Aristotle and the Ends of Eros, or Aristotle's Erotic Sublime?

While Eros has a central philosophical function in the dialogues of Plato, it all but disappears as a philosophical term in the thought of Aristotle, and is replaced by the more rational and reciprocal relation of friendship, phi iota lambda iota alpha. This essay asks what becomes of Eros in Aristotle's thinking, whether as deity, natural or cosmic force, or mode of human relation. Drawing on the ancient epithet of Eros, 'Epsilon rho omega sigma lambda upsilon sigma iota sigma mu epsilon lambda eta sigma, unbinder of limbs, Aristotle's usages of both epsilon rho omega sigma and lambda upsilon sigma iota sigma (loosening, unbinding), respectively are traced in their ambivalence for his fundamentally organismic philosophy, insofar as they disturb the organism's ontological integrity. With the assistance of Kristeva's notion of the abject, it is argued that while Aristotle's overt stance is a polemic against eros, his principal metaphysical innovations - the recasting of alpha rho chi eta as divine tau epsilon lambda omicron sigma, and the separation of material and moving causes - are solutions (AuQstc) to aporias that may involve a traversal of the sublime that is also irreducibly corporeal and erotic.