Aristotle’s habituation means internalized emotional disposition, not behavioral compliance
Evidence
The single most influential scholarly article on Aristotle’s theory of moral habituation. Burnyeat’s argument — that the habit-formation Aristotle has in mind is internalized emotional disposition, not external behavioral compliance — is the philosophical foundation of Episode 6’s claim that the medieval Christian rod-permissive reading of Aristotle is a misreading. Significance: any responsible reading of Nicomachean Ethics II. in contemporary scholarship engages with Burnyeat. The episode’s “two halves of Aristotle” framing is largely his. — , The Rod and the Child, 11475
Categorization
- XREF: Connects to virtue ethics debates and demonstrates how a philosophical misreading (rod-permissive Aristotle) shaped centuries of pedagogy. — connects to: Habit, following Aristotle, is an alteration that does not corrupt but forms spirit. — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 428; Aristotle’s hexis names a stable way of being distinct from transient dispositions and affections — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 483