Proairesis

Use this forum to discuss past Good Words.
User avatar
Dr. Goodword
Site Admin
Posts: 7417
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 9:28 am
Location: Lewisburg, PA
Contact:

Proairesis

Postby Dr. Goodword » Wed Sep 03, 2014 10:26 pm

• proairesis •

Pronunciation: prê-er-ri-sis • Hear it!

Part of Speech: Noun, mass (no plural)

Meaning: The ability to choose, the power to make a decision.

Notes: Today's Good Word is not completely 'naturalized' in English. Rather, it lies on the periphery of the English vocabulary, where the good Doctor likes to hang out. It originates with the Greek philosopher Aristotle, who claimed that proairesis is the self; it defines who we are. This makes it an interesting and important word. Because of its lack of 'naturalization', no adjective has yet been proclaimed, though proairetic would be expected.

In Play: Despite its illegal (unnaturalized) status among English words, it serves a real lexical need: "Judy Side is absent proairesis; she can't reach a decision about anything." This need pops up often: "Willy Knilly! Show some proairesis and choose a blasted color!"

Word History: This word is a transliteration of ancient Greek proairesis "choice of one thing before another", comprising the prefix pro- "before" + (h)airesis "choice" from pro(h)airein "to choose deliberately, to prefer". The root of this word also produced heresy and diaeresis "the splitting in two of what seems to be one syllable", as in preëmpt and coöperate. Etymologists aren't sure, but it may have derived from Proto-Indo-European ser- "to seize", which we find in Hittite sharu "booty" and Welsh herw "booty", though the semantic trail from this word remains difficult to follow. (We are happy the mysterious Grogie of the Alpha Agora had the proairesis to choose today's Good Word and recommend it to us.)
• The Good Dr. Goodword

Perry Lassiter
Great Grand Panjandrum
Posts: 3333
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:41 pm
Location: RUSTON, LA
Contact:

Re: Proairesis

Postby Perry Lassiter » Thu Sep 04, 2014 12:40 am

Does this by definition argue against all forms of determinism: psychological, philosophical, religious (Calvinism, predestination)?
pl

User avatar
call_copse
Senior Lexiterian
Posts: 668
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 7:42 am
Location: Southampton

Re: Proairesis

Postby call_copse » Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:01 am

I think it is valid to be a compatibilist i.e. to believe that determinism and free will are compatible.

See Schopenhauer 'Man can do what he wills but he cannot will what he wills.'

I do accept that this necessarily defines free will as closer to autonomy than an incompatibilist might choose to define it. I kant really say what the objective truth is!
Iain

George Kovac

Re: Proairesis

Postby George Kovac » Thu Sep 04, 2014 11:12 am

Interesting word, and its link to "heresy." The original meaning of heresy in Classical Greece and Rome was "to choose," particularly to choose one's school of philosophy. In the 4th century CE the meaning of heresy morphed to its present pejorative sense of an anathematized belief contrary to religious (or ideological) orthodoxy. This shift coincided with the Church councils called by Constantine (and later Theodocious I). Constantine (why is an emperor calling a church council?) wanted to quell the emerging sectarian disputes in his empire, and ordered the bishops to come up with a uniform theology. In particular, the nature of Jesus (divine? human? both? something else?) was a subject of much debate among the early Christian communities, resulting in bitter rivalries. Constantine, a recent convert himself, did not care what the bishops decided, he just wanted uniformity of belief and the absence of religious infighting. The council produced the Nicene Creed, which (in one form or another) is still recited to this day by Roman Catholics, the Anglican communion and Orthodox Christians. Thus the establishment in the 4th century of the divinity of Jesus and the invention of the Trinity, all of which became official church doctrine, and, under Theodocious I, the unchallengeable belief throughout the empire. As a result, for the next millennium in Europe, church and state were united in rooting out heresy. During the 4th century "heresy" became a negative word, meaning a wrong and unpermitted choice of belief. I am glad to learn from Doctor Goodword that "proairesis" has survived with the original and delightful meaning of the original Greek intact. Were I more churlish by nature, I would say that the Roman Catholic Church's rigid "anti-choice" dogma can be dated to the fourth century, but that might be heretical. At least that is what I choose to believe.

LukeJavan8
Great Grand Panjandrum
Posts: 4423
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 6:16 pm
Location: Land of the Flat Water

Re: Proairesis

Postby LukeJavan8 » Thu Sep 04, 2014 1:07 pm

All interesting because today is date for the
'fall' of the Western Roman Empire when
the emperor, Romulus Augustulus, was deposed.
He was 12 years old. Curious.
-----please, draw me a sheep-----

Perry Lassiter
Great Grand Panjandrum
Posts: 3333
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:41 pm
Location: RUSTON, LA
Contact:

Re: Proairesis

Postby Perry Lassiter » Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:03 pm

Constantine could call the council because until the First Amendment almost all the world assumed the ruler chose everyone's religion. Thus, Luther survived because he had the ruler's protection. The story of the reformation is the story of multiple persecution depending on who ruled over which city-state at the time. Even in the US, the Puritans came for their own religious freedom, not everyone's. Those separatists would imprison Catholics, Baptists, Quakers or whoever didn't agree with their church. Roger Williams, who floated through several denominations, was among the first to proclaim true religious freedom in Rhode Island. The First Amendment now allows each of us to choose our faith - or none - and makes religion a personal choice, not a governmental choice. So when I look at Sunnis and Shias killing each other, I have to remember Northern Ireland.
pl

LukeJavan8
Great Grand Panjandrum
Posts: 4423
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 6:16 pm
Location: Land of the Flat Water

Re: Proairesis

Postby LukeJavan8 » Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:26 pm

Very thoughtful commentary.
-----please, draw me a sheep-----

George Kovac

Re: Proairesis

Postby George Kovac » Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:53 pm

Constantine's calling the council, I submit, was in fact significant and an unusual usurpation. The models for religious and philosophical belief systems and formal institutions was a bit more complex in the ancient world, and the model of one powerful ruler did not always apply. (Greece, with its multiplicity of its city-states, for example, or Roman occupied Samaria and Judea). And, especially in trading cities, there was religious diversity, sometime tolerated and regulated, sometimes not. The Romans had the post of "Pontiff" (Julius Caesar was pontiff of Rome before he was emperor) but the relationship of pontiff and governmental leaders was not of the theological intensity Constantine sought. Even if there was a unity of church and state in Europe after the 4th century, there were still tensions in how it was administered: the Pope had temporal authority in the Papal States, but not necessarily elsewhere; the secular heads of state often claimed the right to appoint bishops within his jurisdiction--a matter of concern to the Pope. Thus what Constantine claimed to do: have the authority to compel the bishops of all his empire to meet and decide a theological issue...that really was a big deal when viewed from the lens of the times. He was not compelling his subjects to embrace Christianity (that came later), he was dictating to the bishops, and getting involved with the essential theology of the religion. That's hubris--or confidence, or vision or leadership, depending on your point of view.

Perry Lassiter
Great Grand Panjandrum
Posts: 3333
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:41 pm
Location: RUSTON, LA
Contact:

Re: Proairesis

Postby Perry Lassiter » Fri Sep 05, 2014 9:12 pm

King James authorized a Bible translation with a majority of Anglican scholars (surprise!) over separatist. But he ordered them to translate ecclesia as church and not congregation, which separatists might tend to do. Likewise he ordered transliteration from Greek to baptism, not immerse, plunge, or dunk, which they might not have done anyway. And there wefe a couple more...
pl

Philip Hudson
Great Grand Panjandrum
Posts: 2784
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 4:41 am
Location: Texas

Re: Proairesis

Postby Philip Hudson » Sat Sep 06, 2014 1:52 am

Most modern philosophy, especially that considered to be scientific, is deterministic. I find it difficult to imagine determinism. If everything is determined, how do we know that the belief that everything is determined is true? Maybe we are just determined to believe something that is not true. It is similar to the saying, "Nothing is absolutely true except for the statement that nothing is absolutely true."

I am a theist, a Christian, and I believe that from our temporal viewpoint, we have free will. God, however, not being in our prison of space and time, can see the end from the beginning.

George Kovac, thanks for weighing in on this weighty subject.
It is dark at night, but the Sun will come up and then we can see.

George Kovac

Re: Proairesis

Postby George Kovac » Sat Sep 06, 2014 1:03 pm

Thank you, Philip Hudson, for that insightful and personal gloss.

Words as a portal to insight, understanding and choice...that is one of the beauties and mysteries of language. Whatever you think of the ingenious theological work of the 4th century bishops (or of the political uses made of that work by the Christian Roman emperors, which is a distinct issue) you have to admire their craft. There is no express assertion in the words of the New Testament that Jesus was divine, or that the monotheistic God sits on a three legged Trinitarian stool. The 4th century theologians divined that from small scraps of suggestive words in the New Testament (no more than about 6 highly ambiguous references, by the account of some scholars), two and a half centuries of tradition and the application of their deep philosophical training. No one would doubt that the core beliefs of Christianity include the divinity of Christ and the existence of the Trinity. (Well, maybe the Unitarians, but that is a side issue.) Those beliefs explain and unify the whole of the New Testament, and defines the essence of Christianity. The bishop's the exercise was a legitimate probing of words--the exegesis of the original text to discover their larger meaning and potential.

I say this because Justices Scalia and Thomas, both devout Roman Catholics, are devout "originalists" concerning the text of the US Constitution. They say if a principle cannot be found in the plain and "original" words, then that concept cannot be part of Constitutional theory. I often wonder if Justices Thomas and Scalia ever thought of applying that analysis to the plain and original words of the New Testament. If they did, then Jesus is not divine and the Trinity is an invented fairy tale, and "Christianity" is something quite different than what we have imagined it to be for the last 1700 years. Words are portals, not things unto themselves. The meaning is deeper than the surface, and often can be understood only after prolonged study and the application of human imagination. At the date of the Council of Nicaea, the New Testament was older than the US Constitution is today. Were the council bishops in 325CE freer to interpret the New Testament (thought by some to be authored, indirectly, by God) than the Supreme Court is to interpret the Constitution (indisputably the word of man) today? Words, language and meaning are more supple, more complex and powerful than the "originalist" theory allows.

Please, gentle readers, I am making an intellectual and linguistic argument, not a political one. Or even a religious one. I won't address particular political or theological outcomes. But I believe in proairesis, and I assert my claim to choose my own heresies. And I believe that in the beginning (and in the end) is the word.


Return to “Good Word Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 48 guests