[lit-ideas] "In the tradition of Kantotle"
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 09:50:30 EDT
In a message dated 6/28/2004 9:36:02 AM Eastern Standard Time,
phil.enns@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
In another post, Walter states that he prefers to understand phronesis
in Kantian rather than Aristotelian terms and I was wondering whether
he, or anyone else, would be willing to expand on what the important
differences are and why the Kantian version is to be preferred.
----
I don't think there is much of a difference.
When philosopher Jonathan Bennett reviewed the Grice festschrift
(Grandy/Warner, PGRICE, Philosophical Grounds of Rationality: Intentions,
Categories,
Ends) for the Times Literary Supplement, he titled it -- after Grice's
'favourite philosopher', "In the tradition of Kantotle".
Jokes apart, there must be a unity of thought between Aristotle and Kant,
since such combos ("Kantotle") do not seem too obvious in the case of any other
pair of philosophers?
Aristotle's 'phronesis' comes out as Kant's 'prudence', and so on.
Cheers,
JL
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
