Dear list,
Here are selected passages from Moss that pertains to our current conversation on virtuous interpretation and action. Of late, I have begun to stop using quotation marks because Google and *up to us* to find out. _____ Aristotle clearly takes himself to be in broad agreement with Plato in identifying *logos* as what transforms a quasi- or proto-virtuous state into genuine virtue. Parallels between phronêsis and two other intellectual excellences in Aristotle’s system: technê (craft) and epistêmê (science). The *EN* characterizes all three as being “with logos,”.. ..what transforms Platonic quasi-virtue into full virtue, and what transforms both Platonic and Aristotelian inferior epistemic states like experience into technê, epistêmê, or other forms of wisdom, is not a rule, proportion, ratio, or form, nor is it Reason itself; instead, it is a particular kind of deliverance of Reason. It is an *explanatory account* – an account of the *aitia*, cause or explanation, that underlies the facts available to the proto-virtuous, or to the layman. *[Flattery] isn’t craft, but mere experience, because it has no logos of the nature of whatever things it applies [or to what] it applies them, so that it’s unable to state (eipein) the cause (aitia) of each thing. And I refuse to call anything without a logos (alogon) craft. (Gorg. 465a)* *quid sit*.. Nothing is complete (*teleion*) which has no end (*telos*); and the end is a limit. Best wishes, Jerry R On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear list, > > > > Why Luke and not Matthew?.. Why not John? > > > > *"In the beginning was the **λόγος**". * > > *This is the very word used by the emperor: * > > *God acts, **συ**̀**ν* *λόγω**, with logos.* > > > > *I don't call a thing without logos** [**alogon**], a techne.* > > > > *quid sit deus*.. what would God be? > > > *Blessed be the Lord God of Israel.. * > > *as he spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets from of old..* > > > > Best for the New Year, > > Jerry R > > On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Wendy Wheeler <peirce-l@list.iupui.edu> > wrote: > >> It’s okay, Helmut. >> >> Happy New Year everyone. >> >> Wendy >> >> >> On 31 Dec 2017, at 18:23, Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote: >> >> Jon, >> Yes, Ive read that too: After the three wise men had left, an angel told >> Mary and Joseph that Herod wants to kill the child, and they should flee to >> Egypt, which they did. But the portray was "taken" in the barn, so they >> were not on their way yet, so technically they were not refugees already, >> only the next day or so. But maybe to portray them as refugees is justified >> with the artist´s license to hop over this small time gap? I think, the >> pope did not make the same mistake like me, but the journalist writing >> about the pope did. Anyway, Wendy is right by saying they were not refugees >> when the portray was "taken", and the sign becomes more complicated with >> this aspect of artist´s license having to be included. Maybe it increases >> the number of required pages to more than 20? >> Happy new year, >> Helmut >> >> 31. Dezember 2017 um 18:32 Uhr >> *Von:* "Jon Alan Schmidt" <jonalanschm...@gmail.com> >> >> Helmut, List: >> >> There are two accounts of the Holy Family in the Bible. Matthew includes >> the flight to Egypt to escape Herod after the visit of the Magi, which is >> presumably what the artist who portrayed them as refugees had in mind. >> Luke omits that particular episode. >> >> FYI, www.biblegateway.com is a handy site for looking up Bible passages, >> especially since it includes various English versions and numerous other >> languages. >> >> Regards, >> >> Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA >> Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman >> www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt >> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt> - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt >> >> On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> >> wrote: >>> >>> Uh! Ive looked it up, and apologize. I am embarassed, why did I answer >>> before looking it up? Now I dont see the point in the nativity picture >>> anymore, an agree with Gary not to talk about it anymore. Sorry again, >>> Wendy, happy new year! >>> Wendy, >>> but Mary, knowing she was pregnant, could not know whether somebody she >>> had told this might have told it to Herodes´ spies? I dont know, maybe you >>> are right, I just have to trust somebody about this, and please forgive me, >>> I (at the time, hypothetically) rather trust the pope than you. I have not >>> looked the matter up in the bible, though. >>> Best, >>> Helmut >>> 30. Dezember 2017 um 21:35 Uhr >>> *Von:* "Wendy Wheeler" <wendy.j.whee...@btinternet.com> >>> Helmut, >>> >>> The reason they travelled was as I’ve stated - as given in the gospel of >>> Luke. Had they stayed at home, there would have been no slaying of the >>> first born by Herod since the latter, according to Matthew, heard of the >>> birth in Bethlehem from the three wise men who came to witness it. >>> >>> I’m not concerned with the Pope’s comparison. >>> >>> Wendy >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On 30 Dec 2017, at 20:09, Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote: >>> >>> Wendy, >>> if they had stayed home, they would have had their first born slain. If >>> this does not make them refugees, discuss it with the pope, who also >>> compared them with the contemporary refugees. >>> Best, >>> Helmut >>> 30. Dezember 2017 um 20:57 Uhr >>> *Von:* "Wendy Wheeler" <wendy.j.whee...@btinternet.com> >>> Dear Helmut (and list), >>> >>> I’ve come to this discussion both late and rather incompletely. I >>> haven’t read every contribution closely. Can I point out, though, and in >>> case nobody else has, that the Holy Family were not refugees. They were >>> travelling to Joseph’s birthplace in obedience to the requirements of the >>> Roman census. They returned home afterwards. The Trondheim Nativity scene >>> under discussion here thus looks like an iconic sign used to mislead. >>> >>> Best wishes, >>> >>> Wendy Wheeler >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> ----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply >> List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts >> should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message >> not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe >> PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at >> http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm . >> >> ----------------------------- >> PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON >> PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to >> peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L >> but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the >> BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce >> -l/peirce-l.htm . >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ----------------------------- >> PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON >> PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to >> peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L >> but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the >> BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce >> -l/peirce-l.htm . >> >> >> >> >> >> >
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
