SOL Search

[Note] that the mind in old age, taken over by dementia, does not take on suffering in itself — something which might allow it to be considered corruptible and mortal. With the organ mutated, and incapable out of unfitness to receive energy from the mind, it [merely] seems that the suffering of the organ is also the suffering of the mind animating it. For when the eye goes bleary, or is rendered unfit from old age, the sense [of sight] remains no less active; but the sensory organ becomes either passive, or totally useless and idle. And the reason why the sensory organ and the sensory capacity are not corrupted together is that the sensory capacity does not have its existence in this body, but in the spirit. So too when old peoples' eyes are weakened by time, with their membranes becoming thicker, wrinkly in a way, and not as transparent, and moreover when the fluids inside are made drier by time, congealed, and unable to transport the sensations of perceptions through the optic nerve — that is when it happens that old people see less well.[1] Also in reference to the demented it is not the mind that is demented; the organ's change for the worse and unfitness is what suffers, and produces [dementia] in the demented — not only in old age, but even in youth, when the body is taken over by certain brain-inflaming or lethargic illnesses. Or: that intense damage to the mind is called derangement; moderate damage is called delirium; and subdued damage is called raving.[2]
But liros [is] someone impudent; from "looking a lot" (lian oran); it is spelled with an iota.[3]

*lh=ros: o(/ti o( nou=s e)n tw=| gh/ra| lh/rois katalhfqei\s ou)k au)to\s ei)s e(auto\n to\ pa/qos a)nede/cato, i(/na kai\ fqarto\s kai\ qnhto\s nomisqh=|: tou= de\ o)rga/nou a)lloiwqe/ntos kai\ th\n a)po\ tou= nou= e)ne/rgeian di' a)nepithdeio/thta mh\ duname/nou de/casqai, to\ pa/qos tou= o)rga/nou pa/qos e)/docen ei)=nai kai\ tou= kinou=ntos au)to\ nou=. kai\ ga\r tou= o)/mmatos lhmw=ntos h)\ kai\ tw=| gh/ra| pro\s a)nepithdeio/thta metabalo/ntos, h( me\n ai)/sqhsis ou)de\n h(=tton me/nei a)paqh/s: to\ de\ ai)sqhth/rion e)mpaqe\s h)\ o(/lws a)/xrhston gi/netai kai\ a)rgo/n. to\ de\ ai)/tion tou= mh\ sundiafqei/resqai tw=| ai)sqhthri/w| kai\ th\n ai)sqhtikh\n du/namin to\ mhde\ e)n tou/tw| tw=| sw/mati e)/xein to\ ei)=nai th\n ai)sqhtikh\n du/namin, a)ll' e)n tw=| pneu/mati. ou(/tw de\ kai\ ta\ tw=n gero/ntwn o)/mmata u(po\ tou= xro/nou e)casqenh/santa kai\ tw=n xitw/nwn paxute/rwn genome/nwn kai\ oi(=on e)rrutidwme/nwn kai\ ou)x ou(/tw diafanw=n, e)/ti te kai\ tw=n e)nto\s u(grw=n chrote/rwn u(po\ tou= xro/nou kai\ pephgo/twn kai\ ou) duname/nwn ta\ a)po\ tw=n ai)sqhtw=n pa/qh diaporqmeu/ein e)pi\ to\ o)ptiko\n pneu=ma, sumbai/nei tou\s ge/rontas h(=tton o(ra=n. kai\ e)pi\ tw=n lh/rwn ou)x o( nou=s lhrei=, a)ll' h( tou= o)rga/nou pro\s to\ xei=ron metabolh\ kai\ a)nepithdeio/ths pa/sxei te kai\ tou\s lh/rous e)mpoiei=, ou)k e)n tw=| gh/ra| mo/non, a)lla\ ka)n th=| neo/thti, noshma/twn tinw=n frenitikw=n h)\ lhqargikw=n to\ sw=ma kateilhfo/twn. h)\ o(/ti h( e)pitetame/nh bla/bh tou= nou= parafrosu/nh le/getai, h( de\ me/sh lh=ros, h( de\ u(feime/nh para/lhros. *liro\s de\ o( a)naidh/s: para\ to\ li/an o(ra=n: dia\ tou= i.

For this headword see also lambda 469.
[1] From John Philoponus, Commentary on Aristotle's De Anima 161.4-15 and 19-26 Hayduck. The Aristotle passage in question is 408B: "The case of mind is different; it seems to be an independent substance implanted within the soul and to be incapable of being destroyed. If it could be destroyed at all, it would be under the blunting influence of old age. What really happens in respect of mind in old age is, however, exactly parallel to what happens in the case of the sense organs; if the old man could recover the proper kind of eye, he would see just as well as the young man. The incapacity of old age is due to an affection not of the soul but of its vehicle, as occurs in drunkenness or disease. Thus it is that in old age the activity of mind or intellectual apprehension declines only through the decay of some other inward part; mind itself is impassible." (J.A. Smith translation: web address 1)
[2] Otherwise unattested definitions. Ironically, given the pains of the Aristotelian commentator to differentiate damage to the mind from damage to the brain, this definition identifies dementia precisely as damage to the mind.
[3] cf. lambda 596. Common definition in the lexica, and the folk etymology appears in the various Etymologica. By contrast Suetonius, *peri\ blasfhmiw=n 4.84, derives it from li/an r(w= "talk a lot".

Suda On Line Search