Type of Media 1
Author 1
Date 7
Type of Media
Author
Thomas' Neoplatonic Histories: His following of Simplicius, 2002
By: Hankey, Wayne J.
Title Thomas' Neoplatonic Histories: His following of Simplicius
Type Article
Language English
Date 2002
Journal Dionysius
Volume 20
Categories no categories
Author(s) Hankey, Wayne J.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)
Following Simplicius, Thomas set up the Platonic and Aristotelian philosophical viae as complementary oppositions each of which contributed to the truth. Thomas also followed Simplicius in discerning differences between the hermeneutic methods of the two great schools. He reproduced the history of philosophy of Simplicius as soon as he had his commentaries, agreed with many of his conciliating judgments, and used the same reconciling logical figures. He does not identify himself as a Peripatetic or as a Platonist. However, when he agrees that Aristotle’s way of reasoning, per viam motus, to the existence of separate substances is manifestior et certior, he is sitting in judgment with, not against, Simplicius. For both the sixth and the thirteenth century commentators, Plato and Aristotle are assimilated to each other in various ways, and the real possibility of any beginning except that from the sensible is excluded. Thomas’ hermeneutic is that of the Platonic tradition in late Antiquity – Thomas certainly thought that the truth was veiled under poetic and symbolic language and judged this to be essential for revealing the truth to humans. Consistently with this approach, in the exposition of the De Caelo, Aquinas goes so far with Simplicius as to find “something divine (fabula aliquid divinum continet)” in the myth that Atlas holds up the heavens.106 He would seem, thus, to be on his way to the reconciliation of religious as well as of philosophical traditions. If this should, in fact, be his intent, Thomas would be following Simplicius and his Neoplatonic predecessors in their deepest purposes. This Christian priest, friar, and saint would have placed himself with the “divine” Proclus among the successors of Plato. [Conclusion]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1349","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1349,"authors_free":[{"id":2004,"entry_id":1349,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":167,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hankey, Wayne J.","free_first_name":"Wayne J.","free_last_name":"Hankey","norm_person":{"id":167,"first_name":" Wayne J.","last_name":"Hankey","full_name":"Hankey, Wayne J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1054015821","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Thomas' Neoplatonic Histories: His following of Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Thomas' Neoplatonic Histories: His following of Simplicius"},"abstract":"Following Simplicius, Thomas set up the Platonic and Aristotelian philosophical viae as complementary oppositions each of which contributed to the truth. Thomas also followed \r\nSimplicius in discerning differences between the hermeneutic methods of the two great schools. He reproduced the history of philosophy of Simplicius as soon as he had his commentaries, agreed with many of his conciliating judgments, and used the same reconciling logical figures. He does not identify himself as a Peripatetic or as a Platonist. \r\nHowever, when he agrees that Aristotle\u2019s way of reasoning, per viam motus, to the existence of \r\nseparate substances is manifestior et certior, he is sitting in judgment with, not against, Simplicius. For both the sixth and the thirteenth century commentators, Plato and Aristotle are assimilated to each other in various ways, and the real possibility of any beginning except that from the sensible is excluded. Thomas\u2019 hermeneutic is that of the Platonic tradition in late Antiquity \u2013 Thomas certainly thought that the truth was veiled under poetic and symbolic language and judged this to be essential for revealing the truth to humans. \r\nConsistently with this approach, in the exposition of the De Caelo, Aquinas goes so far with \r\nSimplicius as to find \u201csomething divine (fabula aliquid divinum continet)\u201d in the myth that Atlas \r\nholds up the heavens.106 He would seem, thus, to be on his way to the reconciliation of religious as well as of philosophical traditions. If this should, in fact, be his intent, Thomas would be following Simplicius and his Neoplatonic predecessors in their deepest purposes. This Christian priest, friar, and saint would have placed himself with the \u201cdivine\u201d Proclus among the successors of Plato. [Conclusion]","btype":3,"date":"2002","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/iv8aERtbvhiRAMo","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":167,"full_name":"Hankey, Wayne J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1349,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Dionysius","volume":"20","issue":"","pages":""}},"sort":[2002]}

Review of: Simplicius, On Aristotle's Physics 5, translated by J.O.Urmson, notes by Peter Lautner. The Ancient Commentators on Aristotle, 1998
By: Hankey, Wayne J.
Title Review of: Simplicius, On Aristotle's Physics 5, translated by J.O.Urmson, notes by Peter Lautner. The Ancient Commentators on Aristotle
Type Article
Language English
Date 1998
Journal Bryn Mawr Classical Review
Volume 3
Issue 19
Categories no categories
Author(s) Hankey, Wayne J.
Editor(s)
Translator(s)
This text reviews J. Urmson‘s translation of Simplicius' On Aristotle's Physics 5. The review notes that the volume contains a short introduction, extensive notes, a list of textual emendations, and indices of names and subjects. The commentary addresses a range of philosophical questions, including the distinction between active and passive transformations and the relation of quality and quantity. Overall, Simplicius' commentary is important for understanding the Neoplatonic reconciliations and unifications and the move from substance to subjectivity in western philosophy. [whole text]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1347","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1347,"authors_free":[{"id":2002,"entry_id":1347,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":167,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hankey, Wayne J.","free_first_name":"Wayne J.","free_last_name":"Hankey","norm_person":{"id":167,"first_name":" Wayne J.","last_name":"Hankey","full_name":"Hankey, Wayne J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1054015821","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Review of: Simplicius, On Aristotle's Physics 5, translated by J.O.Urmson, notes by Peter Lautner. The Ancient Commentators on Aristotle","main_title":{"title":"Review of: Simplicius, On Aristotle's Physics 5, translated by J.O.Urmson, notes by Peter Lautner. The Ancient Commentators on Aristotle"},"abstract":"This text reviews J. Urmson\u2018s translation of Simplicius' On Aristotle's Physics 5. The review notes that the volume contains a short introduction, extensive notes, a list of textual emendations, and indices of names and subjects. The commentary addresses a range of philosophical questions, including the distinction between active and passive transformations and the relation of quality and quantity. Overall, Simplicius' commentary is important for understanding the Neoplatonic reconciliations and unifications and the move from substance to subjectivity in western philosophy. [whole text]","btype":3,"date":"1998","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/uhM07fCfTUkIVJP","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":167,"full_name":"Hankey, Wayne J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1347,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Bryn Mawr Classical Review","volume":"3","issue":"19","pages":""}},"sort":[1998]}

  • PAGE 1 OF 1
Review of: Simplicius, On Aristotle's Physics 5, translated by J.O.Urmson, notes by Peter Lautner. The Ancient Commentators on Aristotle, 1998
By: Hankey, Wayne J.
Title Review of: Simplicius, On Aristotle's Physics 5, translated by J.O.Urmson, notes by Peter Lautner. The Ancient Commentators on Aristotle
Type Article
Language English
Date 1998
Journal Bryn Mawr Classical Review
Volume 3
Issue 19
Categories no categories
Author(s) Hankey, Wayne J.
Editor(s)
Translator(s) 
This text reviews J. Urmson‘s translation of Simplicius' On Aristotle's Physics 5. The review notes that the volume contains a short introduction, extensive notes, a list of textual emendations, and indices of names and subjects. The commentary addresses a range of philosophical questions, including the distinction between active and passive transformations and the relation of quality and quantity. Overall, Simplicius' commentary is important for understanding the Neoplatonic reconciliations and unifications and the move from substance to subjectivity in western philosophy. [whole text]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1347","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1347,"authors_free":[{"id":2002,"entry_id":1347,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":167,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hankey, Wayne J.","free_first_name":"Wayne J.","free_last_name":"Hankey","norm_person":{"id":167,"first_name":" Wayne J.","last_name":"Hankey","full_name":"Hankey, Wayne J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1054015821","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Review of: Simplicius, On Aristotle's Physics 5, translated by J.O.Urmson, notes by Peter Lautner. The Ancient Commentators on Aristotle","main_title":{"title":"Review of: Simplicius, On Aristotle's Physics 5, translated by J.O.Urmson, notes by Peter Lautner. The Ancient Commentators on Aristotle"},"abstract":"This text reviews J. Urmson\u2018s translation of Simplicius' On Aristotle's Physics 5. The review notes that the volume contains a short introduction, extensive notes, a list of textual emendations, and indices of names and subjects. The commentary addresses a range of philosophical questions, including the distinction between active and passive transformations and the relation of quality and quantity. Overall, Simplicius' commentary is important for understanding the Neoplatonic reconciliations and unifications and the move from substance to subjectivity in western philosophy. [whole text]","btype":3,"date":"1998","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/uhM07fCfTUkIVJP","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":167,"full_name":"Hankey, Wayne J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1347,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Bryn Mawr Classical Review","volume":"3","issue":"19","pages":""}},"sort":["Review of: Simplicius, On Aristotle's Physics 5, translated by J.O.Urmson, notes by Peter Lautner. The Ancient Commentators on Aristotle"]}

Thomas' Neoplatonic Histories: His following of Simplicius, 2002
By: Hankey, Wayne J.
Title Thomas' Neoplatonic Histories: His following of Simplicius
Type Article
Language English
Date 2002
Journal Dionysius
Volume 20
Categories no categories
Author(s) Hankey, Wayne J.
Editor(s)
Translator(s) 
Following Simplicius, Thomas set up the Platonic and Aristotelian philosophical viae as complementary oppositions each of which contributed to the truth. Thomas also followed 
Simplicius in discerning differences between the hermeneutic methods of the two great schools. He reproduced the history of philosophy of Simplicius as soon as he had his commentaries, agreed with many of his conciliating judgments, and used the same reconciling logical figures. He does not identify himself as a Peripatetic or as a Platonist. 
However, when he agrees that Aristotle’s way of reasoning, per viam motus, to the existence of 
separate substances is manifestior et certior, he is sitting in judgment with, not against, Simplicius. For both the sixth and the thirteenth century commentators, Plato and Aristotle are assimilated to each other in various ways, and the real possibility of any beginning except that from the sensible is excluded. Thomas’ hermeneutic is that of the Platonic tradition in late Antiquity – Thomas certainly thought that the truth was veiled under poetic and symbolic language and judged this to be essential for revealing the truth to humans. 
Consistently with this approach, in the exposition of the De Caelo, Aquinas goes so far with 
Simplicius as to find “something divine (fabula aliquid divinum continet)” in the myth that Atlas 
holds up the heavens.106 He would seem, thus, to be on his way to the reconciliation of religious as well as of philosophical traditions. If this should, in fact, be his intent, Thomas would be following Simplicius and his Neoplatonic predecessors in their deepest purposes. This Christian priest, friar, and saint would have placed himself with the “divine” Proclus among the successors of Plato. [Conclusion]

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1349","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1349,"authors_free":[{"id":2004,"entry_id":1349,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":167,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hankey, Wayne J.","free_first_name":"Wayne J.","free_last_name":"Hankey","norm_person":{"id":167,"first_name":" Wayne J.","last_name":"Hankey","full_name":"Hankey, Wayne J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1054015821","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Thomas' Neoplatonic Histories: His following of Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Thomas' Neoplatonic Histories: His following of Simplicius"},"abstract":"Following Simplicius, Thomas set up the Platonic and Aristotelian philosophical viae as complementary oppositions each of which contributed to the truth. Thomas also followed \r\nSimplicius in discerning differences between the hermeneutic methods of the two great schools. He reproduced the history of philosophy of Simplicius as soon as he had his commentaries, agreed with many of his conciliating judgments, and used the same reconciling logical figures. He does not identify himself as a Peripatetic or as a Platonist. \r\nHowever, when he agrees that Aristotle\u2019s way of reasoning, per viam motus, to the existence of \r\nseparate substances is manifestior et certior, he is sitting in judgment with, not against, Simplicius. For both the sixth and the thirteenth century commentators, Plato and Aristotle are assimilated to each other in various ways, and the real possibility of any beginning except that from the sensible is excluded. Thomas\u2019 hermeneutic is that of the Platonic tradition in late Antiquity \u2013 Thomas certainly thought that the truth was veiled under poetic and symbolic language and judged this to be essential for revealing the truth to humans. \r\nConsistently with this approach, in the exposition of the De Caelo, Aquinas goes so far with \r\nSimplicius as to find \u201csomething divine (fabula aliquid divinum continet)\u201d in the myth that Atlas \r\nholds up the heavens.106 He would seem, thus, to be on his way to the reconciliation of religious as well as of philosophical traditions. If this should, in fact, be his intent, Thomas would be following Simplicius and his Neoplatonic predecessors in their deepest purposes. This Christian priest, friar, and saint would have placed himself with the \u201cdivine\u201d Proclus among the successors of Plato. [Conclusion]","btype":3,"date":"2002","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/iv8aERtbvhiRAMo","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":167,"full_name":"Hankey, Wayne J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1349,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Dionysius","volume":"20","issue":"","pages":""}},"sort":["Thomas' Neoplatonic Histories: His following of Simplicius"]}

  • PAGE 1 OF 1