[lbo-talk] Re: Butler on Derrida

[Wojtek Sokolowski]

Justin:
> I guess this underlines the subjective nature of the
> word "profound." If Aristotle isn't profound, I don't
> know what the word means. I'm not a classical scholar
> and don't know Greek, though I have had classes in
> Aristotle, and had the privilege of working through
> some of the Nicomachean Ethics with Michael Frede, one
> of the great classical scholars of our time. Tht was
> long ago, of course. I used to teach the NE in ethics
> classes when I was a professor. My tentative
> conclusion is that Aristitle is the greatest mind that
> ever existed, at least that I am aware of. But I guess
> he's not profound.

I share your affection for the Nicomachean Ethics and other works of
Aristotle, but I would not go as far as calling him the greatest mind of all
times.  I think his modern popularity is largely due to what happened after
his death - the fact that our Arab neighbors, especially Averroes, preserved
his writings until the Europeans emerged from their caves - so to speak - in
the 12th century. Then, one Thomas Aquinas reiterated it almost verbatim
(Catholics did not recognize intellectual property rights) added a few
innovations of his own to reconcile A's teachings with the dogma of the
Catholic church, and voila! - a star was born.  

That is not to say that A was not great - he was - but that there are many
more great thinkers of whom we know much less.  Greatness is not as much a
function of a writer's intellect (albeit some "global test" must be met in
this department) - but of institutional framing and marketing.  In other
words, there are many great minds, but many if not most of them remain
relatively unknown or totally obscure.  Only those few who become champions
or effigies of powerful institutions rise to popular stardom.  The same
works for arts, music, and politics.

Wojtek