Element contents
Series: Elements in Ancient Philosophy
Relative Change
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 September 2020
Summary
A relative change occurs when some item changes a relation. This Element examines how Plato, Aristotle, Stoics and Sextus Empiricus approached relative change. Relative change is puzzling because the following three propositions each seem true but cannot be true together: (1) No relative changes are intrinsic changes; (2) Only intrinsic changes are proper changes; (3) Some relative changes are proper changes. Plato's Theaetetus and Phaedo property relative change. I argue that these dialogues assume relative changes to be intrinsic changes, so denying (1). Aristotle responds differently, by denying (3) that relative change is proper change. The Stoics claimed that some non-intrinsic changes are changes (denying (2)). Finally, I discuss Sextus' argument that relative change shows that there are no relatives at all.
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Series: Elements in Ancient PhilosophyOnline ISBN: 9781108581660Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 08 October 2020
References
Annas, Julia, and Barnes, Jonathan. 1985. The Modes of Scepticism: Ancient Texts and Modern Interpretations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aufderheide, Joachim. 2020. Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics Book X: Translation and Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, Jonathan. 1988. ‘Scepticism and Relativity’. Philosophical Studies 32 (July): 1–31.Google Scholar
Bronowski, Ada. 2019. The Stoics on Lekta: All There Is to Say. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brunschwig, Jacques. 2003. ‘Stoic Metaphysics’. In The Cambridge Companion to the Stoics, edited by Inwood, Brad, 206–32. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Burnyeat, Myles. 1982. ‘Idealism and Greek Philosophy: What Descartes Saw and Berkeley Missed’. The Philosophical Review 91 (1): 3–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnyeat, Myles. 1990. The Theaetetus of Plato. Translated by Margaret Levett. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.Google Scholar
Collette-Dučić, Bernard. 2009. ‘On the Chrysippean Thesis That the Virtues Are Poia’. Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 25 (1): 193–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, John M. 1982. ‘Aristotle on Natural Teleology’. In Language and Logos: Studies Presented to G. E. L. Owen, edited by Nussbaum, Martha and Schofield, Malcolm. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dancy, R. M. 1991. Two Studies in the Early Academy. State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
De Lacy, Phillip. 1945. ‘The Stoic Categories as Methodological Principles’. Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 76: 246–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denyer, Nicholas. 1991. Language, Thought, and Falsehood in Ancient Greek Philosophy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Denyer, Nicholas. 2007. ‘The Phaedo’s Final Argument’. Maieusis: Essays in Ancient Philosophy in Honour of Myles Burnyeat, edited by Scott, D.. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 87–96.Google Scholar
Dorter, Kenneth. 1982. Plato’s Phaedo: An Interpretation. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Duncombe, Matthew. 2012. ‘Plato’s Absolute and Relative Categories at Sophist 255c14’. Ancient Philosophy 32 (1): 77–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncombe, Matthew. 2013. ‘The Greatest Difficulty at Parmenides 133c–134e and Plato’s Relative Terms’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 45: 43–62.Google Scholar
Duncombe, Matthew. 2015. ‘The Role of Relatives in Plato’s Partition Argument, Republic 4, 436b9–439c9’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 48 (1): 37–60.Google Scholar
Duncombe, Matthew. 2020. Ancient Relativity: Plato, Aristotle, Stoics, and Sceptics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fine, Kit. 1982. ‘Acts, Events and Things’. In Sprache und Ontologie. Akten Des Sechsten Internationalen Wittgenstein-Symposiums, 23. Bis 30. August 1981, Kirchberg Am Wechsel (Osterreich), edited by Leinfellner, W., Kraemer, E., and Schank, J., 97–105. Vienna: Holder-Pichler-Tempsky.Google Scholar
Frede, Dorothea. 1978. ‘The Final Proof of the Immortality of the Soul in Plato’s Phaedo 102a–107a’. Phronesis 23 (1), 27–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujisawa, Norio. 1974. ‘῎ Eχειν, Mετέχειν, and Idioms of ‘Paradeigmatism’ in Plato’s Theory of Forms’. Phronesis 19 (1), 30–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furley, David. 1985. ‘The Rainfall Example in Physics II. 8’. In Aristotle on Nature and Living Things, edited by Gotthelf, A., 177–82. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gallop, David. 1975. Plato Phaedo. Translated with Notes by D. Gallop. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Gould, Josiah B. 1970. The Philosophy of Chrysippus: Peasants, Provincials, and Folklore in the 1937 Paris World’s Fair. Albany: State University of New York Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graeser, Andreas. 1978. ‘The Stoic Categories’. In Les Stoiciens et Leur Logique, edited by Brunschwig, Jacques, 199–222. Paris: J. Vrin.Google Scholar
Hackforth, Reginald. 1955. Plato’s Phaedo: Translated with Introduction and Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Horky, Philip Sidney. 2016. Plato and Pythagoreanism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hussey, Edward. 1983. Aristotle: Physics III and IV. Clarendon Aristotle. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Judson, Lindsay. 2005. ‘Aristotelian Teleology’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 29, 342–66.Google Scholar
Lear, Jonathan. 1988. Aristotle: The Desire to Understand. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, A. A., and Sedley, David. 1987. The Hellenistic Philosophers. Vol. 1. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Long, A. A., and Sedley, David 1989. The Hellenistic Philosophers: Greek and Latin Texts with Notes and Bibliography. Vol. 2. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Matthen, Mohan. 1984. ‘Forms and Participants in Plato’s Phaedo’. Noûs 18 (2), 281–97.Google Scholar
Matthews, Gareth B. 1982. ‘Accidental Unities’. In Language and Logos: Studies in Ancient Greek Philosophy, edited by Schofield, Malcolm and Nussbaum, Martha, 223–40. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Menn, Stephen. 1999. ‘The Stoic Theory of Categories’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 17: 215–47.Google Scholar
Mignucci, Mario. 1988. ‘The Stoic Notion of Relatives’. In Matter and Metaphysics: Proceedings of the Fourth Symposium Hellenisticum, edited by Barnes, Jonathan and Mignucci, Mario, 129–221. Naples: Bibliopolis.Google Scholar
Nawar, Tamer. 2013. ‘Knowledge and True Belief at Theaetetus 201a–c’. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 21 (6): 1052–70.Google Scholar
Nawar, Tamer. 2017. ‘The Stoics on Identity, Identification, and Peculiar Qualities’. Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 32 (1): 113–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nawar, Tamer. Forthcoming. ‘Dynamic Modalities and Teleological Agency: Plato and Aristotle on Skill and Ability’. In Productive Knowledge in Ancient Philosophy: The Concept of Techne, edited by Johansen, Thomas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nehamas, Alexander. 1973. ‘Predication and Forms of Opposites in the Phaedo’. The Review of Metaphysics 26 (3): 461–91.Google Scholar
O’Brien, Dennis. 1967. ‘The Last Argument of Plato’s Phaedo. I’. The Classical Quarterly 17 (2): 198–231.Google Scholar
O’Brien, Dennis 2008. ‘How Tall Is Socrates? Relative Size in the Phaedo and the Theaetetus’. In Plato’s Theaetetus. Proceedings of the Sixth Symposium Platonicum Pragense, Prague, Oi-Koumene, 55–119.Google Scholar
Pohlenz, M. 1949. Die Stoa: Geschichte Einer Geistigen Bewegung. 2 vols. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Reesor, Margaret E. 1957. ‘The Stoic Categories’. The American Journal of Philology 78 (1): 63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandbach, F. H. 1985. Aristotle and the Stoics. Cambridge: Cambridge Philological Society.Google Scholar
Sedley, David. 1991. ‘Is Aristotle’s Teleology Anthropocentric?’ Phronesis 36 (2): 179–96.Google Scholar
Sedley, David. 2002. ‘Aristotelian Relativities’. In Le Style de La Pensée: Receuil de Textes En Hommage à Jacques Brunschwig, edited by Canto-Sperber, Monique and Pellegrin, Pierre, 324–52. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.Google Scholar
Sedley, David. 2004. The Midwife of Platonism: Text and Subtext in Plato’s Theaetetus. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, David. 2009. ‘Three Kinds of Platonic Immortality’. In Body and Soul in Ancient Philosophy, edited by Frede, Dorothea and Reis, Burkhard, 145–61. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Silverman, Allan. 2009. The Dialectic of Essence: A Study of Plato’s Metaphysics. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sorabji, Richard. 1983. Time, Creation, and the Continuum: Theories in Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Tsouna, Voula. 1998. The Epistemology of the Cyrenaic School. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wardy, Robert. 1993. ‘Aristotelian Rainfall or the Lore of Averages’. Phronesis 38 (1): 18–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waterlow, Sarah. 1982. Passage and Possibility: A Study of Aristotle’s Modal Concepts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Waterlow, Sarah. 1988. Nature, Change, and Agency in Aristotle’s Physics: A Philosophical Study. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
- 10
- Cited by