The metabasis paradox is an instance in Aristotle's Poetics where, according to many scholars,Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim, Hamburg Dramaturgy, New York: Dover, 1769/1962, pp. 107–108.Else, Gerald F. 1957, Aristotle's Poetics: The Argument. Leiden: E. J. Brill, p. 450.Belfiore, Elizabeth. Tragic Pleasures: Aristotle on Plot and Emotion. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992, pp. 174–175.Heath, Malcolm. “Aristotle on the Best Kind of Tragic Plot: Re-reading Poetics 13–14,” pp. 334–351, p. 335. In: William Wians and Ron Polansky (eds.) Reading Aristotle: Argument and Exposition. Series: Philosophia Antiqua, Volume: 146. Leiden/Boston/Paderborn/Singapore: Brill, July 2017.Bouchard, Elsa. "Audience, Poetic Justice, and Aesthetic Value in Aristotle's Poetics". In Ineke Sluiter, Ralph M. Rosen (ed.), Aesthetic Value in Classical Antiquity. Mnemosyne supplements. Monographs on Greek and Latin language and literature, Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2012, p. 350. he makes two incompatible statements. In chapter 13 of the book, Aristotle states that for tragedy to end in misfortune is "correct,"Aristotle. Poetics trans. W.H. Fyfe, Harvard, 1932 1453a26. yet in chapter 14 he judges a type of plot in tragedy "best"Literally, "strongest" (kratiston), Bouchard, 2012, p. 193. that does not end in misfortune.Freeland, Cynthia. "Plot Imitates Action: Aesthetic Evaluation and Moral Realism in Aristotle's Poetics". Rorty, Amélie ed. Essays on Aristotle's Poetics. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992, pp. 120–122.Aristotle. Poetics trans. W.H. Fyfe, Harvard, 1932 1454a2-3. Since the 16th century, scholarsCastelvetro, Lodovico. Poetica d'Aristotele vulgarizzata e sposta ("The Poetics of Aristotle translated in the Vulgar Language and commented on"), 1570.Takeda, Arata: “Aristotle on Mimesis and Violence: Things Hidden since the Foundation of Literary Theory,” In: Elisabetta Brighi / Antonio Cerella (eds.): The Sacred and the Political: Explorations on Mimesis, Violence and Religion. New York: Bloomsbury, 2016, pp. 9–26. in Classics have puzzled over this contradiction or have proposed solutions, of which there are at least three from the 21st century alone.Bertolaso, 2012. Gotthold Lessing's solution has been the most influentialLessing, Gotthold Ephraim. Hamburg Dramaturgy, New York: Dover, 1769/1962, p. 111. yet there is not a consensus.
In chapter 13, Aristotle argues that tragedy should consist of a change of fortune from good to bad.Vahlen, Johannes. Beiträge zu Aristoteles Poetik Volume 2. Wien: K.K.Hof- und Staatsdruckerei, 1865, pp. 26–27. Subsequently, he writes also in chapter 13 that, while critics have judged Euripides harshly because "many" of his plays "end in misfortune," yet "this is, as we have seen, correct," referring to the change of fortune from good to bad.Else, Gerald F. 1957, p. 450. Then, in chapter 14, he identifies the incident that creates fear and pity, killing "among family," in which the killer could either kill or not, and either knowingly or unknowingly.Husain, Martha. Ontology and the Art of Tragedy: An Approach to Aristotle's Poetics. Albany: SUNY Press, 2002, p. 63. Aristotle finds that in the "best" version, the killer recognizes the victim and does not kill. Since that narrative does not end in misfortune, scholars often conclude that chapter 14 seems to contradict 13."Most interpreters have concluded that the two chapters are inconsistent." Heath 2017, p. 335.
In 2016, published a chapter-length study of the problem from the Renaissance up to the late 20th century, omitting 21st century work.Takeda 2016, pp. 9–26. Takeda's 2016 chapter deviated from the standard description of the solutions of André Dacier, Gotthold Lessing,Vahlen, Johannes. Beiträge zu Aristoteles Poetik Volume 2. Wien: K.K.Hof- und Staatsdruckerei, 1865, pp. 26–27.Lucas, D.W. Aristotle: Poetics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968, p. 155 and Stephen Halliwell.Bouchard, 2012, p. 193. In 2025, however, Takeda published in German a comprehensive history of the problem from the Renaissance to the 21st century, following up on his earlier work.Takeda, Arata, Die verkannte Tragödie: Theoriebildung und Wissenswandel zwischen Antike und Neuzeit, Weilerswist: Velbrück, 2025, pp. 297–436.
In Takeda's 2016 publication he proposed a name for the problem, "metabasis paradox," from metabasis, "change," Aristotle's term in the Poetics for change of fortune.Takeda 2016, p. 13. The creator of this Wikipedia article borrowed the name from Takeda. The phrase has never yet been adopted by professional classical scholars for the contradiction of chapters 13 and 14. For a brief time in the early 2020s as this article was noticed online, the name was misappropriated for other paradoxes concerning tragic guilt in the Poetics. Those misuses have faded from view as of 2026. In his 2025 book, Takeda suggested instead the clearer term, Glückswechselparadox (change of fortune paradox).
Context of the problem In chapter 13, Aristotle discusses what combination of change of fortune, or μετάβασις (metabasis) and character will create fear and pity, which turns out to involve a change of fortune from good to bad.Belfiore, Elizabeth. Tragic Pleasures: Aristotle on Plot and Emotion. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992, p. 161. He first rules out all scenarios involving a totally good or totally bad man.Belfiore 1992, p. 161. Omitting the good man passing from bad to good fortune, he evaluates (1) the wholly good man changing from good to bad fortune (Poetics 1452b34-5), (2) the wholly bad man changing from bad to good fortune (1452b37), and (3) the wholly bad man changing from good to bad fortune (1453a1). Aristotle finds that none of these three creates both fear and pity, and instead, the tragic hero should be ethically like the average person—not completely good or bad but a mean between the two (1453a7), and suffer a change of fortune from good to bad (1453a15).Belfiore 1992, p. 163. He describes misfortune in tragedy, δυστυχία (dustuchia "adversity, misfortune") as "to suffer or inflict terrible disasters" (1453a21),Aristotle. Poetics trans. W.H. Fyfe, 1453a21. Aristotle then mentions that "so many" of Euripides's "plays end in misfortune." And he notes that he has just previously shown—"as was said"—that this kind of ending is "ὀρθόν" (orthon "correct") (1453a26).Ibid., 1453a26.
In chapter 14, Aristotle considers the most "dreadful or rather pitiable" deed, "when for instance brother kills brother, or son father, or mother son, or son mother—either kills or intends to kill, or does something of the kind, that is what we must look for" (1453b20-21).Aristotle. Aristotle in 23 Volumes Vol. 23, translated by W.H. Fyfe. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann Ltd. 1932. 1453b20-21.
Aristotle notes four ways this incident may be treated. After naming them, he ranks them:
Killing averted by recognition is considered incompatible with chapter 13's claim that it is "correct" for tragedy to "end in misfortune."Else, Gerald F., Aristotle's Poetics: The Argument. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1957, p. 450.
Solutions
Piero Vettori Vettori did not try to solve the problem but was first to publish about it, in his Latin commentary on the Poetics in 1560.Vettori, Piero. Commentationes in primum librum Aristotelis de Arte Poetarum. Florence, 1560. André Dacier wrote more than a century later, as though unaware of Castelvetro's remarks on the problem, "The wise Victorius [Vettori] is the only one who has seen it; but since he did not know what was the concern in the Chapter, and that it is only by this that it can be solved, he has not attempted to clarify it."Aristotle. Aristotle's Art of poetry. Translated from the original Greek according to Mr. Theodore Goulston's edition. Together, with Mr. D'Acier's notes translated from the French. London: D. Browne and W. Turner, 1705, p. 244.
Lodovico Castelvetro Castelvetro engaged the problem in his translation and commentary of 1570.Takeda 2016, p. 14.Castelvetro, Lodovico. Poetica d'Aristotele vulgarizzata e sposta ("The Poetics of Aristotle translated in the Vulgar Language and commented on"), 1570. He held that Aristotle rightly established ending in misfortune in chapter 13, and wrongly broke this rule in chapter 14, praising as best a kind of tragedy that, as Castelvetro put it, lacks "passion." Castelvetro proposed that a laudable action must involve passion: "[B]y passione Castelvetro meant pathos, that is, suffering, not emotion--and more laudable is such action as involves more passion". And although for Castelvetro killing and recognizing later is no less ethical than killing averted by recognition, in the former the "passion is full and accomplished (piena e auenuta)," whereas in killing averted by recognition passion is "short and threatened (sciema e minacciata)."
André Dacier In commentary accompanying his 1692 French edition of the Poetics, Dacier made the first known attempt to resolve the contradiction.Lessing 1769/1962, p. 107.Aristotle. London: D. Browne and W. Turner, 1705, p. 245. As scholars normally understand Dacier, his theory was that Aristotle called Euripides' plays ending in misfortune "correct" because authoritative, traditional versions of these stories end in misfortune.Aristotle/Dacier 1705, pp. 244–245. When Dacier here associates chapter 13 with the "constitution of fable in general," he is interpreted to mean that Aristotle established the best plot-type as a change from good to bad fortune but not necessarily ending in misfortune, which is understood as a death. Dacier believed that, in chapter 14, Aristotle considered stories that are open to change, hence the option of avoiding a death.Aristotle/Dacier, Ibid., p. 245. As Dacier understood him, Aristotle meant that if the killing within family cannot be avoided, then the playwright moves to the next best, and so on. Dacier also shifted Aristotle's numbering by one. The altered numbering is (1) killing knowingly (third best), (2) killing and recognizing later (second best), (3) killing averted by recognition (best), and (4) failing to kill while knowing (worst).Aristotle/Dacier, London: D. Browne and W. Turner, 1705, p. 256.
Gotthold Lessing Lessing responded to Dacier in one of his books, the Hamburg Dramaturgy.Lucas, D.W. Aristotle: Poetics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968, p. 155. He maintained that Aristotle's preference for ending in misfortune was not relative to tradition. In Lessing's view, Aristotle meant that it is simply always better for tragedy to end in misfortune.Vahlen, 1865, pp. 26–27.Lessing 1769/1962, p. 108.Lucas, D.W. Aristotle: Poetics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968, p. 155.