| Title | The interpretation of Aristotle’s Categories in the Neoplatonic Commentary Tradition |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2017 |
| Published in | Categories. Histories and Perspectives |
| Pages | 35-48 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Hauer, Mareike |
| Editor(s) | D'Anna, Giuseppe , Fossati, Lorenzo |
| Translator(s) |
| The present contribution deals with the exegesis of Aristotle’s Categories in the Neoplatonic commentaries. While Plotinus discusses Aristotle’s Categories in the course of his presentation of the Platonic metaphysical framework, later Neoplatonists, starting from Porphyry, comment on Aristotle’s Categories as a whole. There are eight Neoplatonic commentaries on Aristotle’s Categories that are still extant: the shorter of two commentaries by Porphyry, an equally short one by Dexippus, and the commentaries by Ammonius, Simplicius, Philoponus, Olympiodorus, David (Elias), and Boethius. References and remarks in these commentaries suggest that there have been further Neoplatonic commentaries, such as a commentary by Iamblichus. The present contribution focuses on two aspects of the Neoplatonic exegesis of Aristotle’s Categories: 1) the question of the Categories’ aim or purpose and 2) the understanding of the Aristotelian categories as predicates. In order to shed light on the first question, we will have a closer look at the Neoplatonic debate on the Categories’ σκοπός, i.e., its aim or purpose. The determination of a treatise’s σκοπός was conceived to be of utmost importance by Neoplatonists. Simplicius, for example, says: “For the goal (σκοπός), once correctly identified, defines and rectifies our thought, so that we are not vainly transported about in every direction, but refer everything to it.”¹ However, while many Neoplatonists agree on the importance of the σκοπός, they do not agree on the content of the Categories’ σκοπός. We will have a closer look at Simplicius’ presentation of the different positions, as he deals with them individually and discusses them thoroughly. However, we will also compare it with the remarks by other Neoplatonists. There are extensive and comprehensive scholarly articles that deal with the σκοπός debate in Neoplatonic commentaries and especially with Simplicius’ presentation of the σκοπός debate (see especially Hoffmann 1987), so that the present contribution should rather be regarded as an overview of, or introduction to, the topic. The contribution, moreover, also aims at connecting the debate with the Neoplatonic interpretation of the Aristotelian categories. Many Neoplatonists conceived of the Aristotelian categories as being only applicable to the sensible realm, i.e., the lowest level within the Neoplatonic metaphysical framework. Interestingly, their presentation of the Aristotelian categories involves different descriptions such as “highest genera,” “highest predicates,” or “common items.” I will focus on the Neoplatonic description of the Aristotelian categories as predicates and the fact that, though Neoplatonists commonly designate the categories as predicates, they do not all refer to the same meaning. For all the descriptions entail different theoretical contexts—participation, predication, and universality—which, in turn, stem from complex doctrinal discussions of different philosophical schools. [introduction p. 35-36] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/rAqaBbReFwMMBhs |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1407","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1407,"authors_free":[{"id":2198,"entry_id":1407,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":174,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hauer, Mareike","free_first_name":"Mareike","free_last_name":"Hauer","norm_person":{"id":174,"first_name":"Mareike","last_name":"Hauer","full_name":"Hauer, Mareike","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2199,"entry_id":1407,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":388,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"D'Anna, Giuseppe","free_first_name":"Giuseppe","free_last_name":"D'Anna","norm_person":{"id":388,"first_name":"Giuseppe","last_name":"D'Anna","full_name":"D'Anna, Giuseppe","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/13968588X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2200,"entry_id":1407,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":389,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Fossati, Lorenzo","free_first_name":"Lorenzo","free_last_name":"Fossati","norm_person":{"id":389,"first_name":"Lorenzo","last_name":"Fossati","full_name":"Fossati, Lorenzo","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The interpretation of Aristotle\u2019s Categories in the Neoplatonic Commentary Tradition","main_title":{"title":"The interpretation of Aristotle\u2019s Categories in the Neoplatonic Commentary Tradition"},"abstract":"The present contribution deals with the exegesis of Aristotle\u2019s Categories in the Neoplatonic commentaries. While Plotinus discusses Aristotle\u2019s Categories in the course of his presentation of the Platonic metaphysical framework, later Neoplatonists, starting from Porphyry, comment on Aristotle\u2019s Categories as a whole. There are eight Neoplatonic commentaries on Aristotle\u2019s Categories that are still extant: the shorter of two commentaries by Porphyry, an equally short one by Dexippus, and the commentaries by Ammonius, Simplicius, Philoponus, Olympiodorus, David (Elias), and Boethius. References and remarks in these commentaries suggest that there have been further Neoplatonic commentaries, such as a commentary by Iamblichus.\r\n\r\nThe present contribution focuses on two aspects of the Neoplatonic exegesis of Aristotle\u2019s Categories: 1) the question of the Categories\u2019 aim or purpose and 2) the understanding of the Aristotelian categories as predicates. In order to shed light on the first question, we will have a closer look at the Neoplatonic debate on the Categories\u2019 \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c2, i.e., its aim or purpose. The determination of a treatise\u2019s \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c2 was conceived to be of utmost importance by Neoplatonists. Simplicius, for example, says:\r\n\r\n \u201cFor the goal (\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c2), once correctly identified, defines and rectifies our thought, so that we are not vainly transported about in every direction, but refer everything to it.\u201d\u00b9\r\n\r\nHowever, while many Neoplatonists agree on the importance of the \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c2, they do not agree on the content of the Categories\u2019 \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c2. We will have a closer look at Simplicius\u2019 presentation of the different positions, as he deals with them individually and discusses them thoroughly. However, we will also compare it with the remarks by other Neoplatonists.\r\n\r\nThere are extensive and comprehensive scholarly articles that deal with the \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c2 debate in Neoplatonic commentaries and especially with Simplicius\u2019 presentation of the \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c2 debate (see especially Hoffmann 1987), so that the present contribution should rather be regarded as an overview of, or introduction to, the topic. The contribution, moreover, also aims at connecting the debate with the Neoplatonic interpretation of the Aristotelian categories. Many Neoplatonists conceived of the Aristotelian categories as being only applicable to the sensible realm, i.e., the lowest level within the Neoplatonic metaphysical framework.\r\n\r\nInterestingly, their presentation of the Aristotelian categories involves different descriptions such as \u201chighest genera,\u201d \u201chighest predicates,\u201d or \u201ccommon items.\u201d I will focus on the Neoplatonic description of the Aristotelian categories as predicates and the fact that, though Neoplatonists commonly designate the categories as predicates, they do not all refer to the same meaning. For all the descriptions entail different theoretical contexts\u2014participation, predication, and universality\u2014which, in turn, stem from complex doctrinal discussions of different philosophical schools. [introduction p. 35-36]","btype":2,"date":"2017","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/rAqaBbReFwMMBhs","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":174,"full_name":"Hauer, Mareike","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":388,"full_name":"D'Anna, Giuseppe","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":389,"full_name":"Fossati, Lorenzo","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1407,"section_of":1408,"pages":"35-48","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1408,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Categories. Histories and Perspectives","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2017","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/2am9O0Ljwyc5hy1","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1408,"pubplace":"Hildesheim, Zurich, New York","publisher":"Georg Olms Verlag","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2017]}
| Title | The interpretation of Aristotle’s Categories in the Neoplatonic Commentary Tradition |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2017 |
| Published in | Categories. Histories and Perspectives |
| Pages | 35-48 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Hauer, Mareike |
| Editor(s) | D'Anna, Giuseppe , Fossati, Lorenzo |
| Translator(s) |
The present contribution deals with the exegesis of Aristotle’s Categories in the Neoplatonic commentaries. While Plotinus discusses Aristotle’s Categories in the course of his presentation of the Platonic metaphysical framework, later Neoplatonists, starting from Porphyry, comment on Aristotle’s Categories as a whole. There are eight Neoplatonic commentaries on Aristotle’s Categories that are still extant: the shorter of two commentaries by Porphyry, an equally short one by Dexippus, and the commentaries by Ammonius, Simplicius, Philoponus, Olympiodorus, David (Elias), and Boethius. References and remarks in these commentaries suggest that there have been further Neoplatonic commentaries, such as a commentary by Iamblichus.
The present contribution focuses on two aspects of the Neoplatonic exegesis of Aristotle’s Categories: 1) the question of the Categories’ aim or purpose and 2) the understanding of the Aristotelian categories as predicates. In order to shed light on the first question, we will have a closer look at the Neoplatonic debate on the Categories’ σκοπός, i.e., its aim or purpose. The determination of a treatise’s σκοπός was conceived to be of utmost importance by Neoplatonists. Simplicius, for example, says:
“For the goal (σκοπός), once correctly identified, defines and rectifies our thought, so that we are not vainly transported about in every direction, but refer everything to it.”¹
However, while many Neoplatonists agree on the importance of the σκοπός, they do not agree on the content of the Categories’ σκοπός. We will have a closer look at Simplicius’ presentation of the different positions, as he deals with them individually and discusses them thoroughly. However, we will also compare it with the remarks by other Neoplatonists.
There are extensive and comprehensive scholarly articles that deal with the σκοπός debate in Neoplatonic commentaries and especially with Simplicius’ presentation of the σκοπός debate (see especially Hoffmann 1987), so that the present contribution should rather be regarded as an overview of, or introduction to, the topic. The contribution, moreover, also aims at connecting the debate with the Neoplatonic interpretation of the Aristotelian categories. Many Neoplatonists conceived of the Aristotelian categories as being only applicable to the sensible realm, i.e., the lowest level within the Neoplatonic metaphysical framework.
Interestingly, their presentation of the Aristotelian categories involves different descriptions such as “highest genera,” “highest predicates,” or “common items.” I will focus on the Neoplatonic description of the Aristotelian categories as predicates and the fact that, though Neoplatonists commonly designate the categories as predicates, they do not all refer to the same meaning. For all the descriptions entail different theoretical contexts—participation, predication, and universality—which, in turn, stem from complex doctrinal discussions of different philosophical schools. [introduction p. 35-36] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/rAqaBbReFwMMBhs |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1407","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1407,"authors_free":[{"id":2198,"entry_id":1407,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":174,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hauer, Mareike","free_first_name":"Mareike","free_last_name":"Hauer","norm_person":{"id":174,"first_name":"Mareike","last_name":"Hauer","full_name":"Hauer, Mareike","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2199,"entry_id":1407,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":388,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"D'Anna, Giuseppe","free_first_name":"Giuseppe","free_last_name":"D'Anna","norm_person":{"id":388,"first_name":"Giuseppe","last_name":"D'Anna","full_name":"D'Anna, Giuseppe","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/13968588X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2200,"entry_id":1407,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":389,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Fossati, Lorenzo","free_first_name":"Lorenzo","free_last_name":"Fossati","norm_person":{"id":389,"first_name":"Lorenzo","last_name":"Fossati","full_name":"Fossati, Lorenzo","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The interpretation of Aristotle\u2019s Categories in the Neoplatonic Commentary Tradition","main_title":{"title":"The interpretation of Aristotle\u2019s Categories in the Neoplatonic Commentary Tradition"},"abstract":"The present contribution deals with the exegesis of Aristotle\u2019s Categories in the Neoplatonic commentaries. While Plotinus discusses Aristotle\u2019s Categories in the course of his presentation of the Platonic metaphysical framework, later Neoplatonists, starting from Porphyry, comment on Aristotle\u2019s Categories as a whole. There are eight Neoplatonic commentaries on Aristotle\u2019s Categories that are still extant: the shorter of two commentaries by Porphyry, an equally short one by Dexippus, and the commentaries by Ammonius, Simplicius, Philoponus, Olympiodorus, David (Elias), and Boethius. References and remarks in these commentaries suggest that there have been further Neoplatonic commentaries, such as a commentary by Iamblichus.\r\n\r\nThe present contribution focuses on two aspects of the Neoplatonic exegesis of Aristotle\u2019s Categories: 1) the question of the Categories\u2019 aim or purpose and 2) the understanding of the Aristotelian categories as predicates. In order to shed light on the first question, we will have a closer look at the Neoplatonic debate on the Categories\u2019 \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c2, i.e., its aim or purpose. The determination of a treatise\u2019s \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c2 was conceived to be of utmost importance by Neoplatonists. Simplicius, for example, says:\r\n\r\n \u201cFor the goal (\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c2), once correctly identified, defines and rectifies our thought, so that we are not vainly transported about in every direction, but refer everything to it.\u201d\u00b9\r\n\r\nHowever, while many Neoplatonists agree on the importance of the \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c2, they do not agree on the content of the Categories\u2019 \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c2. We will have a closer look at Simplicius\u2019 presentation of the different positions, as he deals with them individually and discusses them thoroughly. However, we will also compare it with the remarks by other Neoplatonists.\r\n\r\nThere are extensive and comprehensive scholarly articles that deal with the \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c2 debate in Neoplatonic commentaries and especially with Simplicius\u2019 presentation of the \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c2 debate (see especially Hoffmann 1987), so that the present contribution should rather be regarded as an overview of, or introduction to, the topic. The contribution, moreover, also aims at connecting the debate with the Neoplatonic interpretation of the Aristotelian categories. Many Neoplatonists conceived of the Aristotelian categories as being only applicable to the sensible realm, i.e., the lowest level within the Neoplatonic metaphysical framework.\r\n\r\nInterestingly, their presentation of the Aristotelian categories involves different descriptions such as \u201chighest genera,\u201d \u201chighest predicates,\u201d or \u201ccommon items.\u201d I will focus on the Neoplatonic description of the Aristotelian categories as predicates and the fact that, though Neoplatonists commonly designate the categories as predicates, they do not all refer to the same meaning. For all the descriptions entail different theoretical contexts\u2014participation, predication, and universality\u2014which, in turn, stem from complex doctrinal discussions of different philosophical schools. [introduction p. 35-36]","btype":2,"date":"2017","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/rAqaBbReFwMMBhs","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":174,"full_name":"Hauer, Mareike","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":388,"full_name":"D'Anna, Giuseppe","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":389,"full_name":"Fossati, Lorenzo","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1407,"section_of":1408,"pages":"35-48","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1408,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Categories. Histories and Perspectives","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2017","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/2am9O0Ljwyc5hy1","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1408,"pubplace":"Hildesheim, Zurich, New York","publisher":"Georg Olms Verlag","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["The interpretation of Aristotle\u2019s Categories in the Neoplatonic Commentary Tradition"]}