| Title | The Role of the Commentaries on Aristotle in the Teaching of Philosophy according to the Prefaces of the Neoplatonic Commentaries on the Categories |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1991 |
| Published in | Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, Supplementary volume: Aristotle and the Later Tradition |
| Pages | 175-189 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
| Editor(s) | Blumenthal, Henry J. , Robinson, Howard |
| Translator(s) |
| n 19671 had only just begun to study Simplicius’ commentary on Epictetus’ Enchiridion, and I had had at that time my first few doubts about whether Praechter’s views on the dogmatic position of Alexandrian Neo platonism were well founded.2 Praechter had at least formulated these views in the form of hypotheses, but despite his circumspection, they had quickly become unassailable certainties for historians, universally admired and accepted for over fifty years. It was just at this point that I came across the contribution of A. C. Lloyd, who dared to say3 that Praechter had misread or read too hastily the passages in Simplicius’ commentary on Epictetus which referred to first principles, on which Praechter largely based his theory. It was Lloyd again, in the same paper,4 who put historians of philosophy on their guard against the tendency (likewise deriving from Praechter) to minimize, or even to refuse to acknowledge, the importance of the fact that for a long time all the Neoplatonists believed in a fundamental agreement between Plato’s philosophy and Aristotle’s. In my book Le Problème du néo platonisme alexandrin: Hiéroclès et Simplicius’ I simply followed the track marked out by Lloyd. And even now, in the translation with com mentary of Simplicius’ commentary on the Categories which has been undertaken under my editorship,5 61 am attempting to carry further the critique of Praechter’s hypotheses which Lloyd began.This will also be the case in the present paper, which will bring out some of the results which might be reached by working on the Neoplatonic commentaries on Aristotle’s Categories. [pp. 175 f.] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/XguF7or4lVRgRJ5 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"640","_score":null,"_source":{"id":640,"authors_free":[{"id":909,"entry_id":640,"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":910,"entry_id":640,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":911,"entry_id":640,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":139,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Robinson, Howard","free_first_name":"Howard","free_last_name":"Robinson","norm_person":{"id":139,"first_name":"Robinson","last_name":"Howard ","full_name":"Robinson, Howard ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/172347122","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Role of the Commentaries on Aristotle in the Teaching of Philosophy according to the Prefaces of the Neoplatonic Commentaries on the Categories","main_title":{"title":"The Role of the Commentaries on Aristotle in the Teaching of Philosophy according to the Prefaces of the Neoplatonic Commentaries on the Categories"},"abstract":"n 19671 had only just begun to study Simplicius\u2019 commentary on Epictetus\u2019 \r\nEnchiridion, and I had had at that time my first few doubts about whether \r\nPraechter\u2019s views on the dogmatic position of Alexandrian Neo\u00ad\r\nplatonism were well founded.2 Praechter had at least formulated these \r\nviews in the form of hypotheses, but despite his circumspection, they \r\nhad quickly become unassailable certainties for historians, universally \r\nadmired and accepted for over fifty years. It was just at this point that I \r\ncame across the contribution of A. C. Lloyd, who dared to say3 that \r\nPraechter had misread or read too hastily the passages in Simplicius\u2019 \r\ncommentary on Epictetus which referred to first principles, on which \r\nPraechter largely based his theory. It was Lloyd again, in the same \r\npaper,4 who put historians of philosophy on their guard against the tendency (likewise deriving from Praechter) to minimize, or even to \r\nrefuse to acknowledge, the importance of the fact that for a long time all \r\nthe Neoplatonists believed in a fundamental agreement between \r\nPlato\u2019s philosophy and Aristotle\u2019s. In my book Le Probl\u00e8me du n\u00e9o\u00ad\r\nplatonisme alexandrin: Hi\u00e9rocl\u00e8s et Simplicius\u2019 I simply followed the track \r\nmarked out by Lloyd. And even now, in the translation with com\u00ad\r\nmentary of Simplicius\u2019 commentary on the Categories which has been \r\nundertaken under my editorship,5 61 am attempting to carry further the \r\ncritique of Praechter\u2019s hypotheses which Lloyd began.This will also be the case in the present paper, which will bring out \r\nsome of the results which might be reached by working on the \r\nNeoplatonic commentaries on Aristotle\u2019s Categories. [pp. 175 f.]","btype":2,"date":"1991","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/XguF7or4lVRgRJ5","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":139,"full_name":"Robinson, Howard ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":640,"section_of":354,"pages":"175-189","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":354,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, Supplementary volume: Aristotle and the Later Tradition","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Blumenthal\/Robinson1991","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1991","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1991","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/anTH9fx9QKBfykf","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":354,"pubplace":"Oxford","publisher":"Clarendon Press","series":"Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1991]}
| Title | The Role of the Commentaries on Aristotle in the Teaching of Philosophy according to the Prefaces of the Neoplatonic Commentaries on the Categories |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1991 |
| Published in | Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, Supplementary volume: Aristotle and the Later Tradition |
| Pages | 175-189 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
| Editor(s) | Blumenthal, Henry J. , Robinson, Howard |
| Translator(s) |
n 19671 had only just begun to study Simplicius’ commentary on Epictetus’ Enchiridion, and I had had at that time my first few doubts about whether Praechter’s views on the dogmatic position of Alexandrian Neo platonism were well founded.2 Praechter had at least formulated these views in the form of hypotheses, but despite his circumspection, they had quickly become unassailable certainties for historians, universally admired and accepted for over fifty years. It was just at this point that I came across the contribution of A. C. Lloyd, who dared to say3 that Praechter had misread or read too hastily the passages in Simplicius’ commentary on Epictetus which referred to first principles, on which Praechter largely based his theory. It was Lloyd again, in the same paper,4 who put historians of philosophy on their guard against the tendency (likewise deriving from Praechter) to minimize, or even to refuse to acknowledge, the importance of the fact that for a long time all the Neoplatonists believed in a fundamental agreement between Plato’s philosophy and Aristotle’s. In my book Le Problème du néo platonisme alexandrin: Hiéroclès et Simplicius’ I simply followed the track marked out by Lloyd. And even now, in the translation with com mentary of Simplicius’ commentary on the Categories which has been undertaken under my editorship,5 61 am attempting to carry further the critique of Praechter’s hypotheses which Lloyd began.This will also be the case in the present paper, which will bring out some of the results which might be reached by working on the Neoplatonic commentaries on Aristotle’s Categories. [pp. 175 f.] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/XguF7or4lVRgRJ5 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"640","_score":null,"_source":{"id":640,"authors_free":[{"id":909,"entry_id":640,"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":910,"entry_id":640,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":911,"entry_id":640,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":139,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Robinson, Howard","free_first_name":"Howard","free_last_name":"Robinson","norm_person":{"id":139,"first_name":"Robinson","last_name":"Howard ","full_name":"Robinson, Howard ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/172347122","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Role of the Commentaries on Aristotle in the Teaching of Philosophy according to the Prefaces of the Neoplatonic Commentaries on the Categories","main_title":{"title":"The Role of the Commentaries on Aristotle in the Teaching of Philosophy according to the Prefaces of the Neoplatonic Commentaries on the Categories"},"abstract":"n 19671 had only just begun to study Simplicius\u2019 commentary on Epictetus\u2019 \r\nEnchiridion, and I had had at that time my first few doubts about whether \r\nPraechter\u2019s views on the dogmatic position of Alexandrian Neo\u00ad\r\nplatonism were well founded.2 Praechter had at least formulated these \r\nviews in the form of hypotheses, but despite his circumspection, they \r\nhad quickly become unassailable certainties for historians, universally \r\nadmired and accepted for over fifty years. It was just at this point that I \r\ncame across the contribution of A. C. Lloyd, who dared to say3 that \r\nPraechter had misread or read too hastily the passages in Simplicius\u2019 \r\ncommentary on Epictetus which referred to first principles, on which \r\nPraechter largely based his theory. It was Lloyd again, in the same \r\npaper,4 who put historians of philosophy on their guard against the tendency (likewise deriving from Praechter) to minimize, or even to \r\nrefuse to acknowledge, the importance of the fact that for a long time all \r\nthe Neoplatonists believed in a fundamental agreement between \r\nPlato\u2019s philosophy and Aristotle\u2019s. In my book Le Probl\u00e8me du n\u00e9o\u00ad\r\nplatonisme alexandrin: Hi\u00e9rocl\u00e8s et Simplicius\u2019 I simply followed the track \r\nmarked out by Lloyd. And even now, in the translation with com\u00ad\r\nmentary of Simplicius\u2019 commentary on the Categories which has been \r\nundertaken under my editorship,5 61 am attempting to carry further the \r\ncritique of Praechter\u2019s hypotheses which Lloyd began.This will also be the case in the present paper, which will bring out \r\nsome of the results which might be reached by working on the \r\nNeoplatonic commentaries on Aristotle\u2019s Categories. [pp. 175 f.]","btype":2,"date":"1991","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/XguF7or4lVRgRJ5","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":139,"full_name":"Robinson, Howard ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":640,"section_of":354,"pages":"175-189","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":354,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, Supplementary volume: Aristotle and the Later Tradition","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Blumenthal\/Robinson1991","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1991","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1991","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/anTH9fx9QKBfykf","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":354,"pubplace":"Oxford","publisher":"Clarendon Press","series":"Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["The Role of the Commentaries on Aristotle in the Teaching of Philosophy according to the Prefaces of the Neoplatonic Commentaries on the Categories"]}