developmental hypothesis
- Thread starter antongoun
- Start date
Να βοηθήσω εγώ με το κανονικό πληκτρολόγιο. Το δικό σου κείμενο λέει:
It was long thought that the Memorabilia fell into two unequal parts published at different times: a relatively coherent defense, then a long collection of isolated passages, drawn perhaps from notes Xenophon happened to make of Socrates in action. Such developmental hypotheses are now largely discounted, however, and there is more structural integrity here than meets the eye.
Εδώ, στο Aristotle’s Philosophical Development, διαβάζω:
5. A Strong Development
What are we to make of these two accounts of motion? For convenience, let us call the Phys. II account A and the Phys. VIII account B. On the assumption that A precedes B temporally, and on the datum that A comes prior to B in the corpus, we may arrive at several hypotheses, (i) A is merely a sketch of a theory of motion, which is appropriately filled in by B. (ii) A concerns causes of motion in general, B causes of motion in the cosmos, or in a cosmological context, (iii) B is a later development of notions inherent in A but not fully explored by Aristotle until later, (iv) B develops a new theory of motion that contradicts A. Hypotheses (i) and (ii) are unitarian hypotheses, which do not posit any development of Aristotle’s thought, (iii) and (iv) are developmental hypotheses; the former I shall call a “weak” developmental hypothesis insofar as it is not importantly different from the nondevelopmental hypothesis (i) in the logical relation it posits between A and B; the latter I shall call a “strong” developmental hypothesis insofar as it posits a fundamental reordering of Aristotle’s thought on the subject of the principles of motion.
Έτσι που καταλαβαίνω το development εδώ, σαν εξέλιξη μάλλον παρά σαν ανάπτυξη, θα ήθελα να προτείνω την εξελικτική υπόθεση (και όχι την αναπτυξιακή υπόθεση), αλλά πέφτουμε έτσι πάνω στον Δαρβίνο.
It was long thought that the Memorabilia fell into two unequal parts published at different times: a relatively coherent defense, then a long collection of isolated passages, drawn perhaps from notes Xenophon happened to make of Socrates in action. Such developmental hypotheses are now largely discounted, however, and there is more structural integrity here than meets the eye.
Εδώ, στο Aristotle’s Philosophical Development, διαβάζω:
5. A Strong Development
What are we to make of these two accounts of motion? For convenience, let us call the Phys. II account A and the Phys. VIII account B. On the assumption that A precedes B temporally, and on the datum that A comes prior to B in the corpus, we may arrive at several hypotheses, (i) A is merely a sketch of a theory of motion, which is appropriately filled in by B. (ii) A concerns causes of motion in general, B causes of motion in the cosmos, or in a cosmological context, (iii) B is a later development of notions inherent in A but not fully explored by Aristotle until later, (iv) B develops a new theory of motion that contradicts A. Hypotheses (i) and (ii) are unitarian hypotheses, which do not posit any development of Aristotle’s thought, (iii) and (iv) are developmental hypotheses; the former I shall call a “weak” developmental hypothesis insofar as it is not importantly different from the nondevelopmental hypothesis (i) in the logical relation it posits between A and B; the latter I shall call a “strong” developmental hypothesis insofar as it posits a fundamental reordering of Aristotle’s thought on the subject of the principles of motion.
Έτσι που καταλαβαίνω το development εδώ, σαν εξέλιξη μάλλον παρά σαν ανάπτυξη, θα ήθελα να προτείνω την εξελικτική υπόθεση (και όχι την αναπτυξιακή υπόθεση), αλλά πέφτουμε έτσι πάνω στον Δαρβίνο.