‘아레테’를 어떻게 이해할 것인가?- 호메로스에서 아리스토텔레스까지
How to Understand Aretê?- From Homer to Aristotle
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This article is a contribution towards understanding the term [or concept] of aretê in ancient Greece. In general, aretê means an excellence or excellent capacity expected to fulfill a function in a certain field. For an instance, aretê was used in relation to a hero’s combatcapability in the war. If a hero were able to get a victory, his morality defect or personality defect could be overlooked. The requisite credential for a hero was only to be strong enough to defeat the enemies. Moral virtue was not a requirement to the hero. The hero’s aretê is defined not only by his combat capability but also by his speaking ability. Rhetorical ability was even more respected especially in the Greek Classical Age in which the Athenian democracy was established. The great orator was admired as much as the great warrior. Excellency in oratory, a capacity to win a victory in disputes comparable to the ability to win a victory in a combat, could be recognized apart from moral virtue. There arises a risk that falsehood and injustice would lead the city-state to destruction and corruption. It is Plato who noticed the risk; he urged that aretê be joined with the moral virtue. According to him, aretê could be meaningful and valuable only when it contributes to the peace and prosperity of the polis. Similarly, Aristotle also put an emphasis on moral virtue related to aretê. By defining a man who has an aretê as a ‘spoudaios’ man, he regarded the city-state (polis) made up of spoudaios citizen as ‘spoudaios’ (‘spoudaios’ can be translated as ‘noble’). That means spoudaios citizen could [should?] be happy in the spoudaios city-state. However, it seems paradoxical that in Poetics Aristotle argues that characters in tragedy and epic are be fallen into a misfortune because of or in spite of his excellence and moral virtue.
Abstract
This article is a contribution towards understanding the term [or concept] of aretê in ancient Greece. In general, aretê means an excellence or excellent capacity expected to fulfill a function in a certain field. For an instance, aretê was used in relation to a hero’s combatcapability in the war. If a hero were able to get a victory, his morality defect or personality defect could be overlooked. The requisite credential for a hero was only to be strong enough to defeat the enemies. Moral virtue was not a requirement to the hero. The hero’s aretê is defined not only by his combat capability but also by his speaking ability. Rhetorical ability was even more respected especially in the Greek Classical Age in which the Athenian democracy was established. The great orator was admired as much as the great warrior. Excellency in oratory, a capacity to win a victory in disputes comparable to the ability to win a victory in a combat, could be recognized apart from moral virtue. There arises a risk that falsehood and injustice would lead the city-state to destruction and corruption. It is Plato who noticed the risk; he urged that aretê be joined with the moral virtue. According to him, aretê could be meaningful and valuable only when it contributes to the peace and prosperity of the polis. Similarly, Aristotle also put an emphasis on moral virtue related to aretê. By defining a man who has an aretê as a ‘spoudaios’ man, he regarded the city-state (polis) made up of spoudaios citizen as ‘spoudaios’ (‘spoudaios’ can be translated as ‘noble’). That means spoudaios citizen could [should?] be happy in the spoudaios city-state. However, it seems paradoxical that in Poetics Aristotle argues that characters in tragedy and epic are be fallen into a misfortune because of or in spite of his excellence and moral virtue.
참고문헌 (30)
- 호메로스, "일리아스" (2007), 숲
- 호메로스, "오뒷세이아" (2006), 숲
- 헤시오도스, "신통기(神統記)" (2004), 한길사
- 플라톤, "국가" (2013), 서광사
- 플라톤, "고르기아스" (2011), 이제이북스
- 김진성, "아리스토텔레스: 범주론, 명제론" (2005), 이제이북스
- 아리스토텔레스, "영혼론" (2001), 궁리
- 아리스토텔레스, "정치학" (2009), 동서문화사
- 아리스토텔레스, "니코마코스 윤리학" (2011), 길
- 송유레, "아리스토텔레스: 에우데모스 윤리학" (2012), 한길사
- 아리스토텔레스, "시학" (2010), 박영사
- 김헌, "희극 주인공의 성격 연구 －아리스토텔레스의 『시학』과 Tractatus Coislinianus 120을 중심으로", 서양고전학연구, (45), pp.153~182 (2011), 한국서양고전학회
- 이태수, "호메로스의 영웅주의 윤리관", 서양고전학연구, (50), pp.5~32 (2013), 한국서양고전학회
- 정준영, "『일리아스』에서 영웅적 자아의 aidōs와 행위패턴", 서양고전학연구, (33), pp.5~44 (2008), 한국서양고전학회
- Adkins, Arthur W. H., "Merit and Responsibility: A Study in Greek Values" (1960), Clarendon Press
- Burrows, Reynold L., "Review: Merit and Responsibility: A Study in Greek Values by Arthur W. H. Adkins", The Classical World, 53(8) (1960)
- Cairns, D. L., "Aidôs, In The Psychology and Ethics of Honour and Shame in Ancient Greek Literature", pp.50~146 (1993)
- Cole, T., "The Origins of Rhetoric in Ancient Greece" (1991)
- Cunliffe, Richard John, "A Lexicon of the Homeric Dialect" (1988), University of Oklahoma Press
- Dodds, E. R., "그리스인들과 비이성적인 것들" (2002), 까치
- Finkelberg, M., "Timê and Aretê in Homer", The Classical Quarterly, 48(1), pp.14~28 (1998)
- Lloyd-Jones, H., "The Justice of Zeus" (1983)
- Schiappa, E., "Did Plato Coin Rhetorike?", American Journal of Philology, 111 (1999)
- Schiappa, E., "The Beginnings of Rhetorical Theory in Classical Greece" (1999)
- Schniewind, Alexandrine, "L’éthique du sage chez Plotin, le paradigme du spoudaios", Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin (2003)
- Schofield, M., "Euboulia in the Iliad", Classical Quarterly, 36 (1986)
- Stanford, W., "Odyssey I-XII" (2003), Bristol Classical Press
- Werner Jaeger, "Paideia", The Ideals of Greek Culture, 1 (1965)
- William, B., "Shame and Necessity" (1993)
- Zanker, G., "The Heart of Achilles, In Characterization and Personal Ethics in the Iliad" (1994)