Aristotle (Actuality)

aristotle

What a mess trying to sort through in English what Aristotle actually meant by “actuality.” Turns out he used two words, energeia and entelechia and these have been both translated in Latinized translations as actuality. Which is not helpful sorting through the difference. Joe Sachs translates them as “being-at-work” and “being-at-work-staying-itself,” respectively. His translation conveys the philosophical action of the work, but makes for awkward translation. My guess is that in de Anima, his book on the soul, entelechia represents gradations of more or less completed or perfect energeia. I  will correct this post if anyone who knows better tells me I’ve got the relation wrong.

 

About zjb

Zachary Braiterman is Professor of Religion in the Department of Religion at Syracuse University. His specialization is modern Jewish though and philosophical aesthetics. http://religion.syr.edu
This entry was posted in uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Aristotle (Actuality)

  1. mghamner says:

    Sounds like Hegel’s expressive force, energeia, and “force proper” (or force withdrawn into itself), entelechia.

  2. Jon Awbrey says:

    A mashup in my mind of long ago readings leaves me with the sense that an entelechy is something like a homunculus — I have an especially striking mental image of the one in Faust — and that the original word means something like “end in itself” or “having its end in itself”.

    Cf: Inquiry Driven Systems • The Formative Tension

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s