Type of Media 1
Author 1
Date 7
Type of Media
Author
Alexander of Aphrodisias on Celestial Motions, 1997
By: Bodnár, István M.
Title Alexander of Aphrodisias on Celestial Motions
Type Article
Language English
Date 1997
Journal Phronesis
Volume 42
Issue 2
Pages 190-205
Categories no categories
Author(s) Bodnár, István M.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)
A number of features of the doctrine of Alexander of Aphrodisias on heavenly motions are beyond reasonable doubt. First and foremost of these is that he identified the nature of the heavenly spheres with their soul, thereby he could entirely collapse natural motion with voluntary motion into one in their case. Moreover the celestial element, which Alexander tends to call theion sôma, divine body is removed from the components of the everchanging sublunary world to the extent that it can be a legitimate question whether the substrate of celestial bodies can be called matter, and Alexander can refer to perishable entities as evIua, material in contrast to this sublime element. After identifying the contribution of the nature of the celestial spheres with that of their soul, Alexander follows Aristotle in setting out a celestial hierarchy, on top of which there is or there are the separate unmoved mover(s), which move(s) by being object(s) of striving and desire for the less perfect entities of the heavens. This much seems to be firmly settled. A number of further issues, however, call for detailed examination. In this paper first I set out to clarify the contributions of the striving of the different celestial spheres, then I turn to describing the interaction between the various motions of the celestial system, and I discuss whether the theory Alexander propounded could have been a fundamental revision, or rather an alternative exposition of the original, Aristotelian celestial theory deploying homocentric spheres. [Introduction, pp. 190 f.]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1082","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1082,"authors_free":[{"id":1637,"entry_id":1082,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":6,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Bodn\u00e1r, Istv\u00e1n M. ","free_first_name":"Istv\u00e1n M. ","free_last_name":"Bodn\u00e1r","norm_person":{"id":6,"first_name":"Istv\u00e1n M.","last_name":"Bodn\u00e1r","full_name":"Bodn\u00e1r, Istv\u00e1n M.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1031829717","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Alexander of Aphrodisias on Celestial Motions","main_title":{"title":"Alexander of Aphrodisias on Celestial Motions"},"abstract":"A number of features of the doctrine of Alexander of Aphrodisias on heavenly motions are beyond reasonable doubt. First and foremost of these is \r\nthat he identified the nature of the heavenly spheres with their soul, thereby he could entirely collapse natural motion with voluntary motion into one in their case. Moreover the celestial element, which Alexander tends to call theion s\u00f4ma, divine body is removed from the components of \r\nthe everchanging sublunary world to the extent that it can be a legitimate question whether the substrate of celestial bodies can be called matter, and Alexander can refer to perishable entities as evIua, material in contrast to this sublime element. After identifying the contribution of the nature of the celestial spheres with that of their soul, Alexander follows \r\nAristotle in setting out a celestial hierarchy, on top of which there is or there are the separate unmoved mover(s), which move(s) by being object(s) of striving and desire for the less perfect entities of the heavens. This much seems to be firmly settled. A number of further issues, however, call for detailed examination. In this paper first I set out to clarify the contributions of the striving of the different celestial spheres, then I turn to describing the interaction between the various motions of the celestial system, and I discuss whether the theory Alexander propounded could have been a fundamental revision, or rather an alternative exposition of the original, Aristotelian celestial theory deploying homocentric spheres. [Introduction, pp. 190 f.]","btype":3,"date":"1997","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/qoA5caxGCjSIqQm","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":6,"full_name":"Bodn\u00e1r, Istv\u00e1n M.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1082,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Phronesis","volume":"42","issue":"2","pages":"190-205"}},"sort":[1997]}

  • PAGE 1 OF 1
Alexander of Aphrodisias on Celestial Motions, 1997
By: Bodnár, István M.
Title Alexander of Aphrodisias on Celestial Motions
Type Article
Language English
Date 1997
Journal Phronesis
Volume 42
Issue 2
Pages 190-205
Categories no categories
Author(s) Bodnár, István M.
Editor(s)
Translator(s) 
A number of features of the doctrine of Alexander of Aphrodisias on heavenly motions are beyond reasonable doubt. First and foremost of these is 
that he  identified the  nature of  the  heavenly spheres with their soul, thereby he could entirely collapse natural motion with voluntary motion into one in their case. Moreover the celestial element, which Alexander tends to call theion sôma, divine body is removed from the components of 
the everchanging sublunary world to the extent that it can be a legitimate question whether the substrate of  celestial bodies can be called matter, and Alexander can refer to perishable entities as evIua, material in contrast to  this sublime element. After identifying the contribution of  the nature of  the celestial spheres with that of  their soul, Alexander follows 
Aristotle in setting out a  celestial hierarchy, on top of  which there is  or there are the separate unmoved mover(s), which move(s) by  being object(s) of  striving and desire for the less perfect entities of the heavens. This much seems to be firmly settled. A number of further issues, however, call for detailed examination. In this paper first I set out to clarify the contributions of  the striving of  the different celestial spheres, then I turn to describing the interaction between the various motions of the celestial system, and I discuss whether the theory Alexander propounded could have been a fundamental revision, or rather an alternative exposition of the original, Aristotelian celestial theory deploying homocentric spheres. [Introduction, pp. 190 f.]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1082","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1082,"authors_free":[{"id":1637,"entry_id":1082,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":6,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Bodn\u00e1r, Istv\u00e1n M. ","free_first_name":"Istv\u00e1n M. ","free_last_name":"Bodn\u00e1r","norm_person":{"id":6,"first_name":"Istv\u00e1n M.","last_name":"Bodn\u00e1r","full_name":"Bodn\u00e1r, Istv\u00e1n M.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1031829717","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Alexander of Aphrodisias on Celestial Motions","main_title":{"title":"Alexander of Aphrodisias on Celestial Motions"},"abstract":"A number of features of the doctrine of Alexander of Aphrodisias on heavenly motions are beyond reasonable doubt. First and foremost of these is \r\nthat he identified the nature of the heavenly spheres with their soul, thereby he could entirely collapse natural motion with voluntary motion into one in their case. Moreover the celestial element, which Alexander tends to call theion s\u00f4ma, divine body is removed from the components of \r\nthe everchanging sublunary world to the extent that it can be a legitimate question whether the substrate of celestial bodies can be called matter, and Alexander can refer to perishable entities as evIua, material in contrast to this sublime element. After identifying the contribution of the nature of the celestial spheres with that of their soul, Alexander follows \r\nAristotle in setting out a celestial hierarchy, on top of which there is or there are the separate unmoved mover(s), which move(s) by being object(s) of striving and desire for the less perfect entities of the heavens. This much seems to be firmly settled. A number of further issues, however, call for detailed examination. In this paper first I set out to clarify the contributions of the striving of the different celestial spheres, then I turn to describing the interaction between the various motions of the celestial system, and I discuss whether the theory Alexander propounded could have been a fundamental revision, or rather an alternative exposition of the original, Aristotelian celestial theory deploying homocentric spheres. [Introduction, pp. 190 f.]","btype":3,"date":"1997","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/qoA5caxGCjSIqQm","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":6,"full_name":"Bodn\u00e1r, Istv\u00e1n M.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1082,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Phronesis","volume":"42","issue":"2","pages":"190-205"}},"sort":["Alexander of Aphrodisias on Celestial Motions"]}

  • PAGE 1 OF 1