion that the pneuma present in every vital principle,
from high to low, is not identical with one of the four sublunary elements. Nor
can it be simply equated with the fifth element. Pneuma is the-fifth-element-in-its
connection-with-the-changeable-sublunary-elements, and differs in vital force
and vital quality in accordance with its degree of connection with more or fewer
sublunary elements, which differ in their potential for life. Pneuma does not exist
separately, by itself, but exclusively mixed up with the sublunary elements.
S. Berryman, who focused on the importance of pneuma for the locomotion
of living beings, noted: ' Pneuma , if it is indeed analogous to aithèr ( G.A. 2. 3,
737al), would literally be neither heavy nor light, i.e. have no tendency for up-
ward or downward motion' (2002, p. 95). In this regard pneuma does not seem to
belong to the sphere of 'contraries', just as Aristotle states emphatically that the
heavenly element is exempt from the sphere of contraries ( Cael . 1 3, 270a21).n On
p. 96 she continues: ' Pneuma does not turn into one of the other elements, does
8 Pace G. Freudenthal (1995) 37: The substance in question is the vital heat.'
9 He could not in his definition of the soul in Anim. II 1 use the concept of pneuma because
for the stars and planets Aristotle takes it that not pneuma but ether is the 'instrumental body' of
their soul.
10 Gener. anim. Ill 11, 761bl3- 5: 'We may say that plants belong to earth, aquatic creatures to
water, and four-footed animals to air' - xà fièv . . . <ķvxa 0eiiļ xiç äv yf|ç, tjôcxtoç ôè xà ëvuôga,
xà ôè jieÇà àépoç
11 For this problem the very difficult text of Long. 3 may also be relevant. There in 3, 465bl-3
Aristotle makes the intriguing remark: "Iooaç ô' áv xiç ajtopfļOELev eúXóycoç, ap' ëaxi oi>
ä(|)0aQxov ëoxai xò <()0aQXÓv, olov xò jtûq ava), ov p,fļ ëaxi xò évavxtov.' If my proposal for
explaining the text is correct, Aristotle is talking there about the vital heat 'in the upper part' of the
body of a living being. And he says there that it 'has no contrary'. Cf. A.P. Bos, ' "Fire Above":
the Relation of Soul to its Instrumental Body in Aristotle's De Longitudine et Brevitate Vitae 2-3',
Ancient Philosophy 22 (2002) 303-17 and The Soul and its Instrumental Body. A Reinterpretation
of Aristotle's Philosophy of Living Nature (Leiden, 2003) 183-209 and L. Repici (2009).
422 Abraham P. Bos
not move other elements by means o

and, - we are told [in Motion of An
and heavy. The point seems to be th
so as to become less capable of movin
for forcing other bodies aside. We d
just a stipulation of the task pneuma
Pneuma , then, in Aristotle's view,
But it is of divine origin and quality,
on whether it is less or more obstru
has conjoined. Though unrecognizable
pervasively present in that sphere.12
a 'substance' (sóma) and a 'power' (dy
the ether is not itself. And loss occu
sphere of the divine. For it makes a g
Origin of all life.13 And it makes a d
supralunary sphere, pneuma does not
12 In Gener. anim. Ill 11, 762al8 Aristotle

on earth and in seas and rivers: Hvov
èv yfl p£v íjôíjdq imápxEiv èv ô' vôaxi jrvE
XQÓJtov XLvà Jtávxa eivai jiXt|QT1 - 'A
liquids because there is water in earth, and
that in a sense all things are full of soul.' The
it differs essentially from air. According to A
with lungs would not need to come up fo
5, 443a4-6. Cf. Spir. 2, 482a23: oùô' èvimáQX
hand, fish do not have a respiratory system
13 Cf. Gener. anim. Ill 11, 761bl4: 'but va
wonderful difference - xò ôè |iâXXov xai
xai 0auļxaoxfļv ôiac|)OQáv. Aristotle is expre
the entire cosmos. On this very point there
and On the Cosmos 6, 397b34-8al: Kaxà x
xai T1XXOV (b<1)eX,ELaç ^lExaXapßavovxa -
receiving more or less of divine benefit.' W
of life correspond with those in the quality o
these differences depend on the proximity
soul-body is of a higher quality according t
which are more or less suitable as vehicles o
in which he uses his theory of pneuma to e
tion. So it becomes clear here that plants m
which in any case contains pneuma , mainly
a soul-body that in any case contains pneum
quadrupeds to pneuma and (earth and water b
elements depending on whether their natur
On the Cosmos 6, 397b27-30: pxiXioxa ô
aùxoi) oœpa, xal ëjtEixa xò 'vet èxelvo, xal
Pne uma as Quintessence of Aristotle's Philosophy 423
Aristotle, pneuma is the vehicle of vital potential and vital activity in the sphere
of generation and decay, just as ether is the vehicle of vital activity in the celestial
sphere. For Aristotle, pneuma is also different in relation to the sublunary elements,
because, like ether, it is a vehicle of logos , and as such goal-oriented.
And because pneuma is 'instrument of the soul' in the proper sense, the presence
of pneuma in living entities may mean that the sublunary elementary bodies can
also function as 'instruments of the soul'. Hence Aristotle can say that 'all natural
bodies are instruments of the soul'.14
Being of divine origin, pneuma is also a vehicle of desire for eternity, which
is characteristic of all that lives and comes into being. There is desire for eternity
and immortality in all that comes into being and perishes, and there is something
of a different and more divine element in all ensouled beings. And this has to do
with each other.15 We could perhaps infer from this that Aristotle understood the
life of all mortal creatures to depend on the activity of the power of the celestial,
astral element in these creatures. But in these mortal sublunary creatures the heav-
enly, astral element is 'incognito', unrecognizably disseminated, it is 'in diaspora'
there, 'in dispersion', 'in exile', as Aristotle expressed it in his comparison of the
condition of the human soul with the fate of a prisoner of Etrurian pirates, who
was left to his fate bound to a corpse.16 We might suspect that Aristotle conceived
of pneuma , which he is talking about in Generation of Animals II 3, as that which
carries in itself the desire for divinity and immortality,17 because its own origin
is immortal. The desire (oqeîç) active in all that is ensouled and procreates and
that manifests itself on the level of human existence in the 'desire for knowledge'
( Metaph . A 1, 980al) was regarded by Aristotle as the result of an ontological 'lack',
a 'deficiency' (and as an alternative to Plato's theory that every soul contains a
'memory' - anamnesis - of the eternal and the divine). As the vehicle of 'desire'
for the divine and immortality, pneuma for Aristotle is the symbol of the soul with
its sickness 'for home', for the past, and for its original concentrated condition. In
Aristotle's dialogue Eudemus the protagonist Eudemus, as an exile far from his
homeland Cyprus, is himself in turn a symbol of the soul.
the body which is nearest to him most enjoys his power, and afterwards the next nearest, and so on
successively until the regions wherein we dwell are reached'
14 Anim. II 4, 415bl8. Cf. A.P. Bos, 'Aristotle on the Differences between Plants, Animals and
Human Beings and on the Elements as Instruments of the Soul (Anim. II 4, 4 15b 18)', Review of
Metaphysics 63 (2010) 821-41, pp. 826-31.
15 This is similar to Plato's notion that every mortal creature contains a soul which longs for
its original condition. But Aristotle's view differs essentially from Plato's.
16 Arist. Protrepticus fr. 10b Ross; C 106: 2 Düring; 823 Gigon (Augustinus, Contra Julianum
Pelagianum IV 15, 78). This theme could well be placed in the dialogue Eudemus. Cf. A.P. Bos,
'Aristotle on the Etruscan Robbers: a Core Text of "Aristotelian" Dualism', Journal of the History
of Philosophy 41 (2003) 289-306.
17 For this theme, see Anim. II 4, 415a25-b3; Gener. corr. II 10, 336b27-b7; Gener. anim. II
1, 731b24 ff.
424 Abraham P. Bos
In this connection there is a remar

by Ps.-Hippolytus18, not as strange a
understandable:
3. And overall he [Aristotle] agrees with Plato on most matters, with the exception of the doc-
trine of soul. 4. For according to Plato the soul is immortal, but according to Aristotle it survives
and also disappears then19 by merging into the fifth element, which he assumes to exist alongside
the other four - Fire and Earth and Water and Air - <but> more subtle, like pneuma. ...20
6. He too viewed negative matters in contrast to the good and held that these occur in the
sublunary sphere, but not in the supralunary region.
(He said) that the soul of the entire cosmos was immortal and that the cosmos itself was ever-
lasting, but that the individual soul, as we said above [I 20, 4], disappears.
In the sublunary sphere pneuma is the vehicle of vital force, as ether is in the su-
pralunary sphere, and this vital force has its metaphysical Origin in the transcendent
divine Intellect.21
Aristotle's theory of pneuma was not 'in course of development', as F. Solmsen
(1961) 177 suggested. Pneuma was conceived by him as 'ether in the course of
development' in the sphere of coming-to-be and passing-away.
The presence of pneuma on all levels of life allows Aristotle to explain the
finality of all things in living nature. For in his view pneuma is the vehicle of
18 Ps.-Hippolytus, Refutatio Omnium Haeresium I 20, 3-4 and 6, from which especially 4
should be cited: ó pèv yàg nXáxcav àOávaxov, ó ôè Àqlotot8Xt1ç èrnôian-éveiv < * > xai p£xà
xauxa xai xai)xiļv éva<|)aví££O0ai xcp jtépjrcq) ocbpaxi, ö imoxiÖExai eivai [p-exà] xœv ä M.œv
XEOoápwv - xot) XE jtuqòç xai xf|ç y TOÍ> ÍJÔaxoç xai xoí> àépoç - XortóxEpov, olov
jrvEÍJ^La (ed. M. Marcovich 1986).
19 On account of this 'then', M. Marcovich (1986) assumes a lacuna in the text after 'sur-
vives'. But cf. I 2, 15.
20 M. Marcovich (1986) has proposed to delete the second |liex<x. In that case the translation
would read: 'which he assumes to be more subtle than the other four like pneumď. In both
readings there is a relation between ether and pneuma , inasmuch as they are both fine-material.
This relation is underscored by the proposition that pneuma dissolves into ether. This is possible
only if pneuma is actually ether but in a mixed form. Once the mixture has been reversed, pneuma
can once again show its original nature.
21 Cf. Proclus, In Piatonis Timaeum V 312C (ed. E. Diehl, vol. III 238, 19): 'Before the younger
gods produced this [visible] body they brought about the irrational soul together with another ve-
hicle ( ochêma ), a pneumatic one, such as Aristotle accepted, that goes in and out together with our
immortal [part of the soul], but nevertheless being mortal itself.' - ol véoi 0Eoi ncLQáyovoi kqò
xoûôe oœpxxxoç xfļv akoyov xai öxT1îa áXXo jrvEupxxxixóv, olov xai ÀQiaxoxéXrjç imeXaße,
auv eÇíov xcp àOaváxcp xâ) èv fļpīv xai auvEioióv, 0vi1xòv ôè opxjuç ov. Cf. A.J. Festugière
(1968) vol. V, 104. See alsoThemistius, In Arisi. De an. 19, p. 33: nagà ITXáxam jièv xò aùyoEiôèç
0xTļ|ia xai)xi1ç ëx£xai Tf|Ç ÚJtovoíaç, Jiaçà AqloxoxeXel ôè xò àváXoyov xtp jiépjrccp acbpxxxi
Ö <ļ)iļoiv imáQXEiv èv Jtáoaiç oxeôòv xaiç xœv Çœœv ijwxcrtÇ and cf. HJ. Blumenthal (1996)
112. On the topic of the vehicle of the soul see also A.P. Bos, 'The "Vehicle of the Soul" and the
Debate over the Origin of this Concept', Philologus 151 (2007) 31-50.
goal-oriented action, comparable with that of a tool used expertly by a craftsman,

and pneuma imparts this goal-orientedness to everything with which it is mixed.22
4. Pneuma in On the Cosmos and in De Spiritu
If we can conclude that pneuma for Aristotle has a crucial significance in this
way, in which cosmology, biology and theology are interconnected, there is good
reason to reconsider the work On the Cosmos.23 This work is generally regarded
as inauthentic and dated centuries after Aristotle's death. But the basic structure
precisely in this work is a doctrine of five elements, and though the author of the
work does not deal separately with the theme of pneuma and its importance for the
study of living nature, he adds, in a discussion of an entirely separate issue (that
of the various points of the compass - pneumata ), the remark:
AéyExai ôè xal éxépœç Jivetìpa rj te év (|)uxoíç xai Çœoiç <oi>aa>24 xai ôià Jtàvxœv
ÔLT1xoiíoa EfiipD/óę te xai yóvijioç ovaia, jieqí f|ç vijv X.ÉYELV ovx àvayxatov - Pneuma " is
used in a different sense with regard of the ensouled and generative substance which is found in plants
and living creatures, pervading them totally; but with this we need not deal here' (4, 394b9-12).
On the Cosmos also has a theology which is striking in its criticism of any demi-
urgic conception of God. A description of God as 'Father and Maker' which Plato
used in his Timaeus is lacking, and instead we find the salient term 'Begetter' (6,
397b21; 399a31).25
Entirely in accordance with this, and with the theory of procreation in Genera-
tion of Animals, is that On the Cosmos explains in detail that everything that lives
22 For this motif, see Spir. 9, 485a35-b9; Gener. anim. V 8, 789b7-9: 'So it is reasonable that
nature should perform most of her operations using pneuma as its instrument' - èjieI xa! xò xü)
jrvEÚîaxi EQYáÊaBai xà JioXXà eíxòç (bç òpyáva) Anim. 1 3, 407b25-7: 'a craft must employ
its own tools, and a soul its own body' - ôeî yàç) xfļv p£v xéxvrjv XQf|oOai xoíç òqyóvoiç, xrļv
ôè ipuxTlv xcî) owpaxL
23 The authorship of On the Cosmos has always been hotly contested. Cf. P. Moraux (1984)
vol. 2, 5-82; H.B. Gottschalk (1987) 1132-9. The discussion has been radically affected by the
conclusion of J. Barnes (1977): that 'the tract cannot be expropriated from Aristotle on purely
doctrinal grounds, but he has neither stated nor examined the linguistic arguments for expropriation'.
Barnes considers the work's likely date to be before 250 BC. D.M. Schenkeveld (1991) 221-55
argued for a date between 350-200 BC. But his dating of the work between 350 and 200 BC on the
basis of language and style raises a problem: which anonymous and highly skilled author in this
period would want to present his own ideas as Aristotelian in this way and why? For a complete
survey of the modern debate, see G. Reale and A.P. Bos, Il Trattato Sul Cosmo per Alessandro
Attribuito ad Aristotele (Milano, 1995), 369-411. C. Wildberg, in C. Rapp and K. Corcilius (eds)
(2011) 87, again accepts the first century as probable date.
24 This addition was proposed by D. Holwerda (1993) 50.
25 Cf. A.P. Bos, 'Aristotle on God as Principle of Genesis', British Journal for the History of
Philosophy 18 (2010) 363-77, pp. 368-70.
426 Abraham P. Bos
and exists in the cosmos is the result

(6, 397b20-8al).26
On the Cosmos is also unique in the
quotation of Orphic verses, it disting
a male and a female aspect (7, 401b2)
therefore be regarded as authentically A
But according to this passage in On
totelian writings, pneuma is emphati
and fish, and in everything that has
Anim. II 1, 412b26-7). In warm and m
ous generation of simple living bein
This pneuma is therefore strikingly
Plato and the pre-Socratic physicians.
and as such attached great importanc
complexion on this tradition, by also
form of respiration) with pneuma , a
result, in higher creatures, of the gre
keenly saw that in creatures with resp
in an embryonic phase in which ther
in which there must be a vital princi
this soul. He set this out systematica
chapters 2-4), which forms part of t
is authentic, though all modern schol
denied Aristotle's authorship.28
5. Pneuma in Aristotle's De Anima
F. Buddensiek emphatically argued the view: "Das Pneuma ist, allgemein gesagt,
das Instrument der Seele" according to Aristotle.29 An 'instrument' is an ' organon '
in Greek. When in his famous definition of 'the soul' Aristotle talks about the soul
26 It would be most remarkable if a falsifier or imitator emphasized central themes from Ar-
istotle's Generation of Animals, even though Aristotle's biological writings were long neglected.
27 Cf. A.P. Bos and R. Ferwerda, 'Aristotle's De Spiritu as a Critique of the Doctrine of Pneuma
in Plato and his Predecessors', Mnemosyne 60 (2007) 565-88 and On the Life-Bearing Spirit (De
Spiritu). A Discussion with Plato and his Predecessors on Pneuma as the Instrumental Body of the
Soul. Introduction, translation, and commentary (Leiden, 2008). See also P. Macfarlane (2007).
28 W. Jaeger (1913), repr. (1960) 81 already noted: 'Aristoteles hebt scharf hervor, dass die
Bildnertätigkeit des Pneuma bereits vor Bildung der Lunge einsetzt'. In Spir. 2-4 that point is ar-
gued for as something new and important. It would not make sense hundred years after Aristotle.
29 F. Buddensiek (2009) 311, already quoted above.
as 'the first entelechy of a natural body which is organikon' 30 we should translate

4 organikori as 'instrumental', 'serving as an instrument'. The term has this meaning
everywhere else31 in Aristotle.32
The fact that scholars since Alexander of Aphrodisias have thought that it could
also mean 'equipped with organs'33 is partly due to the lines of Anim. II 1, 412bl-4,
where Aristotle argues that the 'parts' of plants are also 'instruments'. However,
these lines originated from a marginal note added in a manuscript after Alexander
of Aphrodisias' reinterpretation of On the Soul.34
But this means that we must combine what Aristotle says in Generation of
Animals II 3 about the connection of the dynamis of every soul with pneuma , and
what he says in On the Soul about a body that is the instrument of the soul, and
must conclude that Aristotle saw all vital phenomena, of plants, animals and hu-
man beings and of Fire Creatures on the Moon35 mentioned in Gener. anim. III 1 1 ,
76 lb 15-21 and in Motu anim. 4, 699b 19, as being possible only on the basis of the
30 Anim. II 1, 412b5- 6: évteAíxeici fļ jiqwti] oá)|naxoç (ļ)uoixoi> opyavixoi) (text A. Jannone

and E. Barbotin 1966). Cf. 412a27-8.
31 H. Bonitz, Index Aristotelicus 521a20-49 mentions twenty-three passages. To these might
be added six more: Anim. Ill 9, 432bl8; Hist. anim. 1 6, 491a26; Part. anim. II 1, 647a2; Inc. anim.
3, 705b2; Gener. anim. II 6, 742b2; blO. According to S. Byl (1971) 132, the word opyavixov
occurs for the first time in Aristotle.
32 There has been a change to the translation 'instrumental', 'serving as an instrument' in recent
times. See L.A. Kosman (1987) 376-7; M.L. Gill (1989) 112; 133; 220; G. Reale and A.P. Bos
(1995) 288; G.E.R. Lloyd (1996) 40; S. Everson (1997) 64; A.P. Bos, The Soul and its Instrumental
Body (2003) especially 69-122; See also J. Barnes (1999) 121; B. Schomakers (2000) 219; 220;
R. Ferwerda (2000) 19; id., (2005) 136; D. Gutiérrez-Giraldo (2001) 164; S. Menn (2002)
110 n. 40; L.P. Gerson (2005) 136; D. Quarantotto (2005) 240; D. Bronstein (2006) 425; P.
Gregoric (2007) 19 and 23; R. King (2007) 323; R. Polanský (2007) 161; K. Corcilius (2008)
31: 'werkzeughaft'; F. Buddensiek (2009) 311; M. Canarsa (2009) 76 n. 79; J. Dillon (2009)
353 n. 7 ('perhaps'); P. Macfarlane and R. Polanský (2009) 113; M. Migliori (2009) 243-4;
C. Shields (2009) 283; W. Kullmann (2010) 118; R. King (2010) 178.
33 Cf. Alex. Aphrod. Anim. 16, 11: son yàç òpy avixòv ocbjua tò ë/ov jiXelw te xai
0Lacļ)EQOVxa ļiEpiļ ipuxixalç ôvváîEOiv ÚJti]QETEío0ai ôvváp£v a. Quaest. 54, 9-11. In this
interpretation it remains completely unclear how the development of the embryo can take place
up till this stage of differentiated organs and how the soul could then be added at this stage. From
Plutarch, Platonic Questions 8, 1006D and Ps.-Hippolytus, Refutatio Omnium Haeresium VII 24,
1-2 it is evident that before Alexander of Aphrodisias a different exegesis of 'ÒQycivixóv' was ac-
cepted. It is remarkable that these texts never have been mentioned in commentaries on Aristotle,
On the Soul.
34 We know that marginal note from ms E (Parisinus gr. 1853, from the 10th century). See A.
Torstrik (1862) 134. Cf. A.P. Bos, 'Aristotle's Definition of the Soul: Why Was it Misunderstood
for Centuries? The Dubious Lines Anim. II 1, 412bl^', Museum Helveticum 69 (2012) 140-55.
35 On this topic see P. Macfarlane 's paper 'Fire Animals', to be published in Ancient Phi-
losophy (2013).
428 Abraham P. Bos
presence of pneuma in conjunction w

degrees of dominance.36
But although pneuma as vehicle of v
the notion is also present in On the
course. On the Soul II 4, 416b28-9 s
ôiò Jtâv E/EL Oeppoiryta - 'wh
is why everything that has soul in i
the theory of Generation of Animals
vital heat, including its relation with
408b 18-30 of Aristotle's On the Soul
which, if read against the backgroun
make it quite plain that in On the So
view of phenomena like old age, perc
pneuma and vital heat are central as
and its afflictions, deterioration of
appetite, are not presented there as
visible body as a whole, as hylomorph
decrease in the vital heat of the life-b
of the (incorporeal) soul.37 And in II
of 'spontaneous generation' (in which
43 3b 14-5 he says that the instrumen
tion is corporeal. This is a direct ref
he says expressly that pneuma is the b
36 In On the Soul II 1-4 Aristotle does talk

but does not mention the role of pneuma. Does
the necessity of the 'innate pneuma ' in On t
ralia )? Or with the fact that his talk about
ensouled beings, whose soul is not connected
to talk about the generation of mortal livin
of the celestial beings is of course also conne
so-called elements', because their instrumen
37 Cf. A.P. Bos, ' Pneuma as Instrumental B
flictions of Old Age', Philotheos. Int. Jour
- forthcoming.
38 Does this mean that Aristotle adhered s
On the Life-Bearing Spirit and (3) Generat
on the empirical reality of the 'vital heat' as in
framework in Anim.l Did he demonstrate in
in Gener. anim. that it must be connected w
also be known to his audience from his dialo
Jteol xaôóôou liwyTIÇ and neoì XtíÇecdv - c
39 See P. Thillet (2005) 47 and A.P. Bos (2
Pne uma as Quintessence of Aristotle's Philosophy 429
6. The Eudemus on the Generation of Living Beings
The theme of 'the Generation of Living Beings' is one of the subjects to which Aris-
totle brought many new insights of his own. And many of his philosophical themes
can be seen to follow from his theoretical reflections on biological problems.40
His interest in the passing on of life to a new generation forced him to break with
many traditional insights. The fact that fertilization always goes together with the
transfer of a physical 'power' ( Gener, ; anim. II 1 , 733b23-5a4) led him to pass harsh
criticism on his teacher Plato's doctrine of soul. Plato seems to have conceived of
the embryo from the time of fertilization and during the pregnancy as a soul-less
entity, whose crowning moment only arrived with the entrance (from outside) of
a soul-principle, that is, at the birth of the new living being and the inception of
the respiratory process. Aristotle wanted to describe the generation of (new) life
as an intra-natural process. To this end he introduced a doctrine of pne uma as a
different kind of thing from the sublunary physical elements.
His theory that the soul (as soul, and not as intellect) is always connected with
an (instrumental) 'body' results from his study of the theme of procreation. This
also led to his insight into the generic specificity of every soul.
In discussing Aristotle's views on procreation we do well to consider that his
dialogue Eudemus , which he did complete and release for publication during his
lifetime, also dealt with this theme. He introduced there the demon Silenus, who
revealed to King Midas that being born is 'the greatest disaster' which can befall
man.41 And that it is most preferable, for both men and women, 'not to be born',
but most preferable after that to die as soon as possible after birth. We will have to
bear in mind here that the Eudemus may have assigned a special position to man
within the realm of living beings. For in Generation of Animals II 1 731b28-30
Aristotle describes 'being born' as better than 'non-being'.42 We can infer from
this that Aristotle will have spoken less negatively about 'generation' for plants
and animals. The fact that his stricture does apply to man is probably because
man can achieve intellectuality. For man, 'being born' means in any case the
beginning of a long period in which his intellectual functionality is not manifest.
The generation of 'human beings' requires a different level of discourse from
the generation of 'living beings' (and plants). For Aristotle the essence of man is
not the living, concrete visible human being, but what separates man from other
40 Cf. M. Furth (1988) 5.

41 Cf. Plutarch, Consolatio ad Apollonium 115B-E = Arist. Eudem. fr. 6 Ross; 65 Gigon: 'For
it is best, for all men and women, not to be born' - apioxov yàç jtâai xa! Jiáaaiç xò ļifļ yEveaBai
This text contains a long literal quotation from Aristotle's dialogue. Cf. A.P. Bos (2003) 238-57.
42 Cf. Anim. II 4, 415a29-b7. In Gener. corr. II 10, 336b31-2 'generation' is even identified
as the way that God completed the Universe: auvEJtXriQouoE tò öXov ó 0eóç, evSeX-Exf) JtOLTļoag
xfļv YÉVEOLV - text C. Mugler (1966) 69. The oldest manuscript reads èvT£À.exf| here.
430 Abraham P. Bos
creatures, i. e. his intellect.43 Talk a

within the sphere of the physical an
Talk about the generation of man mu
'separately' from all corporeality,44 a
'as asleep' and an entelechy 'as awake
Aristotle probably also used the
consequences of 'the disaster' which h
precisely, his conception) can be reve
to its homeland, which it always cont
how the intellect finally and definiti
7. What exactly is 'Soul' in A
If my analysis of Aristotle's theory o

of Aristotle's philosophy are beset b
'soul' actually is. For in that case the
identical to intellect (a 'different ki
ļjovov évôéxexai xœpiÇeaB ai - An
principle a soul-principle is not the
consisting of a fine-material body wh
ment. This explains why there are r
that the soul consists of an 'astral bod
But the doxography fails to say that
' quinta natura ') is not in itself a sou
with an entelechy as immaterial sou
purely 'materialistic' or 'physicalistic
a frequent theme in the modern liter
And this superficial identification
essentia ' or ' quinta natura ') also fa
relates exclusively to the soul of cel
disclose that the soul of a human ba
echy', and is moreover connected wi
43 Cf. Protr. fr. 6 and 11 Ross; 73 Gigo

'bondage' of the soul in the visible body.
44 It is intriguing that Aristotle uses the mo
thesis emphasizes man as a mortal being. Bu
lectual activity, and of thus transcending his
new human being can possess the potential f
45 Cf. A.R Bos, 'Plutarch on the Sleeping
Entelechy Concept,' in: L. Roig Lanzill
the Religious and Philosophical Discourse o
46 Cf. D.E. Hahm (1982) 66.
Pneuma as Quintessence of Aristotle's Philosophy 43 1
manifests itself in combination with the four sublunary bodies and as pneuma.41
This is why D.E. Hahm (1982) and G. Freudenthal (1995) tried their hardest
to argue that in his lost writings Aristotle did talk about a divine principle of vital
heat (ardor caeli ),48 but that he did not call it 'ether' and that he later drew up an
entirely different framework, when he developed his doctrine of the fifth element
opposite the four sublunary elements.49
References
Alexandři Aphrodisiensis, Quaestiones , De Fato , De Mixtione ed. I. Bruns (C.A.G.

Supplem. 2, 2) (Berolini, 1892).
Alexandři Aphrodisiensis Scripta Minora. De Anima liber cum Mantissa ed. I.
Bruns ( C.A.G. Supplem. 2, 1) (Berolini, 1887).
Annas, J., Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind (Berkeley/Los Angeles, 1992).
Barnes, J., 'Review of G. Reale, Aristotele. Trattato Sul Cosmo per Alessandro
(1974)', in Classical Review 21 (1977) 40-3.
Barnes, J., 'Review of S. Everson (1997)', Classical Review 49 (1999) 120-2.
Bees, R., 'Rezeption des Aristoteles in der Naturphilosophie Zenons: die kosmi-
sche Lebenskraft im Rahmen der Gottesbeweise bei Cicero, De Natura Deorum
2.20-44', in: S. Föllinger (Hrsg.), Was ist 'Leben'? Aristoteles' Anschauungen
zur Entstehung und Funktionsweise von Leben (Stuttgart, 2010) 339-66.
Berryman, S., 'Aristotle on Pneuma and Animal Self-Motion', Oxford Studies in
Ancient Philosophy 23 (2002) 85-97.
Blumenthal, HJ., Aristotle and Neoplatonism in Late Antiquity. Interpretations
of the De Anima (London, 1996).
Bonitz, H., Index Aristotelicus (Berlin, 1870; repr. Graz, 1955).
Bronstein, D., 'Review of A.R Bos (2003)' , Ancient Philosophy 26 (2006) 422-7.
Buddensiek, F., 'Aristoteles' Zirbeldrüse? Zum Verhältnis von Seele und Pneuma
in Aristoteles' Theorie der Ortsbewegung der Lebewesen', in: D. Frede and
B. Reis (eds), Body and Soul in Ancient Philosophy (Berlin/New York, 2009)
309-29.
Byl, S., 'Note sur la Polysémie d'Organon et les Origines du Finalisme', L'Antiquité
Classique 40 (1971) 121-33.
47 This is the most striking aspect of Cicero's reports on the soul in Aristotle as 'astral body',
4 quinta essentia ' or ' quinta natura ', that he does not talk anywhere about pneuma or about ' spiritus '.
48 Cicero, De Natura Deorum I 13, 33 = Arist. Philos, fr. 26 Ross; 25, 1 Gigon. Cf. also H.J.
Easterling (1964); P. Moraux (1963).
49 1 would like to thank Professor Demetra Sfendoni-Mentzou, Dr. Christina Papachristou
and Dr. Christos Pechlivanidis for their comments on this paper at the occasion of my presenting
it before the Interdisciplinary Centre of Aristotelian Studies at the University of Thessaloniki.
432 Abraham P. Bos
Canarsa, M., 'Una Lacuna Platonica

nella Prima Accademia Antica', i
e Virtù. Anima e Corpo in Aristote
Charles, D., 'Aristotle on Desire an
Body and Soul in Ancient Philosoph
Corcilius, K., Streben und Bewegen.
bewegung (Berlin, 2008).
Dillon, J., 'How does the Soul direct
Mind-Body Relations in the Old
Body and Soul in Ancient Philosoph
Düring, I., Aristoteles. Darstellung
berg, 1966).
Easterling, HJ., ' Quinta Natura' M
Everson, S., Aristotle on Perception
Ferwerda, R., Aristoteles, Over Dier
voorzien (Groningen, 2000).
Ferwerda, R., Aristoteles, Over Voor
ningen voorzien (Groningen, 2005)
Festugière, A.J., Proclus , Comment
(Paris, 1966-8).
Freudenthal, G., Aristotle's Theor
Form and Soul (Oxford, 1995).
Freudenthal, G., 'The Astrologizatio
ences on the Sublunar World in Ari
roes', in: A.C. Bowen and C. Wildbe
De Cáelo (Leiden, 2009) 239-81.
Furth, M., Substance, Form and P
bridge, 1988).
Gerson, L.P., Aristotle and Other Pl
Gill, M.L., Aristotle on Substance. T
Gottschalk, H.B., 'Aristotelian Philo
of Cicero to the End of the Second
Römischen Welt , vol. II 36, 2 (Ber
Gregoric, P., Aristotle on the Comm
Gutiérrez-Giraldo, D., 'Wu/ti a
(ed.) Aristotle and Contemporary S
Hahm, D.E., 'The Fifth Element in
examination', Journal of Hellenic
Holwerda, D., 'Textkritisches und Ex
riepì xot) X0Ö110U', Mnemosyne
Jaeger, W., 'Das Pneuma im Lyke
Scripta Minora (Roma, 1960) 57-
Jaeger, W., Aristoteles. Grundlegung einer Geschichte seiner Entwicklung (Berlin,

1923; repr. 1955).
Jaeger, W., Aristotle. Fundamentals of the History of his Development , transi,
with the author's corrections and additions by R. Robinson (Oxford, 1934;
2nd ed. 1948; repr. 1962).
Jannone, A. and Barbotin, E., Aristote, De l'Âme (Paris, 1966).
King, R., 'Review of A.R Bos (2003)', Classical Review 57 (2007) 322-3.
King, R., 'The Concept of Life and the Life-Cycle in De Juventute' in: S.
Föllinger (Hrsg.), Was ist ' Leben '? Aristoteles' Anschauungen zur Entstehung
und Funktionsweise von Leben (Stuttgart, 2010) 171-87.
Kosman, L.A., 'Animals and Other Beings in Aristotle', in: A. Gotthelf and
J.G. Lennox (eds), Philosophical Issues in Aristotle's Biology (Cambridge,
1987) 360-91.
Kouremenos, T., Heavenly Stuff: the Constitution of the Celestial Objects and
the Theory of Homocentric Spheres in Aristotle's Cosmology (Stuttgart, 2010).
Kullmann, W., 'Übergänge zwischen Unbeseeltheit und Leben bei Aristoteles',
in: S. Föllinger (Hrsg.), Was ist 'Leben'? Aristoteles' Anschauungen zur
Entstehung und Funktionsweise von Leben (Stuttgart, 2010) 115-35.
Lefèvre, C., Sur l'Évolution d' Aristote en Psychologie (Louvain, 1972).
Lloyd, G.E.R., Aristotelian Explorations (Cambridge: C.U.R, 1996).
Lloyd, G.E.R., ' Pneuma between Body and Soul', Journal of the Royal Anthro-
pological Institute (N.S.) 13 (2007) 135-46.
Macfarlane, P., A Philosophical Commentary on Aristotle's De Spiritu (Ph.D.-
Thesis Duquesne University, 2007).
Macfarlane, P. and Polanský, R., 'God, the Divine and the NOYZ in Relation
to the De Anima ', in: Ancient Perspectives on Aristotle's De Anima, ed. by G.
van Riel and P. Destrée (Leuven, 2009) 107-23.
Marcovich, M., Hippolytus , Refutado Omnium Haeresium (Berlin, 1986).
Menn, S., 'Aristotle's Definition of Soul and the Programme of the De Anima'
Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 22 (2002) 83-139.
Migliori, M., 'L'Anima in Aristotele. Una concezione polivalente e al contempo
aporética', in Fermani, A. and Migliori, M., (eds) Attività e Virtù. Anima e
Corpo in Aristotele (Milano, 2009) 227-60.
Moraux, P., ' Quinta Essentia ', P.W.-R.E. 47 Halbbd. (Stuttgart, 1963) 1171-263.
Moraux, P., Der Aristotelismus bei den Griechen von Andronikos bis Alexander
von Aphrodisias vol. 2 (Berlin, 1984).
Nussbaum, M.C., Aristotle's De Motu Animalium. Text with translation, com-
mentary and interpretive Essays (Princeton, 1978).
Polanský, R., Aristotle's De Anima (Cambridge, 2007).
Quarantotto, D., Causa Finale , Sostanza, Essenza in Aristotele (Napoli, 2005).
Rapp, C. and Corcilus, K., (eds), Aristoteles-Handbuch: Leben , Werk , Wirkung
(Stuttgart, 2011).
434 Abraham P. Bos
Reale, G. and Bos, A.P., Il Trattato S

istotele (Milano, 1995).
Schenkeveld, D.M., 'Language and S
tion to the Question of its Inauthe
Schomakers, B., Aristoteles, De Zie
Sedley, D., 'Teleology, Aristotelian
ton (eds), Being , Nature , and Life
(Cambridge, 2010) 5-29.
Shields, C, 'The Priority of Soul in A
in: D. Frede and B. Reis (eds), Body
New York, 2009) 267-90.
Solmsen, F., 'Greek Philosophy and t
veticum 18 (1961) 150-97; repr. in
Bd. 1,536-82.
Thillet, P., Aristote, De l'Ame. Traduit du Grec. Edition établie, présentée et
annotée (Paris, 2005).
Torstrik, A., Aristotelis De Anima , libri tres , (Berlin, 1862; repr. Hildesheim,
1970).
Amsterdam Abraham P. Bos

Pneuma Aristotle Bos

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Pneuma Aristotle Bos

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

"PNEUMA" AS QUINTESSENCE OF ARISTOTLE'S PHILOSOPHY

Author(s): Abraham P. Bos

PNEUMA AS QUINTESSENCE OF ARISTOTLE'S PHILOSOPHY

7. Pneuma as a Problematic Concept in Aristotle's Work

In this article I argue that the heart

the subject of pneuma is notoriously obscure

2. The Developmental Hypothesis Rejected

This solution needs to be rejected. Aristotle's philosophy is so carefully constructed

abandoned altogether, because this w

3. Pneuma is not a Sixth Element ,

The heart of my alternative approac

náorjç . . . ôúvapiç éxéqou oœpaxoç

' . . . , the dynamis of every kind of soul ha

Aristotle says here that 4 the power (

5 Cf. T. Kouremenos (2010) 71.

not move other elements by means o

12 In Gener. anim. Ill 11, 762al8 Aristotle

In this connection there is a remar

goal-oriented action, comparable with that of a tool used expertly by a craftsman,

4. Pneuma in On the Cosmos and in De Spiritu

and exists in the cosmos is the result

5. Pneuma in Aristotle's De Anima

as 'the first entelechy of a natural body which is organikon' 30 we should translate

30 Anim. II 1, 412b5- 6: évteAíxeici fļ jiqwti] oá)|naxoç (ļ)uoixoi> opyavixoi) (text A. Jannone

presence of pneuma in conjunction w

36 In On the Soul II 1-4 Aristotle does talk

6. The Eudemus on the Generation of Living Beings

40 Cf. M. Furth (1988) 5.

creatures, i. e. his intellect.43 Talk a

7. What exactly is 'Soul' in A

If my analysis of Aristotle's theory o

43 Cf. Protr. fr. 6 and 11 Ross; 73 Gigo

Alexandři Aphrodisiensis, Quaestiones , De Fato , De Mixtione ed. I. Bruns (C.A.G.

Canarsa, M., 'Una Lacuna Platonica

Jaeger, W., Aristoteles. Grundlegung einer Geschichte seiner Entwicklung (Berlin,

Reale, G. and Bos, A.P., Il Trattato S

Amsterdam Abraham P. Bos

S-ar putea să vă placă și