| Title | Conflicting Authorities? Hermias and Simplicius on the Self-Moving Soul |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2021 |
| Published in | Authority and authoritative texts in the Platonist tradition |
| Pages | 178-200 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Aerts, Saskia |
| Editor(s) | Erler, Michael , Heßler, Jan Erik , Petrucci, Federico Maria |
| Translator(s) |
| Aristotle plays a highly authoritative role in Neoplatonic philosophy, second only to the almost undisputed authority of Plato. However, as any reader of Plato’s and Aristotle’s works knows, the views of the two philosophers often diverge and generate conflicts. These conflicts provide the Neoplatonic commentators with a serious interpretative challenge: although, as Platonists, their main goal is to defend Plato and the Platonist position, they are also hesitant to openly criticize Aristotle, who is regarded as a true adherent of Plato’s philosophy. The commentators most prominently face such a challenge in the case of the self-moving soul, a core Platonic doctrine severely criticized by Aristotle, implicitly in Physics 8.5 and explicitly in De anima 1.3. The key to dealing with these conflicting authorities lies in the exegetical act of explicating the ‘harmony’ that exists between the views of both philosophers. This approach relies on the idea that the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle are fundamentally in agreement, which comes to the surface when their texts are interpreted in the right way. ‘Harmony’ translates the Greek symphōnia, a term most notably used in this technical meaning by Simplicius.¹ However, the term ‘harmony’ is problematic because it does not identify any absolute concept— instead, it can refer to any kind of agreement, ranging from mere compatibility to theoretical identity. What is more, the operative concept of harmony employed by modern scholars often bears the same ambiguity as its ancient counterpart.² Most studies do not reflect on the polysemy of the term, and the notion of harmony used is not always well defined, which may lead to pointless debates on terminological matters.³ Moreover, the danger of overemphasizing the unity of this ‘harmonizing tendency,’ as I. Hadot calls it, lies in failing to take proper account of the diversity of the commentators’ approaches.⁴ In this paper, I will present two parallel Neoplatonic discussions of the apparent disagreement between Plato and Aristotle about the self-moving soul, namely those of Hermias of Alexandria in his commentary on Plato’s Phaedrus and Simplicius of Cilicia in his commentary on Aristotle’s Physics.⁵ Since both philosophers ultimately argue that there is agreement between Aristotle and Plato, I will elucidate (i) what specific kind of ‘harmony’ each of the commentators assumes, (ii) what reasons each provides for supposing such a harmony, and (iii) which exegetical methods they use to explicate this harmony. The harmonizing interpretations of Hermias and Simplicius on this issue have been discussed previously by S. Gertz, who claims that both commentators similarly argue that the disagreement between Plato and Aristotle is ‘merely verbal, motivated by respect for the common usage of names.’⁶ Although I agree that this is the kind of harmony that Simplicius assumes, my interpretation of Hermias’ discussion differs from the one proposed by Gertz. Despite some evident similarities in their approaches, I will suggest that Hermias defends a much less radical form of harmony than Simplicius: whereas Simplicius claims that the views of Plato and Aristotle are verbally different but philosophically identical, Hermias only intends to show that Aristotle would have to approve of the self-moving soul to remain faithful to and consistent with his own doctrines. In addition to showing the individuality of these commentators’ approaches in dealing with conflicting authorities, my analysis also aims at elucidating why it is so important for the commentators to defend the self-motion of the soul. As will become clear, the concept of self-motion is not only crucial in Neoplatonic psychology but also indispensable in their explanation of physical motion. [introduction p. 178-180] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/SGsawecaEHSN9gD |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1473","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1473,"authors_free":[{"id":2549,"entry_id":1473,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":543,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Aerts, Saskia","free_first_name":"Saskia","free_last_name":"Aerts","norm_person":{"id":543,"first_name":"Saskia","last_name":"Aerts","full_name":"Aerts, Saskia","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2550,"entry_id":1473,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":164,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Erler, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Erler","norm_person":{"id":164,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Erler","full_name":"Erler, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122153847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2551,"entry_id":1473,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":478,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","free_first_name":"Jan Erik","free_last_name":"He\u00dfler","norm_person":{"id":478,"first_name":"Jan Erik","last_name":"He\u00dfler","full_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1059760533","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2552,"entry_id":1473,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":544,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Petrucci, Federico Maria","free_first_name":"Federico Maria","free_last_name":"Petrucci","norm_person":{"id":544,"first_name":"Federico Maria","last_name":"Petrucci","full_name":"Petrucci, Federico Maria","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1027675344","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Conflicting Authorities? Hermias and Simplicius on the Self-Moving Soul","main_title":{"title":"Conflicting Authorities? Hermias and Simplicius on the Self-Moving Soul"},"abstract":"Aristotle plays a highly authoritative role in Neoplatonic philosophy, second only to the almost undisputed authority of Plato. However, as any reader of Plato\u2019s and Aristotle\u2019s works knows, the views of the two philosophers often diverge and generate conflicts. These conflicts provide the Neoplatonic commentators with a serious interpretative challenge: although, as Platonists, their main goal is to defend Plato and the Platonist position, they are also hesitant to openly criticize Aristotle, who is regarded as a true adherent of Plato\u2019s philosophy. The commentators most prominently face such a challenge in the case of the self-moving soul, a core Platonic doctrine severely criticized by Aristotle, implicitly in Physics 8.5 and explicitly in De anima 1.3.\r\n\r\nThe key to dealing with these conflicting authorities lies in the exegetical act of explicating the \u2018harmony\u2019 that exists between the views of both philosophers. This approach relies on the idea that the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle are fundamentally in agreement, which comes to the surface when their texts are interpreted in the right way. \u2018Harmony\u2019 translates the Greek symph\u014dnia, a term most notably used in this technical meaning by Simplicius.\u00b9 However, the term \u2018harmony\u2019 is problematic because it does not identify any absolute concept\u2014 instead, it can refer to any kind of agreement, ranging from mere compatibility to theoretical identity. What is more, the operative concept of harmony employed by modern scholars often bears the same ambiguity as its ancient counterpart.\u00b2 Most studies do not reflect on the polysemy of the term, and the notion of harmony used is not always well defined, which may lead to pointless debates on terminological matters.\u00b3 Moreover, the danger of overemphasizing the unity of this \u2018harmonizing tendency,\u2019 as I. Hadot calls it, lies in failing to take proper account of the diversity of the commentators\u2019 approaches.\u2074\r\n\r\nIn this paper, I will present two parallel Neoplatonic discussions of the apparent disagreement between Plato and Aristotle about the self-moving soul, namely those of Hermias of Alexandria in his commentary on Plato\u2019s Phaedrus and Simplicius of Cilicia in his commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics.\u2075 Since both philosophers ultimately argue that there is agreement between Aristotle and Plato, I will elucidate (i) what specific kind of \u2018harmony\u2019 each of the commentators assumes, (ii) what reasons each provides for supposing such a harmony, and (iii) which exegetical methods they use to explicate this harmony.\r\n\r\nThe harmonizing interpretations of Hermias and Simplicius on this issue have been discussed previously by S. Gertz, who claims that both commentators similarly argue that the disagreement between Plato and Aristotle is \u2018merely verbal, motivated by respect for the common usage of names.\u2019\u2076 Although I agree that this is the kind of harmony that Simplicius assumes, my interpretation of Hermias\u2019 discussion differs from the one proposed by Gertz. Despite some evident similarities in their approaches, I will suggest that Hermias defends a much less radical form of harmony than Simplicius: whereas Simplicius claims that the views of Plato and Aristotle are verbally different but philosophically identical, Hermias only intends to show that Aristotle would have to approve of the self-moving soul to remain faithful to and consistent with his own doctrines.\r\n\r\nIn addition to showing the individuality of these commentators\u2019 approaches in dealing with conflicting authorities, my analysis also aims at elucidating why it is so important for the commentators to defend the self-motion of the soul. As will become clear, the concept of self-motion is not only crucial in Neoplatonic psychology but also indispensable in their explanation of physical motion. [introduction p. 178-180]","btype":2,"date":"2021","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/SGsawecaEHSN9gD","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":543,"full_name":"Aerts, Saskia","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":164,"full_name":"Erler, Michael ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":478,"full_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":544,"full_name":"Petrucci, Federico Maria","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1473,"section_of":1474,"pages":"178-200","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1474,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Authority and authoritative texts in the Platonist tradition","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Erler-He\u00dfler-Petrucci_2021","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2021","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"All disciplines can count on a noble founder, and the representation of this founder as an authority is key in order to construe a discipline's identity. This book sheds light on how Plato and other authorities were represented in one of the most long-lasting traditions of all time. It leads the reader through exegesis and polemics, recovery of the past and construction of a philosophical identity. From Xenocrates to Proclus, from the sceptical shift to the re-establishment of dogmatism, from the Mosaic of the Philosophers to the Neoplatonist Commentaries, the construction of authority emerges as a way of access to the core of the Platonist tradition. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ZaiPIkzZzpNqhmG","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1474,"pubplace":" Cambridge \u2013 New York","publisher":"Cambridge University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2021]}
| Title | Surface Reading and Deeper Meaning. On Aristotle reading Plato and Platonists reading Aristotle |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2013 |
| Published in | Argument und literarische Form in antiker Philosophie. Akten des 3. Kongresses der Gesellschaft für antike Philosophie 2010 |
| Pages | 469-494 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
| Editor(s) | Erler, Michael , Heßler, Jan Erik , Blumenfelder, Benedikt (Collaborator) |
| Translator(s) |
| We are here together to discuss various forms of philosophy in antiquity. There is a surprising variety of literary genres of philosophy so different from the narrow academic format of proceedings, handbooks, and referred journal articles. Already among the works of Aristotle, as the commentators noticed, there is a great variety, and Aristotle always adapted his style to the genre: dialogues, letters, protreptics, documentation works, research discussions, treatises on ethics and politics aiming at a broader public. And if we take the whole literary production of ancient philosophy, the variety is even more impressive. Besides the treatises and commentaries, the summaries and paraphrases, refutations and replies, the handbooks, manuals, and doxographies, there are dialogues and diatribes and orations, letters and catechisms with sentences to be set in practice, epigraphical posters in public city galleries, philosophical poems and political pamphlets, revelations of Hermes Trismegistos, Chaldean oracles, and we must include the manifold Jewish and Christian interpretations of biblical texts, sermons, and theological polemics. They all require other ways of reading and interpreting. The title of this introductory lecture does not mean that I would recommend us to seek for deeper meaning hidden under the many literary forms. It was undoubtedly a very influential hermeneutical model, in particular when combined with the esoteric/exoteric distinction. But in my view, it remains primarily a model for interpreting mythical and sacred texts and, since the secularization of sacred hermeneutics, for reading “challenging literary texts.” It is not a method for the interpretation of philosophical texts, where analysis, insight into the structure of arguments, questioning, and criticism are required. To play with a well-known quote from Thoreau: “In this part of the world (i.e., in philosophy), it is considered a ground for complaint if a man’s writings admit of more than one interpretation.” This refusal of a search for deeper meaning in philosophy, however, does not mean that we should remain just superficial readers, surfing on the text. Let us use all the possibilities we have, including attention to the literary context, to better understand the argument of the author. To avoid the impression that I am finally agreeing with Aristotle against Plato, let me conclude with a remarkable statement of Plato in the Phaedo. It comes from the crucial section of the debate where Socrates starts his critique of Simmias’ argument that the soul is the harmony of the body and will disappear once the substrate is destroyed. All participants are deeply impressed by the harmony argument, and there is an uneasy silence, as they thought it was a fatal blow to Socrates’ belief in immortality, but Socrates is not impressed. He confronts Simmias with a difficult choice: If you stick to the harmony doctrine, you will have to give up the other doctrine you just accepted, because it is incompatible with the harmony thesis, namely that all knowledge is recollection. What will you keep then, Simmias, this new theory or the former you already accepted? Simmias answers without hesitation that he would stand by the anamnesis doctrine. For this other (sc. the doctrine that the soul is like a harmony) came to me without demonstration; it merely seemed probable and attractive, which is the reason why many people hold it. I am conscious that arguments which base their demonstrations on mere probability are deceptive, and if we are not on our guard against them, they deceive us greatly, in geometry and in all other things. When commenting on this passage, Damascius, the last head of the Platonic Academy in Athens, distinguishes between what he calls superficial (ἐπιπόλαιοι) and profound (βαθύτεροι) thinkers, but not in any esoteric sense. Superficial thinkers, he says, “find pleasure in plausible arguments,” based on analogies and comparisons, metaphors. That is why the analogy of the soul with the harmony of the lyre is so attractive. “The more profound thinkers, who scorn the world of senses and its ready-at-hand (πρόχειρον) beliefs, rise above plausibilities and love arguments that are connected by necessity.” In this sense, I would also like to be a ‘profound’ reader ... alas, there arises again a problem. The doctrine that, according to Socrates, is supposedly demonstrated by sound, almost geometrical arguments, and not by analogy, as the rejected harmony thesis, is itself based on analogy and metaphor. For, Aristotle, sitting in this hall, would stand up and say: “What do you mean, Socrates, by that anamnesis? Is it not a metaphor and poetical phrase?” [conclusion p. 490-492] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/3r4OKQesOkyPwb0 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"482","_score":null,"_source":{"id":482,"authors_free":[{"id":653,"entry_id":482,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":654,"entry_id":482,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":164,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Erler, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Erler","norm_person":{"id":164,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Erler","full_name":"Erler, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122153847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2424,"entry_id":482,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":478,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","free_first_name":"Jan Erik","free_last_name":"He\u00dfler","norm_person":{"id":478,"first_name":"Jan Erik","last_name":"He\u00dfler","full_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1059760533","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2425,"entry_id":482,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":479,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Blumenfelder, Benedikt (Collaborator)","free_first_name":"Benedikt","free_last_name":"Blumenfelder","norm_person":{"id":479,"first_name":"Benedikt","last_name":"Blumenfelder","full_name":"Blumenfelder, Benedikt","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Surface Reading and Deeper Meaning. On Aristotle reading Plato and Platonists reading Aristotle","main_title":{"title":"Surface Reading and Deeper Meaning. On Aristotle reading Plato and Platonists reading Aristotle"},"abstract":"We are here together to discuss various forms of philosophy in antiquity. There is a surprising variety of literary genres of philosophy so different from the narrow academic format of proceedings, handbooks, and referred journal articles. Already among the works of Aristotle, as the commentators noticed, there is a great variety, and Aristotle always adapted his style to the genre: dialogues, letters, protreptics, documentation works, research discussions, treatises on ethics and politics aiming at a broader public.\r\n\r\nAnd if we take the whole literary production of ancient philosophy, the variety is even more impressive. Besides the treatises and commentaries, the summaries and paraphrases, refutations and replies, the handbooks, manuals, and doxographies, there are dialogues and diatribes and orations, letters and catechisms with sentences to be set in practice, epigraphical posters in public city galleries, philosophical poems and political pamphlets, revelations of Hermes Trismegistos, Chaldean oracles, and we must include the manifold Jewish and Christian interpretations of biblical texts, sermons, and theological polemics. They all require other ways of reading and interpreting.\r\n\r\nThe title of this introductory lecture does not mean that I would recommend us to seek for deeper meaning hidden under the many literary forms. It was undoubtedly a very influential hermeneutical model, in particular when combined with the esoteric\/exoteric distinction. But in my view, it remains primarily a model for interpreting mythical and sacred texts and, since the secularization of sacred hermeneutics, for reading \u201cchallenging literary texts.\u201d It is not a method for the interpretation of philosophical texts, where analysis, insight into the structure of arguments, questioning, and criticism are required.\r\n\r\nTo play with a well-known quote from Thoreau: \u201cIn this part of the world (i.e., in philosophy), it is considered a ground for complaint if a man\u2019s writings admit of more than one interpretation.\u201d This refusal of a search for deeper meaning in philosophy, however, does not mean that we should remain just superficial readers, surfing on the text. Let us use all the possibilities we have, including attention to the literary context, to better understand the argument of the author.\r\n\r\nTo avoid the impression that I am finally agreeing with Aristotle against Plato, let me conclude with a remarkable statement of Plato in the Phaedo. It comes from the crucial section of the debate where Socrates starts his critique of Simmias\u2019 argument that the soul is the harmony of the body and will disappear once the substrate is destroyed.\r\n\r\nAll participants are deeply impressed by the harmony argument, and there is an uneasy silence, as they thought it was a fatal blow to Socrates\u2019 belief in immortality, but Socrates is not impressed. He confronts Simmias with a difficult choice: If you stick to the harmony doctrine, you will have to give up the other doctrine you just accepted, because it is incompatible with the harmony thesis, namely that all knowledge is recollection. What will you keep then, Simmias, this new theory or the former you already accepted? Simmias answers without hesitation that he would stand by the anamnesis doctrine.\r\n\r\nFor this other (sc. the doctrine that the soul is like a harmony) came to me without demonstration; it merely seemed probable and attractive, which is the reason why many people hold it. I am conscious that arguments which base their demonstrations on mere probability are deceptive, and if we are not on our guard against them, they deceive us greatly, in geometry and in all other things.\r\n\r\nWhen commenting on this passage, Damascius, the last head of the Platonic Academy in Athens, distinguishes between what he calls superficial (\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9) and profound (\u03b2\u03b1\u03b8\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9) thinkers, but not in any esoteric sense. Superficial thinkers, he says, \u201cfind pleasure in plausible arguments,\u201d based on analogies and comparisons, metaphors. That is why the analogy of the soul with the harmony of the lyre is so attractive. \u201cThe more profound thinkers, who scorn the world of senses and its ready-at-hand (\u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd) beliefs, rise above plausibilities and love arguments that are connected by necessity.\u201d\r\n\r\nIn this sense, I would also like to be a \u2018profound\u2019 reader ... alas, there arises again a problem. The doctrine that, according to Socrates, is supposedly demonstrated by sound, almost geometrical arguments, and not by analogy, as the rejected harmony thesis, is itself based on analogy and metaphor.\r\n\r\nFor, Aristotle, sitting in this hall, would stand up and say: \u201cWhat do you mean, Socrates, by that anamnesis? Is it not a metaphor and poetical phrase?\u201d [conclusion p. 490-492]","btype":2,"date":"2013","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/3r4OKQesOkyPwb0","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":164,"full_name":"Erler, Michael ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":478,"full_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":479,"full_name":"Blumenfelder, Benedikt","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":482,"section_of":322,"pages":"469-494","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":322,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Argument und literarische Form in antiker Philosophie. Akten des 3. Kongresses der Gesellschaft f\u00fcr antike Philosophie 2010","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Erler2013","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2013","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2013","abstract":"In der modernen Universit\u00e4t werden Literatur, Philologie und Philosophie als unterschiedliche Bereiche betrachtet. Damit wird eine im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert zunehmende Entfremdung zwischen der Erforschung antiker Philosophie und Philologie manifest, die den urspr\u00fcnglichen Gegebenheiten in der Antike keineswegs gerecht wird. Denn die Philosophie entwickelt sich in Griechenland und Rom in enger Verbindung mit und oft in einem Spannungsverh\u00e4ltnis zu unterschiedlichen literarischen Genres. Dies hat zur Folge, dass die Autoren und Interpreten infolge der Wahl bestimmter Gattungen als Medium philosophischer Botschaften neben der eigentlichen Argumentation auch Darstellungsformen der jeweiligen Gattungen zu w\u00fcrdigen haben. Dieses oft spannungsvolle Verh\u00e4ltnis von philosophischem Argument und literarischer Form auszuleuchten hatte sich der 3. Kongress der Gesellschaft f\u00fcr antike Philosophie vorgenommen. In Vortr\u00e4gen und Diskussionsrunden von Philosophen und Philologen wurde diese Frage unter verschiedenen Aspekten mit Blick auf antike Philosophen verschiedener Epochen lebendig diskutiert. Dieser Band, der den Gro\u00dfteil dieser Beitr\u00e4ge versammelt, mag einen Eindruck von der Diskussion vermitteln und Philologen, Philosophen und an der Antike Interessierte zu weiteren \u00dcberlegungen anregen. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/0QiKNhBCl16gJMn","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":322,"pubplace":"Berlin","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2013]}
| Title | Die Stellung des Neuplatonikers Simplikios zum Verhältnis der Philosophie zu Religion und Theurgie |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | German |
| Date | 2002 |
| Published in | Metaphysik und Religion: Zur Signatur des spätantiken Denkens / Akten des Internationalen Kongresses vom 13.-17. März 2001 in Würzburg |
| Pages | 323-342 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
| Editor(s) | Kobusch, Theo , Erler, Michael |
| Translator(s) |
| Der Epiktetkommentar ist dazu bestimmt, dem Leser die sittlichen Grundhaltungen zu vermitteln, ohne die es für ihn nicht förderlich ist, ein Studium der Philosophie zu beginnen. Da es sich somit um eine allgemein gehaltene Einführung handelt, die den Erwerb der bürgerlichen Tugenden mit Hilfe der neuplatonischen Kommentierung des Handbüchleins des Epiktet zum Ziel hat wird im Verfolg des zu kommentierenden Textes eine breite Palette von philosophischen Fragen kurz angesprochen, ohne in die Tiefen des philosophischen Systems vorzudringen. Es ist daher unerlässlich, bei der Interpretierung des Epiktetkommentars über die traditionellen neuplatonischen Lehren informiert zu sein, wenn man den dogmatischen Hintergrund der Darlegungen des Simplikios erfassen will: Die Aneignung der ersten Stufe des neuplatonischen Tugendkanons, der politischen Tugenden, die erklärterweise das Ziel des Kommentars zum Handbüchlein des Epiktet ist, geht mit der Ausübung der Kultriten einher, wenn sie wohl auch im allgemeinen zur Zeit des Simplikios nur noch im privaten Rahmen stattfinden konnten. Es gibt keine Anhaltspunkte dafür, daß Simplikios eine im Vergleich zu Jamblich, Hierokles und Proklos abweichende Haltung gegenüber dem Verhältnis der Philosophie zu Religion und Theurgie eingenommen hätte, d.h. daß, bei aller Wichtigkeit und Unerlässlichkeit der Theurgie, auch für ihn die Philosophie mit ihrer rationalen Erfassung der metaphysischen Themen eine unabdingbare Voraussetzung bleibt. [Author's abstract] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/0gw38rZ6TRENJZm |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"674","_score":null,"_source":{"id":674,"authors_free":[{"id":990,"entry_id":674,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","free_first_name":"Ilsetraut","free_last_name":"Hadot","norm_person":{"id":4,"first_name":"Ilsetraut","last_name":"Hadot","full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/107415011","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":991,"entry_id":674,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":163,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Kobusch, Theo","free_first_name":"Theo","free_last_name":"Kobusch","norm_person":{"id":163,"first_name":"Theo","last_name":"Kobusch","full_name":"Kobusch, Theo","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115417486","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":992,"entry_id":674,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":164,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Erler, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Erler","norm_person":{"id":164,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Erler","full_name":"Erler, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122153847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Die Stellung des Neuplatonikers Simplikios zum Verh\u00e4ltnis der Philosophie zu Religion und Theurgie","main_title":{"title":"Die Stellung des Neuplatonikers Simplikios zum Verh\u00e4ltnis der Philosophie zu Religion und Theurgie"},"abstract":"Der Epiktetkommentar ist dazu bestimmt, dem Leser die sittlichen Grundhaltungen zu vermitteln, ohne die es f\u00fcr ihn nicht f\u00f6r\u00adderlich ist, ein Studium der Philosophie zu beginnen. Da es sich somit um eine allgemein gehaltene Einf\u00fch\u00adrung handelt, die den Erwerb der b\u00fcrgerlichen Tugenden mit Hilfe der neuplato\u00adnischen Kommentierung des Handb\u00fcchleins des Epiktet zum Ziel hat wird im Verfolg des zu kommentierenden Textes eine breite Palette von philosophischen Fragen kurz angesprochen, ohne in die Tiefen des philosophischen Systems vorzudringen. Es ist daher unerl\u00e4sslich, bei der Interpretierung des Epiktetkommentars \u00fcber die traditionellen neuplatonischen Lehren informiert zu sein, wenn man den dogmatischen Hintergrund der Darlegungen des Simplikios erfassen will: Die Aneignung der ersten Stufe des neuplatoni\u00adschen Tugendkanons, der politischen Tugenden, die erkl\u00e4rterweise das Ziel des Kommentars zum Handb\u00fcchlein des Epiktet ist, geht mit der Aus\u00fcbung der Kultriten einher, wenn sie wohl auch im allgemeinen zur Zeit des Simplikios nur noch im privaten Rahmen stattfinden konnten. Es gibt keine Anhaltspunkte daf\u00fcr, da\u00df Simplikios eine im Vergleich zu Jamblich, Hierokles und Proklos abweichende Haltung gegen\u00fcber dem Verh\u00e4ltnis der Philo\u00adsophie zu Religion und Theurgie eingenommen h\u00e4tte, d.h. da\u00df, bei aller Wich\u00adtigkeit und Unerl\u00e4sslichkeit der Theurgie, auch f\u00fcr ihn die Philosophie mit ihrer rationalen Erfassung der metaphysischen Themen eine unabdingbare Vorausset\u00adzung bleibt. [Author's abstract]","btype":2,"date":"2002","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/0gw38rZ6TRENJZm","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":163,"full_name":"Kobusch, Theo","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":164,"full_name":"Erler, Michael ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":674,"section_of":265,"pages":"323-342","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":265,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Metaphysik und Religion: Zur Signatur des sp\u00e4tantiken Denkens \/ Akten des Internationalen Kongresses vom 13.-17. M\u00e4rz 2001 in W\u00fcrzburg","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Kobusch\/Erler2002b","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2002","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2002","abstract":"\r\nDie Beitr\u00e4ge zur Altertumskunde enthalten Monographien, Sammelb\u00e4nde, Editionen, \u00dcbersetzungen und Kommentare zu Themen aus den Bereichen Klassische, Mittel- und Neulateinische Philologie, Alte Geschichte, Arch\u00e4ologie, Antike Philosophie sowie Nachwirken der Antike bis in die Neuzeit. Dadurch leistet die Reihe einen umfassenden Beitrag zur Erschlie\u00dfung klassischer Literatur und zur Forschung im gesamten Gebiet der Altertumswissenschaften. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/lv1Opvh3eZrvkIS","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":265,"pubplace":"M\u00fcnchen - Leipzig","publisher":"Saur","series":"Beitr\u00e4ge zur Altertumskunde","volume":"160","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2002]}
| Title | Stoische Ethik und neuplatonische Tugendlehre. Zur Verortung der stoischen Ethik im neuplatonischen System in Simplikios' Kommentar zu Epiktets Enchiridion |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1999 |
| Published in | Zur Rezeption der hellenistischen Philosophie in der Spätantike. Akten der 1. Tagung der Karl-und-Gertrud-Abel-Stiftung vom 22.-25. September 1997 in Trier |
| Pages | 93-103 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Thiel, Rainer |
| Editor(s) | Fuhrer, Therese , Erler, Michael |
| Translator(s) |
| The text presents an analysis of the Stoic ethics and its placement within the Neoplatonic system, particularly in Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' Enchiridion. It explores how the Neoplatonic tradition emerged as a unified philosophical school, leading to the disappearance of conflicting philosophical schools. Despite the Stoic teachings being present in Neoplatonic works, they are generally treated critically and dismissed as opposed to the Aristotelian position. The text then delves into the Neoplatonic system of virtues, starting with Plato's four cardinal virtues, which were further developed by Neoplatonists. It highlights Plotinus' view that the political virtues alone are not sufficient for the soul's ascent to divine perfection, as they are related to the material world. Instead, Plotinus introduces the concept of "purifications" as the virtues that enable the soul to detach from bodily passions and elevate itself towards the divine. The abstract concludes by emphasizing the relevance of Simplikios' application of this Neoplatonic virtue system to Epictetus' Enchiridion, positioning it as an essential tool for the soul's progress towards resemblance to the divine. [introduction] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/RKLOhPA3UpPbgKk |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"470","_score":null,"_source":{"id":470,"authors_free":[{"id":633,"entry_id":470,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":333,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Thiel, Rainer","free_first_name":"Rainer","free_last_name":"Thiel","norm_person":{"id":333,"first_name":"Rainer","last_name":"Thiel","full_name":"Thiel, Rainer","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/12885054X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":634,"entry_id":470,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":339,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Fuhrer, Therese","free_first_name":"Therese","free_last_name":"Fuhrer","norm_person":{"id":339,"first_name":"Therese","last_name":"Fuhrer","full_name":"Fuhrer, Therese","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117693804","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":635,"entry_id":470,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":164,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Erler, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Erler","norm_person":{"id":164,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Erler","full_name":"Erler, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122153847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Stoische Ethik und neuplatonische Tugendlehre. Zur Verortung der stoischen Ethik im neuplatonischen System in Simplikios' Kommentar zu Epiktets Enchiridion","main_title":{"title":"Stoische Ethik und neuplatonische Tugendlehre. Zur Verortung der stoischen Ethik im neuplatonischen System in Simplikios' Kommentar zu Epiktets Enchiridion"},"abstract":"The text presents an analysis of the Stoic ethics and its placement within the Neoplatonic system, particularly in Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' Enchiridion. It explores how the Neoplatonic tradition emerged as a unified philosophical school, leading to the disappearance of conflicting philosophical schools. Despite the Stoic teachings being present in Neoplatonic works, they are generally treated critically and dismissed as opposed to the Aristotelian position. The text then delves into the Neoplatonic system of virtues, starting with Plato's four cardinal virtues, which were further developed by Neoplatonists. It highlights Plotinus' view that the political virtues alone are not sufficient for the soul's ascent to divine perfection, as they are related to the material world. Instead, Plotinus introduces the concept of \"purifications\" as the virtues that enable the soul to detach from bodily passions and elevate itself towards the divine. The abstract concludes by emphasizing the relevance of Simplikios' application of this Neoplatonic virtue system to Epictetus' Enchiridion, positioning it as an essential tool for the soul's progress towards resemblance to the divine. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1999","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/RKLOhPA3UpPbgKk","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":333,"full_name":"Thiel, Rainer","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":339,"full_name":"Fuhrer, Therese","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":164,"full_name":"Erler, Michael ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":470,"section_of":324,"pages":"93-103","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":324,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Zur Rezeption der hellenistischen Philosophie in der Sp\u00e4tantike. Akten der 1. Tagung der Karl-und-Gertrud-Abel-Stiftung vom 22.-25. September 1997 in Trier","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Fuhrer\/Erler1999","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1999","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1999","abstract":"Review by T. Runia: As a generalization it is often remarked that the poor state of our knowledge of Hellenistic philosophy, based almost exclusively on reports and fragments, is due to the decline of interest in this philosophy during the period of late antiquity. After the schools had closed down by the beginning of the 3rd century C.E., Peripatetic, Stoic, and Epicurean writings ceased to circulate widely, and in the end disappeared completely. Of course the end result of this process cannot be disputed. These writings have simply disappeared and, short of a miracle, they will not resurface.\r\n\r\nBut the process certainly took longer and was less radical in its earlier stages than is often thought. Late ancient philosophers and theologians in many cases still had a considerable knowledge of Hellenistic philosophy and used that knowledge to good effect in their own writings.\r\n\r\nThe theme of the reception of Hellenistic philosophy in late antiquity is the subject of the book under review, which contains fifteen studies originally presented at a conference in Trier in 1997. The studies are in German, with two exceptions, a paper in Italian and one in English. They have been prepared by a group of young scholars, mainly in their 30's and 40's, who in most cases have taken up positions in German and Swiss universities during the past decade or so.\r\n\r\nReviewing the various studies, one cannot but help noticing a marked similarity of method. The subjects treated are on the whole fairly limited in scope, and often concentrate on a particular author and a particular text. The detailed treatment is usually prefaced by an introductory section, which places the subject in a wider context, for example by tracing its development from the end of the Hellenistic period to the time of the author being discussed.These introductory sections can sometimes be very entertaining and informative (as in the case of the article of Christoph Riedweg, who points out remarkable correspondences between the period of late antiquity and our own time), but can also be too much simply a catalogue of authors and texts (as in the case of the survey of Epicureanism from Hadrian to Lactantius in the article by Jochem Althoff). The end result is that we have fifteen small but well-featured islands standing out in the broader sea of the book's subject.\r\n\r\nThe brief introduction competently but very succinctly outlines three connecting themes:\r\n\r\n The role of the Stoa and Epicureanism in Platonist philosophy.\r\n Scepticism, Stoicism, and Epicureanism in Christian literature.\r\n Doctrines of the Hellenistic philosophical schools as general cultural knowledge (Bildungsgut).\r\n\r\nBut no real attempt is made to cover the subject in more general terms. This is increasingly the method of such selective conference volumes. In spite of the general title, it is primarily a book for specialists.\r\n\r\nThe fifteen papers can be more or less divided into the three thematic categories noted above. Four concentrate on Hellenistic themes in later Platonism: Dominic O'Meara on Epicurus Neoplatonicus, Rainer Thiel and Michael Erler on the preparatory role of Hellenistic (and especially Stoic) ethics, Jan Opsomer and Carlos Steel on Proclus' doctrine of the origin of evil and its Hellenistic antecedents. Christoph Riedweg, by investigating Julian's use of Stoic and Platonic argumentation in his anti-Christian polemic, bridges the gap with the eight contributions which concentrate on Patristic authors.\r\n\r\nThe intellectual dominance of Augustine is illustrated by the fact that no less than five contributions concentrate on his writings: Maria Bettetini on the background to De musica (very little Hellenistic philosophy here), Karin Schlapbach on Ciceronian and Neoplatonist elements in the proarmia of Contra Academicos I & II, Sabine Harwardt on Stoic argumentation in De beata vita, Christoph Horn on Augustine's moral philosophy in relation to Greek virtue ethics, Therese Fuhrer on the Hellenistic epistemological background of Augustine's concept of faith.\r\n\r\nThe other three specifically Patristic contributions are on Amobius (philosophical themes in his apologetic argumentation, by Sabine Follinger), Lactantius (his use of Epicurus, by Jochem Althoff), and Prudentius (virtue against vice in the Psychomachia, by Carolin Oser-Grote).\r\n\r\nThe volume ends with two more general treatments. Karla Pollman attempts to trace two differing conceptions of fictionality\u2014the Platonic mimesis-model focused on the author and the Stoic signification-model focused more on the reader\u2014from Hellenistic philosophy to their adaptation in late ancient texts. Ulrich Eigler, in an ambitious and stimulating contribution, investigates the cultural context of the kind of amateur use of philosophy that we find, for example, in Jerome's writings. Of these fifteen articles, three stand out on account of the lucidity of their treatment and the importance of their subject. Christoph Horn's method is perhaps somewhat unusual, in that he focuses his treatment of Augustine's virtue ethics almost entirely on a point-by-point rebuttal of the position of the Swedish scholar of a previous generation, Gosta Hok, whom he accuses of interpreting Augustine in such a way as to make him a fideistic opponent of ancient rationalism. In actual fact, Augustine unreservedly takes over the basic theses of ancient ethical rationalism, but in his later years reserves it for followers of the \"true religion,\" without coming to a real discussion with its original Neoplatonist proponents.\r\n\r\nMany of Horn's points are well taken, but one wonders whether in this interpretation the gulf between Augustine's professed method of selective spoliatio and his actual practice of largely uncritical appropriation (as proposed by Horn) does not become too great. What Augustine objects to in ancient rationalism is its intellectual arrogance, the refusal to submit to the yoke of faith. This position seems to me to have revisionary aspirations. The struggle between \"catholic\" and \"protestant\" readings of Augustine is likely to continue.\r\n\r\nIn her paper on the epistemological background to Augustine's conception of faith, Therese Fuhrer argues that it is to be found in the Stoic theory in which assent (adsensio, \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2) precedes both knowledge (scientia, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7, based on comprehensio, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03c8\u03b9\u03c2) and belief (opinio, \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1). A priori, this seems not so likely, since the role assigned to volition in the two conceptions is quite different. Nevertheless, Fuhrer manages to show that both in terms of structure and terminology this background does have illuminating features.\r\n\r\nA difficulty remains that no texts indicating an explicit relation between the act of faith and epistemological assent can be found until two passages in very late writings. This article illustrates how difficult it is to pin Augustine down in relation to specific philosophical theories. It is his powerful transforming drive that makes his views so distinctive and so hard to categorize in \"doxographical\" terms.\r\n\r\nThe article of Jan Opsomer and Carlos Steel is recommended reading for anyone interested in how ancient philosophers working within the tradition of classical ontology wrestled with the problem of evil. Not only does it give an excellent overview of the dilemmas involved and the solutions attempted, but it also draws on the new translation of Proclus' De malorum substantia, which the authors are preparing.\r\n\r\nThey show how Proclus tries to find a way out of the classical dilemma in which one either has to detract from providence or not take evil seriously enough as a real aspect of the world. Proclus' solution is intriguing but very risky. Any attribution of evil to the first cause is unacceptable, but in the light of Neoplatonist ontological monism this means that one has to understand evil as an (ultimately) uncaused event.\r\n\r\nNot only is this very awkward in light of the Platonic principle nihil fit sine causa, which Proclus fully endorses, but it also seems to reduce evil to a kind of accidental epiphenomenon. Opsomer and Steel argue that Proclus may have found a third way between the Stoa and the Peripatos (which reserves providence for the divine realm only), but at a considerable cost. They tentatively conclude that the Stoa continues to hold the last word in this debate, and that theodicy may well be the worst legacy that this school has left to subsequent philosophy. This is perhaps a somewhat disappointing result, but no better illustration could be given of the importance of studying Hellenistic philosophy as a background for late ancient and patristic philosophy.\r\n\r\nIn furthering this study, the book under review makes a valuable contribution. The volume also shows, as the product of predominantly young scholars, that the future of scholarship in the area of later ancient and Patristic philosophy is in good hands.","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Wi5qXtXGHesjYwT","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":324,"pubplace":"Stuttgart","publisher":"Franz Steiner Verlag","series":"Philosophie der Antike","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1999]}
| Title | Hellenistische Philosophie als 'praeparatio Platonica' in der Spätantike (am Beispiel von Boethius' 'consolatio philosophiae') |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1999 |
| Published in | Zur Rezeption der hellenistischen Philosophie in der Spätantike. Akten der 1. Tagung der Karl-und-Gertrud-Abel-Stiftung vom 22.-25. September 1997 in Trier |
| Pages | 105-122 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Erler, Michael |
| Editor(s) | Fuhrer, Therese , Erler, Michael |
| Translator(s) |
| Rainer Thiel (Stoische Ethik und neuplatonische Tugendlehre. Zur Verortung der stoischen Ethik im neuplatonischen System in Simplikios’ Kommentar zu Epiktets Enchiridion, 93-103) analysiert präzise, wie Simplikios in seinem Kommentar zu Epiktets Encheiridion den Wert der stoischen Ethik bestimmt: die Befolgung des dort Gesagten sei Voraussetzung für den eigentlichen philosophischen Aufstieg. Auch hier erscheint hellenistische Philosophie also als propädeutische Vorstufe, wobei Simplikios - wie Thiel zu Recht hervorhebt - freilich immer auch die Differenzen zwischen Epiktet und neuplatonischen Auffassungen benennt, was er zu seiner Zeit bereits in einer zurückhaltenden, unpolemischen Form tun kann. Von einer anderen Seite her kommt Michael Erler (Philosophie als Therapie — Hellenistische Philosophie als praeparatio philosophica im Platonismus der Spätantike, 105-22) - auch gestützt auf die Forschungen des Ehepaars Hadot - für Simplikios' Kommentar zu demselben Ergebnis (115: "eine gleichsam verschriftlichte Form schulmäßiger Vorbereitung auf das platonische Philosophiestudium") und gewinnt hieraus für Boethius' Consolatio Philosophiae eine überzeugende Erklärung für das Phänomen, daß stoisches Gedankengut in den ersten drei Büchern eine deutliche Rolle spielt, um danach in den Hintergrund zu treten. Indem Erler Boethius' Schrift in den Kontext platonischer Schulpraxis des allmählichen Aufsteigens zur Erkenntnis rückt, vermag er verständlich zu machen, was der rein literarische Vergleich mit anderer Konsolationsliteratur nicht zu erklären vermochte. In der ersten Werkhälfte geht es darum, den noch ganz im irdischen Leben gefangenen Boethius erst einmal innerweltlich auf die richtige Bahn zu bringen, vor allem, seine Vorstellungen zu reinigen, und hierbei kann auch auf die hellenistische Philosophie zurückgegriffen werden, insoweit sie als Vorbereitung auf die im platonischen Sinne eigentliche Philosophie dienen kann, weswegen Erler diese Funktion als "praeparatio platonica" bezeichnet. Neben dieser Aneignung hellenistischen philosophischen Gutes als propädeutischer Vorübung gibt es aber naturgemäß auch Felder, in denen eine Abgrenzung unvermeidlich ist. |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/NeFv0yyCaNc0UCn |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1519","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1519,"authors_free":[{"id":2635,"entry_id":1519,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":164,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Erler, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Erler","norm_person":{"id":164,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Erler","full_name":"Erler, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122153847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2636,"entry_id":1519,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":339,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Fuhrer, Therese","free_first_name":"Therese","free_last_name":"Fuhrer","norm_person":{"id":339,"first_name":"Therese","last_name":"Fuhrer","full_name":"Fuhrer, Therese","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117693804","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2637,"entry_id":1519,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":164,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Erler, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Erler","norm_person":{"id":164,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Erler","full_name":"Erler, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122153847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Hellenistische Philosophie als 'praeparatio Platonica' in der Sp\u00e4tantike (am Beispiel von Boethius' 'consolatio philosophiae')","main_title":{"title":"Hellenistische Philosophie als 'praeparatio Platonica' in der Sp\u00e4tantike (am Beispiel von Boethius' 'consolatio philosophiae')"},"abstract":" Rainer Thiel (Stoische Ethik und neuplatonische Tugendlehre. Zur Verortung der stoischen Ethik im neuplatonischen System in Simplikios\u2019 Kommentar zu Epiktets Enchiridion, 93-103) analysiert pr\u00e4zise, wie Simplikios in seinem Kommentar zu Epiktets Encheiridion den Wert der stoischen Ethik bestimmt: die Befolgung des dort Gesagten sei Voraussetzung f\u00fcr den eigentlichen philosophischen Aufstieg. Auch hier erscheint hellenistische Philosophie also als prop\u00e4deutische Vorstufe, wobei Simplikios - wie Thiel zu Recht hervorhebt - freilich immer auch die Differenzen zwischen Epiktet und neuplatonischen Auffassungen benennt, was er zu seiner Zeit bereits in einer zur\u00fcckhaltenden, unpolemischen Form tun kann. Von einer anderen Seite her kommt Michael Erler (Philosophie als Therapie \u2014 Hellenistische Philosophie als praeparatio philosophica im Platonismus der Sp\u00e4tantike, 105-22) - auch gest\u00fctzt auf die Forschungen des Ehepaars Hadot - f\u00fcr Simplikios' Kommentar zu demselben Ergebnis (115: \"eine gleichsam verschriftlichte Form schulm\u00e4\u00dfiger Vorbereitung auf das platonische Philosophiestudium\") und gewinnt hieraus f\u00fcr Boethius' Consolatio Philosophiae eine \u00fcberzeugende Erkl\u00e4rung f\u00fcr das Ph\u00e4nomen, da\u00df stoisches Gedankengut in den ersten drei B\u00fcchern eine deutliche Rolle spielt, um danach in den Hintergrund zu treten. Indem Erler Boethius' Schrift in den Kontext platonischer Schulpraxis des allm\u00e4hlichen Aufsteigens zur Erkenntnis r\u00fcckt, vermag er verst\u00e4ndlich zu machen, was der rein literarische Vergleich mit anderer Konsolationsliteratur nicht zu erkl\u00e4ren vermochte. In der ersten Werkh\u00e4lfte geht es darum, den noch ganz im irdischen Leben gefangenen Boethius erst einmal innerweltlich auf die richtige Bahn zu bringen, vor allem, seine Vorstellungen zu reinigen, und hierbei kann auch auf die hellenistische Philosophie zur\u00fcckgegriffen werden, insoweit sie als Vorbereitung auf die im platonischen Sinne eigentliche Philosophie dienen kann, weswegen Erler diese Funktion als \"praeparatio platonica\" bezeichnet. Neben dieser Aneignung hellenistischen philosophischen Gutes als prop\u00e4deutischer Vor\u00fcbung gibt es aber naturgem\u00e4\u00df auch Felder, in denen eine Abgrenzung unvermeidlich ist.","btype":2,"date":"1999","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/NeFv0yyCaNc0UCn","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":164,"full_name":"Erler, Michael ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":339,"full_name":"Fuhrer, Therese","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":164,"full_name":"Erler, Michael ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1519,"section_of":324,"pages":"105-122","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":324,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Zur Rezeption der hellenistischen Philosophie in der Sp\u00e4tantike. Akten der 1. Tagung der Karl-und-Gertrud-Abel-Stiftung vom 22.-25. September 1997 in Trier","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Fuhrer\/Erler1999","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1999","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1999","abstract":"Review by T. Runia: As a generalization it is often remarked that the poor state of our knowledge of Hellenistic philosophy, based almost exclusively on reports and fragments, is due to the decline of interest in this philosophy during the period of late antiquity. After the schools had closed down by the beginning of the 3rd century C.E., Peripatetic, Stoic, and Epicurean writings ceased to circulate widely, and in the end disappeared completely. Of course the end result of this process cannot be disputed. These writings have simply disappeared and, short of a miracle, they will not resurface.\r\n\r\nBut the process certainly took longer and was less radical in its earlier stages than is often thought. Late ancient philosophers and theologians in many cases still had a considerable knowledge of Hellenistic philosophy and used that knowledge to good effect in their own writings.\r\n\r\nThe theme of the reception of Hellenistic philosophy in late antiquity is the subject of the book under review, which contains fifteen studies originally presented at a conference in Trier in 1997. The studies are in German, with two exceptions, a paper in Italian and one in English. They have been prepared by a group of young scholars, mainly in their 30's and 40's, who in most cases have taken up positions in German and Swiss universities during the past decade or so.\r\n\r\nReviewing the various studies, one cannot but help noticing a marked similarity of method. The subjects treated are on the whole fairly limited in scope, and often concentrate on a particular author and a particular text. The detailed treatment is usually prefaced by an introductory section, which places the subject in a wider context, for example by tracing its development from the end of the Hellenistic period to the time of the author being discussed.These introductory sections can sometimes be very entertaining and informative (as in the case of the article of Christoph Riedweg, who points out remarkable correspondences between the period of late antiquity and our own time), but can also be too much simply a catalogue of authors and texts (as in the case of the survey of Epicureanism from Hadrian to Lactantius in the article by Jochem Althoff). The end result is that we have fifteen small but well-featured islands standing out in the broader sea of the book's subject.\r\n\r\nThe brief introduction competently but very succinctly outlines three connecting themes:\r\n\r\n The role of the Stoa and Epicureanism in Platonist philosophy.\r\n Scepticism, Stoicism, and Epicureanism in Christian literature.\r\n Doctrines of the Hellenistic philosophical schools as general cultural knowledge (Bildungsgut).\r\n\r\nBut no real attempt is made to cover the subject in more general terms. This is increasingly the method of such selective conference volumes. In spite of the general title, it is primarily a book for specialists.\r\n\r\nThe fifteen papers can be more or less divided into the three thematic categories noted above. Four concentrate on Hellenistic themes in later Platonism: Dominic O'Meara on Epicurus Neoplatonicus, Rainer Thiel and Michael Erler on the preparatory role of Hellenistic (and especially Stoic) ethics, Jan Opsomer and Carlos Steel on Proclus' doctrine of the origin of evil and its Hellenistic antecedents. Christoph Riedweg, by investigating Julian's use of Stoic and Platonic argumentation in his anti-Christian polemic, bridges the gap with the eight contributions which concentrate on Patristic authors.\r\n\r\nThe intellectual dominance of Augustine is illustrated by the fact that no less than five contributions concentrate on his writings: Maria Bettetini on the background to De musica (very little Hellenistic philosophy here), Karin Schlapbach on Ciceronian and Neoplatonist elements in the proarmia of Contra Academicos I & II, Sabine Harwardt on Stoic argumentation in De beata vita, Christoph Horn on Augustine's moral philosophy in relation to Greek virtue ethics, Therese Fuhrer on the Hellenistic epistemological background of Augustine's concept of faith.\r\n\r\nThe other three specifically Patristic contributions are on Amobius (philosophical themes in his apologetic argumentation, by Sabine Follinger), Lactantius (his use of Epicurus, by Jochem Althoff), and Prudentius (virtue against vice in the Psychomachia, by Carolin Oser-Grote).\r\n\r\nThe volume ends with two more general treatments. Karla Pollman attempts to trace two differing conceptions of fictionality\u2014the Platonic mimesis-model focused on the author and the Stoic signification-model focused more on the reader\u2014from Hellenistic philosophy to their adaptation in late ancient texts. Ulrich Eigler, in an ambitious and stimulating contribution, investigates the cultural context of the kind of amateur use of philosophy that we find, for example, in Jerome's writings. Of these fifteen articles, three stand out on account of the lucidity of their treatment and the importance of their subject. Christoph Horn's method is perhaps somewhat unusual, in that he focuses his treatment of Augustine's virtue ethics almost entirely on a point-by-point rebuttal of the position of the Swedish scholar of a previous generation, Gosta Hok, whom he accuses of interpreting Augustine in such a way as to make him a fideistic opponent of ancient rationalism. In actual fact, Augustine unreservedly takes over the basic theses of ancient ethical rationalism, but in his later years reserves it for followers of the \"true religion,\" without coming to a real discussion with its original Neoplatonist proponents.\r\n\r\nMany of Horn's points are well taken, but one wonders whether in this interpretation the gulf between Augustine's professed method of selective spoliatio and his actual practice of largely uncritical appropriation (as proposed by Horn) does not become too great. What Augustine objects to in ancient rationalism is its intellectual arrogance, the refusal to submit to the yoke of faith. This position seems to me to have revisionary aspirations. The struggle between \"catholic\" and \"protestant\" readings of Augustine is likely to continue.\r\n\r\nIn her paper on the epistemological background to Augustine's conception of faith, Therese Fuhrer argues that it is to be found in the Stoic theory in which assent (adsensio, \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2) precedes both knowledge (scientia, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7, based on comprehensio, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03c8\u03b9\u03c2) and belief (opinio, \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1). A priori, this seems not so likely, since the role assigned to volition in the two conceptions is quite different. Nevertheless, Fuhrer manages to show that both in terms of structure and terminology this background does have illuminating features.\r\n\r\nA difficulty remains that no texts indicating an explicit relation between the act of faith and epistemological assent can be found until two passages in very late writings. This article illustrates how difficult it is to pin Augustine down in relation to specific philosophical theories. It is his powerful transforming drive that makes his views so distinctive and so hard to categorize in \"doxographical\" terms.\r\n\r\nThe article of Jan Opsomer and Carlos Steel is recommended reading for anyone interested in how ancient philosophers working within the tradition of classical ontology wrestled with the problem of evil. Not only does it give an excellent overview of the dilemmas involved and the solutions attempted, but it also draws on the new translation of Proclus' De malorum substantia, which the authors are preparing.\r\n\r\nThey show how Proclus tries to find a way out of the classical dilemma in which one either has to detract from providence or not take evil seriously enough as a real aspect of the world. Proclus' solution is intriguing but very risky. Any attribution of evil to the first cause is unacceptable, but in the light of Neoplatonist ontological monism this means that one has to understand evil as an (ultimately) uncaused event.\r\n\r\nNot only is this very awkward in light of the Platonic principle nihil fit sine causa, which Proclus fully endorses, but it also seems to reduce evil to a kind of accidental epiphenomenon. Opsomer and Steel argue that Proclus may have found a third way between the Stoa and the Peripatos (which reserves providence for the divine realm only), but at a considerable cost. They tentatively conclude that the Stoa continues to hold the last word in this debate, and that theodicy may well be the worst legacy that this school has left to subsequent philosophy. This is perhaps a somewhat disappointing result, but no better illustration could be given of the importance of studying Hellenistic philosophy as a background for late ancient and patristic philosophy.\r\n\r\nIn furthering this study, the book under review makes a valuable contribution. The volume also shows, as the product of predominantly young scholars, that the future of scholarship in the area of later ancient and Patristic philosophy is in good hands.","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Wi5qXtXGHesjYwT","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":324,"pubplace":"Stuttgart","publisher":"Franz Steiner Verlag","series":"Philosophie der Antike","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1999]}
| Title | Conflicting Authorities? Hermias and Simplicius on the Self-Moving Soul |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2021 |
| Published in | Authority and authoritative texts in the Platonist tradition |
| Pages | 178-200 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Aerts, Saskia |
| Editor(s) | Erler, Michael , Heßler, Jan Erik , Petrucci, Federico Maria |
| Translator(s) |
Aristotle plays a highly authoritative role in Neoplatonic philosophy, second only to the almost undisputed authority of Plato. However, as any reader of Plato’s and Aristotle’s works knows, the views of the two philosophers often diverge and generate conflicts. These conflicts provide the Neoplatonic commentators with a serious interpretative challenge: although, as Platonists, their main goal is to defend Plato and the Platonist position, they are also hesitant to openly criticize Aristotle, who is regarded as a true adherent of Plato’s philosophy. The commentators most prominently face such a challenge in the case of the self-moving soul, a core Platonic doctrine severely criticized by Aristotle, implicitly in Physics 8.5 and explicitly in De anima 1.3. The key to dealing with these conflicting authorities lies in the exegetical act of explicating the ‘harmony’ that exists between the views of both philosophers. This approach relies on the idea that the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle are fundamentally in agreement, which comes to the surface when their texts are interpreted in the right way. ‘Harmony’ translates the Greek symphōnia, a term most notably used in this technical meaning by Simplicius.¹ However, the term ‘harmony’ is problematic because it does not identify any absolute concept— instead, it can refer to any kind of agreement, ranging from mere compatibility to theoretical identity. What is more, the operative concept of harmony employed by modern scholars often bears the same ambiguity as its ancient counterpart.² Most studies do not reflect on the polysemy of the term, and the notion of harmony used is not always well defined, which may lead to pointless debates on terminological matters.³ Moreover, the danger of overemphasizing the unity of this ‘harmonizing tendency,’ as I. Hadot calls it, lies in failing to take proper account of the diversity of the commentators’ approaches.⁴ In this paper, I will present two parallel Neoplatonic discussions of the apparent disagreement between Plato and Aristotle about the self-moving soul, namely those of Hermias of Alexandria in his commentary on Plato’s Phaedrus and Simplicius of Cilicia in his commentary on Aristotle’s Physics.⁵ Since both philosophers ultimately argue that there is agreement between Aristotle and Plato, I will elucidate (i) what specific kind of ‘harmony’ each of the commentators assumes, (ii) what reasons each provides for supposing such a harmony, and (iii) which exegetical methods they use to explicate this harmony. The harmonizing interpretations of Hermias and Simplicius on this issue have been discussed previously by S. Gertz, who claims that both commentators similarly argue that the disagreement between Plato and Aristotle is ‘merely verbal, motivated by respect for the common usage of names.’⁶ Although I agree that this is the kind of harmony that Simplicius assumes, my interpretation of Hermias’ discussion differs from the one proposed by Gertz. Despite some evident similarities in their approaches, I will suggest that Hermias defends a much less radical form of harmony than Simplicius: whereas Simplicius claims that the views of Plato and Aristotle are verbally different but philosophically identical, Hermias only intends to show that Aristotle would have to approve of the self-moving soul to remain faithful to and consistent with his own doctrines. In addition to showing the individuality of these commentators’ approaches in dealing with conflicting authorities, my analysis also aims at elucidating why it is so important for the commentators to defend the self-motion of the soul. As will become clear, the concept of self-motion is not only crucial in Neoplatonic psychology but also indispensable in their explanation of physical motion. [introduction p. 178-180] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/SGsawecaEHSN9gD |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1473","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1473,"authors_free":[{"id":2549,"entry_id":1473,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":543,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Aerts, Saskia","free_first_name":"Saskia","free_last_name":"Aerts","norm_person":{"id":543,"first_name":"Saskia","last_name":"Aerts","full_name":"Aerts, Saskia","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2550,"entry_id":1473,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":164,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Erler, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Erler","norm_person":{"id":164,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Erler","full_name":"Erler, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122153847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2551,"entry_id":1473,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":478,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","free_first_name":"Jan Erik","free_last_name":"He\u00dfler","norm_person":{"id":478,"first_name":"Jan Erik","last_name":"He\u00dfler","full_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1059760533","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2552,"entry_id":1473,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":544,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Petrucci, Federico Maria","free_first_name":"Federico Maria","free_last_name":"Petrucci","norm_person":{"id":544,"first_name":"Federico Maria","last_name":"Petrucci","full_name":"Petrucci, Federico Maria","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1027675344","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Conflicting Authorities? Hermias and Simplicius on the Self-Moving Soul","main_title":{"title":"Conflicting Authorities? Hermias and Simplicius on the Self-Moving Soul"},"abstract":"Aristotle plays a highly authoritative role in Neoplatonic philosophy, second only to the almost undisputed authority of Plato. However, as any reader of Plato\u2019s and Aristotle\u2019s works knows, the views of the two philosophers often diverge and generate conflicts. These conflicts provide the Neoplatonic commentators with a serious interpretative challenge: although, as Platonists, their main goal is to defend Plato and the Platonist position, they are also hesitant to openly criticize Aristotle, who is regarded as a true adherent of Plato\u2019s philosophy. The commentators most prominently face such a challenge in the case of the self-moving soul, a core Platonic doctrine severely criticized by Aristotle, implicitly in Physics 8.5 and explicitly in De anima 1.3.\r\n\r\nThe key to dealing with these conflicting authorities lies in the exegetical act of explicating the \u2018harmony\u2019 that exists between the views of both philosophers. This approach relies on the idea that the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle are fundamentally in agreement, which comes to the surface when their texts are interpreted in the right way. \u2018Harmony\u2019 translates the Greek symph\u014dnia, a term most notably used in this technical meaning by Simplicius.\u00b9 However, the term \u2018harmony\u2019 is problematic because it does not identify any absolute concept\u2014 instead, it can refer to any kind of agreement, ranging from mere compatibility to theoretical identity. What is more, the operative concept of harmony employed by modern scholars often bears the same ambiguity as its ancient counterpart.\u00b2 Most studies do not reflect on the polysemy of the term, and the notion of harmony used is not always well defined, which may lead to pointless debates on terminological matters.\u00b3 Moreover, the danger of overemphasizing the unity of this \u2018harmonizing tendency,\u2019 as I. Hadot calls it, lies in failing to take proper account of the diversity of the commentators\u2019 approaches.\u2074\r\n\r\nIn this paper, I will present two parallel Neoplatonic discussions of the apparent disagreement between Plato and Aristotle about the self-moving soul, namely those of Hermias of Alexandria in his commentary on Plato\u2019s Phaedrus and Simplicius of Cilicia in his commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics.\u2075 Since both philosophers ultimately argue that there is agreement between Aristotle and Plato, I will elucidate (i) what specific kind of \u2018harmony\u2019 each of the commentators assumes, (ii) what reasons each provides for supposing such a harmony, and (iii) which exegetical methods they use to explicate this harmony.\r\n\r\nThe harmonizing interpretations of Hermias and Simplicius on this issue have been discussed previously by S. Gertz, who claims that both commentators similarly argue that the disagreement between Plato and Aristotle is \u2018merely verbal, motivated by respect for the common usage of names.\u2019\u2076 Although I agree that this is the kind of harmony that Simplicius assumes, my interpretation of Hermias\u2019 discussion differs from the one proposed by Gertz. Despite some evident similarities in their approaches, I will suggest that Hermias defends a much less radical form of harmony than Simplicius: whereas Simplicius claims that the views of Plato and Aristotle are verbally different but philosophically identical, Hermias only intends to show that Aristotle would have to approve of the self-moving soul to remain faithful to and consistent with his own doctrines.\r\n\r\nIn addition to showing the individuality of these commentators\u2019 approaches in dealing with conflicting authorities, my analysis also aims at elucidating why it is so important for the commentators to defend the self-motion of the soul. As will become clear, the concept of self-motion is not only crucial in Neoplatonic psychology but also indispensable in their explanation of physical motion. [introduction p. 178-180]","btype":2,"date":"2021","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/SGsawecaEHSN9gD","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":543,"full_name":"Aerts, Saskia","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":164,"full_name":"Erler, Michael ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":478,"full_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":544,"full_name":"Petrucci, Federico Maria","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1473,"section_of":1474,"pages":"178-200","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1474,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Authority and authoritative texts in the Platonist tradition","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Erler-He\u00dfler-Petrucci_2021","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2021","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"All disciplines can count on a noble founder, and the representation of this founder as an authority is key in order to construe a discipline's identity. This book sheds light on how Plato and other authorities were represented in one of the most long-lasting traditions of all time. It leads the reader through exegesis and polemics, recovery of the past and construction of a philosophical identity. From Xenocrates to Proclus, from the sceptical shift to the re-establishment of dogmatism, from the Mosaic of the Philosophers to the Neoplatonist Commentaries, the construction of authority emerges as a way of access to the core of the Platonist tradition. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ZaiPIkzZzpNqhmG","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1474,"pubplace":" Cambridge \u2013 New York","publisher":"Cambridge University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Conflicting Authorities? Hermias and Simplicius on the Self-Moving Soul"]}
| Title | Die Stellung des Neuplatonikers Simplikios zum Verhältnis der Philosophie zu Religion und Theurgie |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | German |
| Date | 2002 |
| Published in | Metaphysik und Religion: Zur Signatur des spätantiken Denkens / Akten des Internationalen Kongresses vom 13.-17. März 2001 in Würzburg |
| Pages | 323-342 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
| Editor(s) | Kobusch, Theo , Erler, Michael |
| Translator(s) |
Der Epiktetkommentar ist dazu bestimmt, dem Leser die sittlichen Grundhaltungen zu vermitteln, ohne die es für ihn nicht förderlich ist, ein Studium der Philosophie zu beginnen. Da es sich somit um eine allgemein gehaltene Einführung handelt, die den Erwerb der bürgerlichen Tugenden mit Hilfe der neuplatonischen Kommentierung des Handbüchleins des Epiktet zum Ziel hat wird im Verfolg des zu kommentierenden Textes eine breite Palette von philosophischen Fragen kurz angesprochen, ohne in die Tiefen des philosophischen Systems vorzudringen. Es ist daher unerlässlich, bei der Interpretierung des Epiktetkommentars über die traditionellen neuplatonischen Lehren informiert zu sein, wenn man den dogmatischen Hintergrund der Darlegungen des Simplikios erfassen will: Die Aneignung der ersten Stufe des neuplatonischen Tugendkanons, der politischen Tugenden, die erklärterweise das Ziel des Kommentars zum Handbüchlein des Epiktet ist, geht mit der Ausübung der Kultriten einher, wenn sie wohl auch im allgemeinen zur Zeit des Simplikios nur noch im privaten Rahmen stattfinden konnten. Es gibt keine Anhaltspunkte dafür, daß Simplikios eine im Vergleich zu Jamblich, Hierokles und Proklos abweichende Haltung gegenüber dem Verhältnis der Philosophie zu Religion und Theurgie eingenommen hätte, d.h. daß, bei aller Wichtigkeit und Unerlässlichkeit der Theurgie, auch für ihn die Philosophie mit ihrer rationalen Erfassung der metaphysischen Themen eine unabdingbare Voraussetzung bleibt. [Author's abstract] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/0gw38rZ6TRENJZm |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"674","_score":null,"_source":{"id":674,"authors_free":[{"id":990,"entry_id":674,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","free_first_name":"Ilsetraut","free_last_name":"Hadot","norm_person":{"id":4,"first_name":"Ilsetraut","last_name":"Hadot","full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/107415011","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":991,"entry_id":674,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":163,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Kobusch, Theo","free_first_name":"Theo","free_last_name":"Kobusch","norm_person":{"id":163,"first_name":"Theo","last_name":"Kobusch","full_name":"Kobusch, Theo","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115417486","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":992,"entry_id":674,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":164,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Erler, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Erler","norm_person":{"id":164,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Erler","full_name":"Erler, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122153847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Die Stellung des Neuplatonikers Simplikios zum Verh\u00e4ltnis der Philosophie zu Religion und Theurgie","main_title":{"title":"Die Stellung des Neuplatonikers Simplikios zum Verh\u00e4ltnis der Philosophie zu Religion und Theurgie"},"abstract":"Der Epiktetkommentar ist dazu bestimmt, dem Leser die sittlichen Grundhaltungen zu vermitteln, ohne die es f\u00fcr ihn nicht f\u00f6r\u00adderlich ist, ein Studium der Philosophie zu beginnen. Da es sich somit um eine allgemein gehaltene Einf\u00fch\u00adrung handelt, die den Erwerb der b\u00fcrgerlichen Tugenden mit Hilfe der neuplato\u00adnischen Kommentierung des Handb\u00fcchleins des Epiktet zum Ziel hat wird im Verfolg des zu kommentierenden Textes eine breite Palette von philosophischen Fragen kurz angesprochen, ohne in die Tiefen des philosophischen Systems vorzudringen. Es ist daher unerl\u00e4sslich, bei der Interpretierung des Epiktetkommentars \u00fcber die traditionellen neuplatonischen Lehren informiert zu sein, wenn man den dogmatischen Hintergrund der Darlegungen des Simplikios erfassen will: Die Aneignung der ersten Stufe des neuplatoni\u00adschen Tugendkanons, der politischen Tugenden, die erkl\u00e4rterweise das Ziel des Kommentars zum Handb\u00fcchlein des Epiktet ist, geht mit der Aus\u00fcbung der Kultriten einher, wenn sie wohl auch im allgemeinen zur Zeit des Simplikios nur noch im privaten Rahmen stattfinden konnten. Es gibt keine Anhaltspunkte daf\u00fcr, da\u00df Simplikios eine im Vergleich zu Jamblich, Hierokles und Proklos abweichende Haltung gegen\u00fcber dem Verh\u00e4ltnis der Philo\u00adsophie zu Religion und Theurgie eingenommen h\u00e4tte, d.h. da\u00df, bei aller Wich\u00adtigkeit und Unerl\u00e4sslichkeit der Theurgie, auch f\u00fcr ihn die Philosophie mit ihrer rationalen Erfassung der metaphysischen Themen eine unabdingbare Vorausset\u00adzung bleibt. [Author's abstract]","btype":2,"date":"2002","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/0gw38rZ6TRENJZm","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":163,"full_name":"Kobusch, Theo","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":164,"full_name":"Erler, Michael ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":674,"section_of":265,"pages":"323-342","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":265,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Metaphysik und Religion: Zur Signatur des sp\u00e4tantiken Denkens \/ Akten des Internationalen Kongresses vom 13.-17. M\u00e4rz 2001 in W\u00fcrzburg","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Kobusch\/Erler2002b","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2002","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2002","abstract":"\r\nDie Beitr\u00e4ge zur Altertumskunde enthalten Monographien, Sammelb\u00e4nde, Editionen, \u00dcbersetzungen und Kommentare zu Themen aus den Bereichen Klassische, Mittel- und Neulateinische Philologie, Alte Geschichte, Arch\u00e4ologie, Antike Philosophie sowie Nachwirken der Antike bis in die Neuzeit. Dadurch leistet die Reihe einen umfassenden Beitrag zur Erschlie\u00dfung klassischer Literatur und zur Forschung im gesamten Gebiet der Altertumswissenschaften. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/lv1Opvh3eZrvkIS","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":265,"pubplace":"M\u00fcnchen - Leipzig","publisher":"Saur","series":"Beitr\u00e4ge zur Altertumskunde","volume":"160","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Die Stellung des Neuplatonikers Simplikios zum Verh\u00e4ltnis der Philosophie zu Religion und Theurgie"]}
| Title | Hellenistische Philosophie als 'praeparatio Platonica' in der Spätantike (am Beispiel von Boethius' 'consolatio philosophiae') |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1999 |
| Published in | Zur Rezeption der hellenistischen Philosophie in der Spätantike. Akten der 1. Tagung der Karl-und-Gertrud-Abel-Stiftung vom 22.-25. September 1997 in Trier |
| Pages | 105-122 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Erler, Michael |
| Editor(s) | Fuhrer, Therese , Erler, Michael |
| Translator(s) |
Rainer Thiel (Stoische Ethik und neuplatonische Tugendlehre. Zur Verortung der stoischen Ethik im neuplatonischen System in Simplikios’ Kommentar zu Epiktets Enchiridion, 93-103) analysiert präzise, wie Simplikios in seinem Kommentar zu Epiktets Encheiridion den Wert der stoischen Ethik bestimmt: die Befolgung des dort Gesagten sei Voraussetzung für den eigentlichen philosophischen Aufstieg. Auch hier erscheint hellenistische Philosophie also als propädeutische Vorstufe, wobei Simplikios - wie Thiel zu Recht hervorhebt - freilich immer auch die Differenzen zwischen Epiktet und neuplatonischen Auffassungen benennt, was er zu seiner Zeit bereits in einer zurückhaltenden, unpolemischen Form tun kann. Von einer anderen Seite her kommt Michael Erler (Philosophie als Therapie — Hellenistische Philosophie als praeparatio philosophica im Platonismus der Spätantike, 105-22) - auch gestützt auf die Forschungen des Ehepaars Hadot - für Simplikios' Kommentar zu demselben Ergebnis (115: "eine gleichsam verschriftlichte Form schulmäßiger Vorbereitung auf das platonische Philosophiestudium") und gewinnt hieraus für Boethius' Consolatio Philosophiae eine überzeugende Erklärung für das Phänomen, daß stoisches Gedankengut in den ersten drei Büchern eine deutliche Rolle spielt, um danach in den Hintergrund zu treten. Indem Erler Boethius' Schrift in den Kontext platonischer Schulpraxis des allmählichen Aufsteigens zur Erkenntnis rückt, vermag er verständlich zu machen, was der rein literarische Vergleich mit anderer Konsolationsliteratur nicht zu erklären vermochte. In der ersten Werkhälfte geht es darum, den noch ganz im irdischen Leben gefangenen Boethius erst einmal innerweltlich auf die richtige Bahn zu bringen, vor allem, seine Vorstellungen zu reinigen, und hierbei kann auch auf die hellenistische Philosophie zurückgegriffen werden, insoweit sie als Vorbereitung auf die im platonischen Sinne eigentliche Philosophie dienen kann, weswegen Erler diese Funktion als "praeparatio platonica" bezeichnet. Neben dieser Aneignung hellenistischen philosophischen Gutes als propädeutischer Vorübung gibt es aber naturgemäß auch Felder, in denen eine Abgrenzung unvermeidlich ist. |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/NeFv0yyCaNc0UCn |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1519","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1519,"authors_free":[{"id":2635,"entry_id":1519,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":164,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Erler, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Erler","norm_person":{"id":164,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Erler","full_name":"Erler, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122153847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2636,"entry_id":1519,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":339,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Fuhrer, Therese","free_first_name":"Therese","free_last_name":"Fuhrer","norm_person":{"id":339,"first_name":"Therese","last_name":"Fuhrer","full_name":"Fuhrer, Therese","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117693804","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2637,"entry_id":1519,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":164,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Erler, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Erler","norm_person":{"id":164,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Erler","full_name":"Erler, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122153847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Hellenistische Philosophie als 'praeparatio Platonica' in der Sp\u00e4tantike (am Beispiel von Boethius' 'consolatio philosophiae')","main_title":{"title":"Hellenistische Philosophie als 'praeparatio Platonica' in der Sp\u00e4tantike (am Beispiel von Boethius' 'consolatio philosophiae')"},"abstract":" Rainer Thiel (Stoische Ethik und neuplatonische Tugendlehre. Zur Verortung der stoischen Ethik im neuplatonischen System in Simplikios\u2019 Kommentar zu Epiktets Enchiridion, 93-103) analysiert pr\u00e4zise, wie Simplikios in seinem Kommentar zu Epiktets Encheiridion den Wert der stoischen Ethik bestimmt: die Befolgung des dort Gesagten sei Voraussetzung f\u00fcr den eigentlichen philosophischen Aufstieg. Auch hier erscheint hellenistische Philosophie also als prop\u00e4deutische Vorstufe, wobei Simplikios - wie Thiel zu Recht hervorhebt - freilich immer auch die Differenzen zwischen Epiktet und neuplatonischen Auffassungen benennt, was er zu seiner Zeit bereits in einer zur\u00fcckhaltenden, unpolemischen Form tun kann. Von einer anderen Seite her kommt Michael Erler (Philosophie als Therapie \u2014 Hellenistische Philosophie als praeparatio philosophica im Platonismus der Sp\u00e4tantike, 105-22) - auch gest\u00fctzt auf die Forschungen des Ehepaars Hadot - f\u00fcr Simplikios' Kommentar zu demselben Ergebnis (115: \"eine gleichsam verschriftlichte Form schulm\u00e4\u00dfiger Vorbereitung auf das platonische Philosophiestudium\") und gewinnt hieraus f\u00fcr Boethius' Consolatio Philosophiae eine \u00fcberzeugende Erkl\u00e4rung f\u00fcr das Ph\u00e4nomen, da\u00df stoisches Gedankengut in den ersten drei B\u00fcchern eine deutliche Rolle spielt, um danach in den Hintergrund zu treten. Indem Erler Boethius' Schrift in den Kontext platonischer Schulpraxis des allm\u00e4hlichen Aufsteigens zur Erkenntnis r\u00fcckt, vermag er verst\u00e4ndlich zu machen, was der rein literarische Vergleich mit anderer Konsolationsliteratur nicht zu erkl\u00e4ren vermochte. In der ersten Werkh\u00e4lfte geht es darum, den noch ganz im irdischen Leben gefangenen Boethius erst einmal innerweltlich auf die richtige Bahn zu bringen, vor allem, seine Vorstellungen zu reinigen, und hierbei kann auch auf die hellenistische Philosophie zur\u00fcckgegriffen werden, insoweit sie als Vorbereitung auf die im platonischen Sinne eigentliche Philosophie dienen kann, weswegen Erler diese Funktion als \"praeparatio platonica\" bezeichnet. Neben dieser Aneignung hellenistischen philosophischen Gutes als prop\u00e4deutischer Vor\u00fcbung gibt es aber naturgem\u00e4\u00df auch Felder, in denen eine Abgrenzung unvermeidlich ist.","btype":2,"date":"1999","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/NeFv0yyCaNc0UCn","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":164,"full_name":"Erler, Michael ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":339,"full_name":"Fuhrer, Therese","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":164,"full_name":"Erler, Michael ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1519,"section_of":324,"pages":"105-122","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":324,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Zur Rezeption der hellenistischen Philosophie in der Sp\u00e4tantike. Akten der 1. Tagung der Karl-und-Gertrud-Abel-Stiftung vom 22.-25. September 1997 in Trier","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Fuhrer\/Erler1999","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1999","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1999","abstract":"Review by T. Runia: As a generalization it is often remarked that the poor state of our knowledge of Hellenistic philosophy, based almost exclusively on reports and fragments, is due to the decline of interest in this philosophy during the period of late antiquity. After the schools had closed down by the beginning of the 3rd century C.E., Peripatetic, Stoic, and Epicurean writings ceased to circulate widely, and in the end disappeared completely. Of course the end result of this process cannot be disputed. These writings have simply disappeared and, short of a miracle, they will not resurface.\r\n\r\nBut the process certainly took longer and was less radical in its earlier stages than is often thought. Late ancient philosophers and theologians in many cases still had a considerable knowledge of Hellenistic philosophy and used that knowledge to good effect in their own writings.\r\n\r\nThe theme of the reception of Hellenistic philosophy in late antiquity is the subject of the book under review, which contains fifteen studies originally presented at a conference in Trier in 1997. The studies are in German, with two exceptions, a paper in Italian and one in English. They have been prepared by a group of young scholars, mainly in their 30's and 40's, who in most cases have taken up positions in German and Swiss universities during the past decade or so.\r\n\r\nReviewing the various studies, one cannot but help noticing a marked similarity of method. The subjects treated are on the whole fairly limited in scope, and often concentrate on a particular author and a particular text. The detailed treatment is usually prefaced by an introductory section, which places the subject in a wider context, for example by tracing its development from the end of the Hellenistic period to the time of the author being discussed.These introductory sections can sometimes be very entertaining and informative (as in the case of the article of Christoph Riedweg, who points out remarkable correspondences between the period of late antiquity and our own time), but can also be too much simply a catalogue of authors and texts (as in the case of the survey of Epicureanism from Hadrian to Lactantius in the article by Jochem Althoff). The end result is that we have fifteen small but well-featured islands standing out in the broader sea of the book's subject.\r\n\r\nThe brief introduction competently but very succinctly outlines three connecting themes:\r\n\r\n The role of the Stoa and Epicureanism in Platonist philosophy.\r\n Scepticism, Stoicism, and Epicureanism in Christian literature.\r\n Doctrines of the Hellenistic philosophical schools as general cultural knowledge (Bildungsgut).\r\n\r\nBut no real attempt is made to cover the subject in more general terms. This is increasingly the method of such selective conference volumes. In spite of the general title, it is primarily a book for specialists.\r\n\r\nThe fifteen papers can be more or less divided into the three thematic categories noted above. Four concentrate on Hellenistic themes in later Platonism: Dominic O'Meara on Epicurus Neoplatonicus, Rainer Thiel and Michael Erler on the preparatory role of Hellenistic (and especially Stoic) ethics, Jan Opsomer and Carlos Steel on Proclus' doctrine of the origin of evil and its Hellenistic antecedents. Christoph Riedweg, by investigating Julian's use of Stoic and Platonic argumentation in his anti-Christian polemic, bridges the gap with the eight contributions which concentrate on Patristic authors.\r\n\r\nThe intellectual dominance of Augustine is illustrated by the fact that no less than five contributions concentrate on his writings: Maria Bettetini on the background to De musica (very little Hellenistic philosophy here), Karin Schlapbach on Ciceronian and Neoplatonist elements in the proarmia of Contra Academicos I & II, Sabine Harwardt on Stoic argumentation in De beata vita, Christoph Horn on Augustine's moral philosophy in relation to Greek virtue ethics, Therese Fuhrer on the Hellenistic epistemological background of Augustine's concept of faith.\r\n\r\nThe other three specifically Patristic contributions are on Amobius (philosophical themes in his apologetic argumentation, by Sabine Follinger), Lactantius (his use of Epicurus, by Jochem Althoff), and Prudentius (virtue against vice in the Psychomachia, by Carolin Oser-Grote).\r\n\r\nThe volume ends with two more general treatments. Karla Pollman attempts to trace two differing conceptions of fictionality\u2014the Platonic mimesis-model focused on the author and the Stoic signification-model focused more on the reader\u2014from Hellenistic philosophy to their adaptation in late ancient texts. Ulrich Eigler, in an ambitious and stimulating contribution, investigates the cultural context of the kind of amateur use of philosophy that we find, for example, in Jerome's writings. Of these fifteen articles, three stand out on account of the lucidity of their treatment and the importance of their subject. Christoph Horn's method is perhaps somewhat unusual, in that he focuses his treatment of Augustine's virtue ethics almost entirely on a point-by-point rebuttal of the position of the Swedish scholar of a previous generation, Gosta Hok, whom he accuses of interpreting Augustine in such a way as to make him a fideistic opponent of ancient rationalism. In actual fact, Augustine unreservedly takes over the basic theses of ancient ethical rationalism, but in his later years reserves it for followers of the \"true religion,\" without coming to a real discussion with its original Neoplatonist proponents.\r\n\r\nMany of Horn's points are well taken, but one wonders whether in this interpretation the gulf between Augustine's professed method of selective spoliatio and his actual practice of largely uncritical appropriation (as proposed by Horn) does not become too great. What Augustine objects to in ancient rationalism is its intellectual arrogance, the refusal to submit to the yoke of faith. This position seems to me to have revisionary aspirations. The struggle between \"catholic\" and \"protestant\" readings of Augustine is likely to continue.\r\n\r\nIn her paper on the epistemological background to Augustine's conception of faith, Therese Fuhrer argues that it is to be found in the Stoic theory in which assent (adsensio, \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2) precedes both knowledge (scientia, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7, based on comprehensio, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03c8\u03b9\u03c2) and belief (opinio, \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1). A priori, this seems not so likely, since the role assigned to volition in the two conceptions is quite different. Nevertheless, Fuhrer manages to show that both in terms of structure and terminology this background does have illuminating features.\r\n\r\nA difficulty remains that no texts indicating an explicit relation between the act of faith and epistemological assent can be found until two passages in very late writings. This article illustrates how difficult it is to pin Augustine down in relation to specific philosophical theories. It is his powerful transforming drive that makes his views so distinctive and so hard to categorize in \"doxographical\" terms.\r\n\r\nThe article of Jan Opsomer and Carlos Steel is recommended reading for anyone interested in how ancient philosophers working within the tradition of classical ontology wrestled with the problem of evil. Not only does it give an excellent overview of the dilemmas involved and the solutions attempted, but it also draws on the new translation of Proclus' De malorum substantia, which the authors are preparing.\r\n\r\nThey show how Proclus tries to find a way out of the classical dilemma in which one either has to detract from providence or not take evil seriously enough as a real aspect of the world. Proclus' solution is intriguing but very risky. Any attribution of evil to the first cause is unacceptable, but in the light of Neoplatonist ontological monism this means that one has to understand evil as an (ultimately) uncaused event.\r\n\r\nNot only is this very awkward in light of the Platonic principle nihil fit sine causa, which Proclus fully endorses, but it also seems to reduce evil to a kind of accidental epiphenomenon. Opsomer and Steel argue that Proclus may have found a third way between the Stoa and the Peripatos (which reserves providence for the divine realm only), but at a considerable cost. They tentatively conclude that the Stoa continues to hold the last word in this debate, and that theodicy may well be the worst legacy that this school has left to subsequent philosophy. This is perhaps a somewhat disappointing result, but no better illustration could be given of the importance of studying Hellenistic philosophy as a background for late ancient and patristic philosophy.\r\n\r\nIn furthering this study, the book under review makes a valuable contribution. The volume also shows, as the product of predominantly young scholars, that the future of scholarship in the area of later ancient and Patristic philosophy is in good hands.","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Wi5qXtXGHesjYwT","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":324,"pubplace":"Stuttgart","publisher":"Franz Steiner Verlag","series":"Philosophie der Antike","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Hellenistische Philosophie als 'praeparatio Platonica' in der Sp\u00e4tantike (am Beispiel von Boethius' 'consolatio philosophiae')"]}
| Title | Stoische Ethik und neuplatonische Tugendlehre. Zur Verortung der stoischen Ethik im neuplatonischen System in Simplikios' Kommentar zu Epiktets Enchiridion |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1999 |
| Published in | Zur Rezeption der hellenistischen Philosophie in der Spätantike. Akten der 1. Tagung der Karl-und-Gertrud-Abel-Stiftung vom 22.-25. September 1997 in Trier |
| Pages | 93-103 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Thiel, Rainer |
| Editor(s) | Fuhrer, Therese , Erler, Michael |
| Translator(s) |
The text presents an analysis of the Stoic ethics and its placement within the Neoplatonic system, particularly in Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' Enchiridion. It explores how the Neoplatonic tradition emerged as a unified philosophical school, leading to the disappearance of conflicting philosophical schools. Despite the Stoic teachings being present in Neoplatonic works, they are generally treated critically and dismissed as opposed to the Aristotelian position. The text then delves into the Neoplatonic system of virtues, starting with Plato's four cardinal virtues, which were further developed by Neoplatonists. It highlights Plotinus' view that the political virtues alone are not sufficient for the soul's ascent to divine perfection, as they are related to the material world. Instead, Plotinus introduces the concept of "purifications" as the virtues that enable the soul to detach from bodily passions and elevate itself towards the divine. The abstract concludes by emphasizing the relevance of Simplikios' application of this Neoplatonic virtue system to Epictetus' Enchiridion, positioning it as an essential tool for the soul's progress towards resemblance to the divine. [introduction] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/RKLOhPA3UpPbgKk |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"470","_score":null,"_source":{"id":470,"authors_free":[{"id":633,"entry_id":470,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":333,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Thiel, Rainer","free_first_name":"Rainer","free_last_name":"Thiel","norm_person":{"id":333,"first_name":"Rainer","last_name":"Thiel","full_name":"Thiel, Rainer","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/12885054X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":634,"entry_id":470,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":339,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Fuhrer, Therese","free_first_name":"Therese","free_last_name":"Fuhrer","norm_person":{"id":339,"first_name":"Therese","last_name":"Fuhrer","full_name":"Fuhrer, Therese","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117693804","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":635,"entry_id":470,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":164,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Erler, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Erler","norm_person":{"id":164,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Erler","full_name":"Erler, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122153847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Stoische Ethik und neuplatonische Tugendlehre. Zur Verortung der stoischen Ethik im neuplatonischen System in Simplikios' Kommentar zu Epiktets Enchiridion","main_title":{"title":"Stoische Ethik und neuplatonische Tugendlehre. Zur Verortung der stoischen Ethik im neuplatonischen System in Simplikios' Kommentar zu Epiktets Enchiridion"},"abstract":"The text presents an analysis of the Stoic ethics and its placement within the Neoplatonic system, particularly in Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' Enchiridion. It explores how the Neoplatonic tradition emerged as a unified philosophical school, leading to the disappearance of conflicting philosophical schools. Despite the Stoic teachings being present in Neoplatonic works, they are generally treated critically and dismissed as opposed to the Aristotelian position. The text then delves into the Neoplatonic system of virtues, starting with Plato's four cardinal virtues, which were further developed by Neoplatonists. It highlights Plotinus' view that the political virtues alone are not sufficient for the soul's ascent to divine perfection, as they are related to the material world. Instead, Plotinus introduces the concept of \"purifications\" as the virtues that enable the soul to detach from bodily passions and elevate itself towards the divine. The abstract concludes by emphasizing the relevance of Simplikios' application of this Neoplatonic virtue system to Epictetus' Enchiridion, positioning it as an essential tool for the soul's progress towards resemblance to the divine. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1999","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/RKLOhPA3UpPbgKk","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":333,"full_name":"Thiel, Rainer","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":339,"full_name":"Fuhrer, Therese","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":164,"full_name":"Erler, Michael ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":470,"section_of":324,"pages":"93-103","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":324,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Zur Rezeption der hellenistischen Philosophie in der Sp\u00e4tantike. Akten der 1. Tagung der Karl-und-Gertrud-Abel-Stiftung vom 22.-25. September 1997 in Trier","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Fuhrer\/Erler1999","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1999","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1999","abstract":"Review by T. Runia: As a generalization it is often remarked that the poor state of our knowledge of Hellenistic philosophy, based almost exclusively on reports and fragments, is due to the decline of interest in this philosophy during the period of late antiquity. After the schools had closed down by the beginning of the 3rd century C.E., Peripatetic, Stoic, and Epicurean writings ceased to circulate widely, and in the end disappeared completely. Of course the end result of this process cannot be disputed. These writings have simply disappeared and, short of a miracle, they will not resurface.\r\n\r\nBut the process certainly took longer and was less radical in its earlier stages than is often thought. Late ancient philosophers and theologians in many cases still had a considerable knowledge of Hellenistic philosophy and used that knowledge to good effect in their own writings.\r\n\r\nThe theme of the reception of Hellenistic philosophy in late antiquity is the subject of the book under review, which contains fifteen studies originally presented at a conference in Trier in 1997. The studies are in German, with two exceptions, a paper in Italian and one in English. They have been prepared by a group of young scholars, mainly in their 30's and 40's, who in most cases have taken up positions in German and Swiss universities during the past decade or so.\r\n\r\nReviewing the various studies, one cannot but help noticing a marked similarity of method. The subjects treated are on the whole fairly limited in scope, and often concentrate on a particular author and a particular text. The detailed treatment is usually prefaced by an introductory section, which places the subject in a wider context, for example by tracing its development from the end of the Hellenistic period to the time of the author being discussed.These introductory sections can sometimes be very entertaining and informative (as in the case of the article of Christoph Riedweg, who points out remarkable correspondences between the period of late antiquity and our own time), but can also be too much simply a catalogue of authors and texts (as in the case of the survey of Epicureanism from Hadrian to Lactantius in the article by Jochem Althoff). The end result is that we have fifteen small but well-featured islands standing out in the broader sea of the book's subject.\r\n\r\nThe brief introduction competently but very succinctly outlines three connecting themes:\r\n\r\n The role of the Stoa and Epicureanism in Platonist philosophy.\r\n Scepticism, Stoicism, and Epicureanism in Christian literature.\r\n Doctrines of the Hellenistic philosophical schools as general cultural knowledge (Bildungsgut).\r\n\r\nBut no real attempt is made to cover the subject in more general terms. This is increasingly the method of such selective conference volumes. In spite of the general title, it is primarily a book for specialists.\r\n\r\nThe fifteen papers can be more or less divided into the three thematic categories noted above. Four concentrate on Hellenistic themes in later Platonism: Dominic O'Meara on Epicurus Neoplatonicus, Rainer Thiel and Michael Erler on the preparatory role of Hellenistic (and especially Stoic) ethics, Jan Opsomer and Carlos Steel on Proclus' doctrine of the origin of evil and its Hellenistic antecedents. Christoph Riedweg, by investigating Julian's use of Stoic and Platonic argumentation in his anti-Christian polemic, bridges the gap with the eight contributions which concentrate on Patristic authors.\r\n\r\nThe intellectual dominance of Augustine is illustrated by the fact that no less than five contributions concentrate on his writings: Maria Bettetini on the background to De musica (very little Hellenistic philosophy here), Karin Schlapbach on Ciceronian and Neoplatonist elements in the proarmia of Contra Academicos I & II, Sabine Harwardt on Stoic argumentation in De beata vita, Christoph Horn on Augustine's moral philosophy in relation to Greek virtue ethics, Therese Fuhrer on the Hellenistic epistemological background of Augustine's concept of faith.\r\n\r\nThe other three specifically Patristic contributions are on Amobius (philosophical themes in his apologetic argumentation, by Sabine Follinger), Lactantius (his use of Epicurus, by Jochem Althoff), and Prudentius (virtue against vice in the Psychomachia, by Carolin Oser-Grote).\r\n\r\nThe volume ends with two more general treatments. Karla Pollman attempts to trace two differing conceptions of fictionality\u2014the Platonic mimesis-model focused on the author and the Stoic signification-model focused more on the reader\u2014from Hellenistic philosophy to their adaptation in late ancient texts. Ulrich Eigler, in an ambitious and stimulating contribution, investigates the cultural context of the kind of amateur use of philosophy that we find, for example, in Jerome's writings. Of these fifteen articles, three stand out on account of the lucidity of their treatment and the importance of their subject. Christoph Horn's method is perhaps somewhat unusual, in that he focuses his treatment of Augustine's virtue ethics almost entirely on a point-by-point rebuttal of the position of the Swedish scholar of a previous generation, Gosta Hok, whom he accuses of interpreting Augustine in such a way as to make him a fideistic opponent of ancient rationalism. In actual fact, Augustine unreservedly takes over the basic theses of ancient ethical rationalism, but in his later years reserves it for followers of the \"true religion,\" without coming to a real discussion with its original Neoplatonist proponents.\r\n\r\nMany of Horn's points are well taken, but one wonders whether in this interpretation the gulf between Augustine's professed method of selective spoliatio and his actual practice of largely uncritical appropriation (as proposed by Horn) does not become too great. What Augustine objects to in ancient rationalism is its intellectual arrogance, the refusal to submit to the yoke of faith. This position seems to me to have revisionary aspirations. The struggle between \"catholic\" and \"protestant\" readings of Augustine is likely to continue.\r\n\r\nIn her paper on the epistemological background to Augustine's conception of faith, Therese Fuhrer argues that it is to be found in the Stoic theory in which assent (adsensio, \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2) precedes both knowledge (scientia, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7, based on comprehensio, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03c8\u03b9\u03c2) and belief (opinio, \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1). A priori, this seems not so likely, since the role assigned to volition in the two conceptions is quite different. Nevertheless, Fuhrer manages to show that both in terms of structure and terminology this background does have illuminating features.\r\n\r\nA difficulty remains that no texts indicating an explicit relation between the act of faith and epistemological assent can be found until two passages in very late writings. This article illustrates how difficult it is to pin Augustine down in relation to specific philosophical theories. It is his powerful transforming drive that makes his views so distinctive and so hard to categorize in \"doxographical\" terms.\r\n\r\nThe article of Jan Opsomer and Carlos Steel is recommended reading for anyone interested in how ancient philosophers working within the tradition of classical ontology wrestled with the problem of evil. Not only does it give an excellent overview of the dilemmas involved and the solutions attempted, but it also draws on the new translation of Proclus' De malorum substantia, which the authors are preparing.\r\n\r\nThey show how Proclus tries to find a way out of the classical dilemma in which one either has to detract from providence or not take evil seriously enough as a real aspect of the world. Proclus' solution is intriguing but very risky. Any attribution of evil to the first cause is unacceptable, but in the light of Neoplatonist ontological monism this means that one has to understand evil as an (ultimately) uncaused event.\r\n\r\nNot only is this very awkward in light of the Platonic principle nihil fit sine causa, which Proclus fully endorses, but it also seems to reduce evil to a kind of accidental epiphenomenon. Opsomer and Steel argue that Proclus may have found a third way between the Stoa and the Peripatos (which reserves providence for the divine realm only), but at a considerable cost. They tentatively conclude that the Stoa continues to hold the last word in this debate, and that theodicy may well be the worst legacy that this school has left to subsequent philosophy. This is perhaps a somewhat disappointing result, but no better illustration could be given of the importance of studying Hellenistic philosophy as a background for late ancient and patristic philosophy.\r\n\r\nIn furthering this study, the book under review makes a valuable contribution. The volume also shows, as the product of predominantly young scholars, that the future of scholarship in the area of later ancient and Patristic philosophy is in good hands.","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Wi5qXtXGHesjYwT","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":324,"pubplace":"Stuttgart","publisher":"Franz Steiner Verlag","series":"Philosophie der Antike","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Stoische Ethik und neuplatonische Tugendlehre. Zur Verortung der stoischen Ethik im neuplatonischen System in Simplikios' Kommentar zu Epiktets Enchiridion"]}
| Title | Surface Reading and Deeper Meaning. On Aristotle reading Plato and Platonists reading Aristotle |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2013 |
| Published in | Argument und literarische Form in antiker Philosophie. Akten des 3. Kongresses der Gesellschaft für antike Philosophie 2010 |
| Pages | 469-494 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
| Editor(s) | Erler, Michael , Heßler, Jan Erik , Blumenfelder, Benedikt (Collaborator) |
| Translator(s) |
We are here together to discuss various forms of philosophy in antiquity. There is a surprising variety of literary genres of philosophy so different from the narrow academic format of proceedings, handbooks, and referred journal articles. Already among the works of Aristotle, as the commentators noticed, there is a great variety, and Aristotle always adapted his style to the genre: dialogues, letters, protreptics, documentation works, research discussions, treatises on ethics and politics aiming at a broader public. And if we take the whole literary production of ancient philosophy, the variety is even more impressive. Besides the treatises and commentaries, the summaries and paraphrases, refutations and replies, the handbooks, manuals, and doxographies, there are dialogues and diatribes and orations, letters and catechisms with sentences to be set in practice, epigraphical posters in public city galleries, philosophical poems and political pamphlets, revelations of Hermes Trismegistos, Chaldean oracles, and we must include the manifold Jewish and Christian interpretations of biblical texts, sermons, and theological polemics. They all require other ways of reading and interpreting. The title of this introductory lecture does not mean that I would recommend us to seek for deeper meaning hidden under the many literary forms. It was undoubtedly a very influential hermeneutical model, in particular when combined with the esoteric/exoteric distinction. But in my view, it remains primarily a model for interpreting mythical and sacred texts and, since the secularization of sacred hermeneutics, for reading “challenging literary texts.” It is not a method for the interpretation of philosophical texts, where analysis, insight into the structure of arguments, questioning, and criticism are required. To play with a well-known quote from Thoreau: “In this part of the world (i.e., in philosophy), it is considered a ground for complaint if a man’s writings admit of more than one interpretation.” This refusal of a search for deeper meaning in philosophy, however, does not mean that we should remain just superficial readers, surfing on the text. Let us use all the possibilities we have, including attention to the literary context, to better understand the argument of the author. To avoid the impression that I am finally agreeing with Aristotle against Plato, let me conclude with a remarkable statement of Plato in the Phaedo. It comes from the crucial section of the debate where Socrates starts his critique of Simmias’ argument that the soul is the harmony of the body and will disappear once the substrate is destroyed. All participants are deeply impressed by the harmony argument, and there is an uneasy silence, as they thought it was a fatal blow to Socrates’ belief in immortality, but Socrates is not impressed. He confronts Simmias with a difficult choice: If you stick to the harmony doctrine, you will have to give up the other doctrine you just accepted, because it is incompatible with the harmony thesis, namely that all knowledge is recollection. What will you keep then, Simmias, this new theory or the former you already accepted? Simmias answers without hesitation that he would stand by the anamnesis doctrine. For this other (sc. the doctrine that the soul is like a harmony) came to me without demonstration; it merely seemed probable and attractive, which is the reason why many people hold it. I am conscious that arguments which base their demonstrations on mere probability are deceptive, and if we are not on our guard against them, they deceive us greatly, in geometry and in all other things. When commenting on this passage, Damascius, the last head of the Platonic Academy in Athens, distinguishes between what he calls superficial (ἐπιπόλαιοι) and profound (βαθύτεροι) thinkers, but not in any esoteric sense. Superficial thinkers, he says, “find pleasure in plausible arguments,” based on analogies and comparisons, metaphors. That is why the analogy of the soul with the harmony of the lyre is so attractive. “The more profound thinkers, who scorn the world of senses and its ready-at-hand (πρόχειρον) beliefs, rise above plausibilities and love arguments that are connected by necessity.” In this sense, I would also like to be a ‘profound’ reader ... alas, there arises again a problem. The doctrine that, according to Socrates, is supposedly demonstrated by sound, almost geometrical arguments, and not by analogy, as the rejected harmony thesis, is itself based on analogy and metaphor. For, Aristotle, sitting in this hall, would stand up and say: “What do you mean, Socrates, by that anamnesis? Is it not a metaphor and poetical phrase?” [conclusion p. 490-492] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/3r4OKQesOkyPwb0 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"482","_score":null,"_source":{"id":482,"authors_free":[{"id":653,"entry_id":482,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":654,"entry_id":482,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":164,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Erler, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Erler","norm_person":{"id":164,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Erler","full_name":"Erler, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122153847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2424,"entry_id":482,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":478,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","free_first_name":"Jan Erik","free_last_name":"He\u00dfler","norm_person":{"id":478,"first_name":"Jan Erik","last_name":"He\u00dfler","full_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1059760533","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2425,"entry_id":482,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":479,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Blumenfelder, Benedikt (Collaborator)","free_first_name":"Benedikt","free_last_name":"Blumenfelder","norm_person":{"id":479,"first_name":"Benedikt","last_name":"Blumenfelder","full_name":"Blumenfelder, Benedikt","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Surface Reading and Deeper Meaning. On Aristotle reading Plato and Platonists reading Aristotle","main_title":{"title":"Surface Reading and Deeper Meaning. On Aristotle reading Plato and Platonists reading Aristotle"},"abstract":"We are here together to discuss various forms of philosophy in antiquity. There is a surprising variety of literary genres of philosophy so different from the narrow academic format of proceedings, handbooks, and referred journal articles. Already among the works of Aristotle, as the commentators noticed, there is a great variety, and Aristotle always adapted his style to the genre: dialogues, letters, protreptics, documentation works, research discussions, treatises on ethics and politics aiming at a broader public.\r\n\r\nAnd if we take the whole literary production of ancient philosophy, the variety is even more impressive. Besides the treatises and commentaries, the summaries and paraphrases, refutations and replies, the handbooks, manuals, and doxographies, there are dialogues and diatribes and orations, letters and catechisms with sentences to be set in practice, epigraphical posters in public city galleries, philosophical poems and political pamphlets, revelations of Hermes Trismegistos, Chaldean oracles, and we must include the manifold Jewish and Christian interpretations of biblical texts, sermons, and theological polemics. They all require other ways of reading and interpreting.\r\n\r\nThe title of this introductory lecture does not mean that I would recommend us to seek for deeper meaning hidden under the many literary forms. It was undoubtedly a very influential hermeneutical model, in particular when combined with the esoteric\/exoteric distinction. But in my view, it remains primarily a model for interpreting mythical and sacred texts and, since the secularization of sacred hermeneutics, for reading \u201cchallenging literary texts.\u201d It is not a method for the interpretation of philosophical texts, where analysis, insight into the structure of arguments, questioning, and criticism are required.\r\n\r\nTo play with a well-known quote from Thoreau: \u201cIn this part of the world (i.e., in philosophy), it is considered a ground for complaint if a man\u2019s writings admit of more than one interpretation.\u201d This refusal of a search for deeper meaning in philosophy, however, does not mean that we should remain just superficial readers, surfing on the text. Let us use all the possibilities we have, including attention to the literary context, to better understand the argument of the author.\r\n\r\nTo avoid the impression that I am finally agreeing with Aristotle against Plato, let me conclude with a remarkable statement of Plato in the Phaedo. It comes from the crucial section of the debate where Socrates starts his critique of Simmias\u2019 argument that the soul is the harmony of the body and will disappear once the substrate is destroyed.\r\n\r\nAll participants are deeply impressed by the harmony argument, and there is an uneasy silence, as they thought it was a fatal blow to Socrates\u2019 belief in immortality, but Socrates is not impressed. He confronts Simmias with a difficult choice: If you stick to the harmony doctrine, you will have to give up the other doctrine you just accepted, because it is incompatible with the harmony thesis, namely that all knowledge is recollection. What will you keep then, Simmias, this new theory or the former you already accepted? Simmias answers without hesitation that he would stand by the anamnesis doctrine.\r\n\r\nFor this other (sc. the doctrine that the soul is like a harmony) came to me without demonstration; it merely seemed probable and attractive, which is the reason why many people hold it. I am conscious that arguments which base their demonstrations on mere probability are deceptive, and if we are not on our guard against them, they deceive us greatly, in geometry and in all other things.\r\n\r\nWhen commenting on this passage, Damascius, the last head of the Platonic Academy in Athens, distinguishes between what he calls superficial (\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9) and profound (\u03b2\u03b1\u03b8\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9) thinkers, but not in any esoteric sense. Superficial thinkers, he says, \u201cfind pleasure in plausible arguments,\u201d based on analogies and comparisons, metaphors. That is why the analogy of the soul with the harmony of the lyre is so attractive. \u201cThe more profound thinkers, who scorn the world of senses and its ready-at-hand (\u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd) beliefs, rise above plausibilities and love arguments that are connected by necessity.\u201d\r\n\r\nIn this sense, I would also like to be a \u2018profound\u2019 reader ... alas, there arises again a problem. The doctrine that, according to Socrates, is supposedly demonstrated by sound, almost geometrical arguments, and not by analogy, as the rejected harmony thesis, is itself based on analogy and metaphor.\r\n\r\nFor, Aristotle, sitting in this hall, would stand up and say: \u201cWhat do you mean, Socrates, by that anamnesis? Is it not a metaphor and poetical phrase?\u201d [conclusion p. 490-492]","btype":2,"date":"2013","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/3r4OKQesOkyPwb0","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":164,"full_name":"Erler, Michael ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":478,"full_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":479,"full_name":"Blumenfelder, Benedikt","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":482,"section_of":322,"pages":"469-494","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":322,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Argument und literarische Form in antiker Philosophie. Akten des 3. Kongresses der Gesellschaft f\u00fcr antike Philosophie 2010","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Erler2013","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2013","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2013","abstract":"In der modernen Universit\u00e4t werden Literatur, Philologie und Philosophie als unterschiedliche Bereiche betrachtet. Damit wird eine im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert zunehmende Entfremdung zwischen der Erforschung antiker Philosophie und Philologie manifest, die den urspr\u00fcnglichen Gegebenheiten in der Antike keineswegs gerecht wird. Denn die Philosophie entwickelt sich in Griechenland und Rom in enger Verbindung mit und oft in einem Spannungsverh\u00e4ltnis zu unterschiedlichen literarischen Genres. Dies hat zur Folge, dass die Autoren und Interpreten infolge der Wahl bestimmter Gattungen als Medium philosophischer Botschaften neben der eigentlichen Argumentation auch Darstellungsformen der jeweiligen Gattungen zu w\u00fcrdigen haben. Dieses oft spannungsvolle Verh\u00e4ltnis von philosophischem Argument und literarischer Form auszuleuchten hatte sich der 3. Kongress der Gesellschaft f\u00fcr antike Philosophie vorgenommen. In Vortr\u00e4gen und Diskussionsrunden von Philosophen und Philologen wurde diese Frage unter verschiedenen Aspekten mit Blick auf antike Philosophen verschiedener Epochen lebendig diskutiert. Dieser Band, der den Gro\u00dfteil dieser Beitr\u00e4ge versammelt, mag einen Eindruck von der Diskussion vermitteln und Philologen, Philosophen und an der Antike Interessierte zu weiteren \u00dcberlegungen anregen. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/0QiKNhBCl16gJMn","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":322,"pubplace":"Berlin","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Surface Reading and Deeper Meaning. On Aristotle reading Plato and Platonists reading Aristotle"]}