| Title | Review of: Place, Void, and Eternity. Philoponus: Corollaries on Place and Void. Simplicius: Against Philoponus on the Eternity of the World. By Philoponus and Simplicius |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1993 |
| Journal | The Philosophical Review |
| Volume | 102 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 89-91 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Ide, Harry A. |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| This volume is one of a series of translations of later ancient philosophy, edited by Richard Sorabji. These works have never been translated into modern European languages, although there are Renaissance Latin editions of many of them. Earlier volumes in the series include other works by Simplicius and Philoponus, as well as Alexander of Aphrodisias and Dexippus. These names are not now household names among philosophers, but work prompted and generated by this series will probably result in their receiving the increased attention and respect they deserve. John Philoponus, a sixth-century Christian, may be the best known of these authors among the general philosophical community. For more than a century, historians of science have known that he was an important influence on Galileo. This volume makes some of his important texts available in English. The first part comprises two selections from Philoponus's commentary on Aristotle's Physics, which are self-contained essays on place and void. The second part consists of selections from an attack against Philoponus by Simplicius, a non-Christian Neoplatonist contemporary with Philoponus. In these selections, Simplicius reports and responds to Philoponus's arguments that the world can perish. Simplicius took these arguments from a treatise of Philoponus's that no longer exists. The volume includes the extensive subject and word indices that are standard in this series, and brief introductions to each of the parts. In Physics 4, Aristotle argues that a body's place cannot be the three-dimensional extension within its boundaries, but must be the two-dimensional boundaries. Philoponus argues against Aristotle that place must be three-dimensional. He argues, for example, from wine's bursting a wineskin when it ferments: if there were no three-dimensional extension, it would not need a larger one. This is connected to the existence of void, since Aristotle argues against void because it relies on three-dimensional place. Philoponus correspondingly claims that void is in some sense possible (although it can't occur). His Corollary on Void attempts to prove against Aristotle that motion is possible even if there is a void, and that motion in fact requires void. Aristotle suggests that an object moving in a void would move instantaneously, which is impossible. Philoponus responds that bodies' speed is determined not only by external resistance, but also by their internal impetus. Even in an actually existing vacuum, the internal impetus would still cause only a finite speed. And void is required for motion, since bodies can move only if they have a three-dimensional extension to move into. So, although a three-dimensional extension without any body never actually occurs, there must be a three-dimensional extension separate from body. In the arguments of Simplicius translated in the second part, Philoponus is represented as first arguing for the Aristotelian conclusion that no finite body has an infinite capacity (dunamis), and then inferring that no finite body, including the universe, can exist forever. Simplicius responds that Philoponus overlooks an option—the universe might be able to be moved forever without having an infinite capacity to move itself—and that Philoponus wrongly assumes that something must have an infinite capacity to be infinite, while infinity simply involves a never-ending series of finite steps. In a further series of arguments, Simplicius has Philoponus argue that the capacity of the world must be finite in its own nature, although God apparently could keep the world in existence forever. Sorabji argues in his introduction that Simplicius misses the point of the qualification and thereby misdirects his criticisms. Philoponus, Sorabji suggests, rightly insists that the world's own nature would still be finite. This volume is well translated and well produced. It contains material that is historically important. Anyone interested in the history of science or the development of our understanding of place, void, and eternity will find it interesting and useful. [the entire review] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/6Z4EGDinHRCTNE1 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"740","_score":null,"_source":{"id":740,"authors_free":[{"id":1103,"entry_id":740,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":230,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Ide, Harry A.","free_first_name":"Harry A.","free_last_name":"Ide","norm_person":{"id":230,"first_name":"Harry A.","last_name":"Ide","full_name":"Ide, Harry A.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Review of: Place, Void, and Eternity. Philoponus: Corollaries on Place and Void. Simplicius: Against Philoponus on the Eternity of the World. By Philoponus and Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Review of: Place, Void, and Eternity. Philoponus: Corollaries on Place and Void. Simplicius: Against Philoponus on the Eternity of the World. By Philoponus and Simplicius"},"abstract":"This volume is one of a series of translations of later ancient philosophy, edited by Richard Sorabji. These works have never been translated into modern European languages, although there are Renaissance Latin editions of many of them. Earlier volumes in the series include other works by Simplicius and Philoponus, as well as Alexander of Aphrodisias and Dexippus. These names are not now household names among philosophers, but work prompted and generated by this series will probably result in their receiving the increased attention and respect they deserve.\r\n\r\nJohn Philoponus, a sixth-century Christian, may be the best known of these authors among the general philosophical community. For more than a century, historians of science have known that he was an important influence on Galileo. This volume makes some of his important texts available in English.\r\n\r\nThe first part comprises two selections from Philoponus's commentary on Aristotle's Physics, which are self-contained essays on place and void. The second part consists of selections from an attack against Philoponus by Simplicius, a non-Christian Neoplatonist contemporary with Philoponus. In these selections, Simplicius reports and responds to Philoponus's arguments that the world can perish. Simplicius took these arguments from a treatise of Philoponus's that no longer exists. The volume includes the extensive subject and word indices that are standard in this series, and brief introductions to each of the parts.\r\n\r\nIn Physics 4, Aristotle argues that a body's place cannot be the three-dimensional extension within its boundaries, but must be the two-dimensional boundaries. Philoponus argues against Aristotle that place must be three-dimensional. He argues, for example, from wine's bursting a wineskin when it ferments: if there were no three-dimensional extension, it would not need a larger one. This is connected to the existence of void, since Aristotle argues against void because it relies on three-dimensional place. Philoponus correspondingly claims that void is in some sense possible (although it can't occur). His Corollary on Void attempts to prove against Aristotle that motion is possible even if there is a void, and that motion in fact requires void. Aristotle suggests that an object moving in a void would move instantaneously, which is impossible. Philoponus responds that bodies' speed is determined not only by external resistance, but also by their internal impetus. Even in an actually existing vacuum, the internal impetus would still cause only a finite speed. And void is required for motion, since bodies can move only if they have a three-dimensional extension to move into. So, although a three-dimensional extension without any body never actually occurs, there must be a three-dimensional extension separate from body.\r\n\r\nIn the arguments of Simplicius translated in the second part, Philoponus is represented as first arguing for the Aristotelian conclusion that no finite body has an infinite capacity (dunamis), and then inferring that no finite body, including the universe, can exist forever. Simplicius responds that Philoponus overlooks an option\u2014the universe might be able to be moved forever without having an infinite capacity to move itself\u2014and that Philoponus wrongly assumes that something must have an infinite capacity to be infinite, while infinity simply involves a never-ending series of finite steps.\r\n\r\nIn a further series of arguments, Simplicius has Philoponus argue that the capacity of the world must be finite in its own nature, although God apparently could keep the world in existence forever. Sorabji argues in his introduction that Simplicius misses the point of the qualification and thereby misdirects his criticisms. Philoponus, Sorabji suggests, rightly insists that the world's own nature would still be finite.\r\n\r\nThis volume is well translated and well produced. It contains material that is historically important. Anyone interested in the history of science or the development of our understanding of place, void, and eternity will find it interesting and useful. [the entire review]","btype":3,"date":"1993","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/6Z4EGDinHRCTNE1","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":230,"full_name":"Ide, Harry A.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":740,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The Philosophical Review","volume":"102","issue":"1","pages":"89-91"}},"sort":[1993]}
| Title | Review of: Place, Void, and Eternity. Philoponus: Corollaries on Place and Void. Simplicius: Against Philoponus on the Eternity of the World. By Philoponus and Simplicius |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1993 |
| Journal | The Philosophical Review |
| Volume | 102 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 89-91 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Ide, Harry A. |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
This volume is one of a series of translations of later ancient philosophy, edited by Richard Sorabji. These works have never been translated into modern European languages, although there are Renaissance Latin editions of many of them. Earlier volumes in the series include other works by Simplicius and Philoponus, as well as Alexander of Aphrodisias and Dexippus. These names are not now household names among philosophers, but work prompted and generated by this series will probably result in their receiving the increased attention and respect they deserve. John Philoponus, a sixth-century Christian, may be the best known of these authors among the general philosophical community. For more than a century, historians of science have known that he was an important influence on Galileo. This volume makes some of his important texts available in English. The first part comprises two selections from Philoponus's commentary on Aristotle's Physics, which are self-contained essays on place and void. The second part consists of selections from an attack against Philoponus by Simplicius, a non-Christian Neoplatonist contemporary with Philoponus. In these selections, Simplicius reports and responds to Philoponus's arguments that the world can perish. Simplicius took these arguments from a treatise of Philoponus's that no longer exists. The volume includes the extensive subject and word indices that are standard in this series, and brief introductions to each of the parts. In Physics 4, Aristotle argues that a body's place cannot be the three-dimensional extension within its boundaries, but must be the two-dimensional boundaries. Philoponus argues against Aristotle that place must be three-dimensional. He argues, for example, from wine's bursting a wineskin when it ferments: if there were no three-dimensional extension, it would not need a larger one. This is connected to the existence of void, since Aristotle argues against void because it relies on three-dimensional place. Philoponus correspondingly claims that void is in some sense possible (although it can't occur). His Corollary on Void attempts to prove against Aristotle that motion is possible even if there is a void, and that motion in fact requires void. Aristotle suggests that an object moving in a void would move instantaneously, which is impossible. Philoponus responds that bodies' speed is determined not only by external resistance, but also by their internal impetus. Even in an actually existing vacuum, the internal impetus would still cause only a finite speed. And void is required for motion, since bodies can move only if they have a three-dimensional extension to move into. So, although a three-dimensional extension without any body never actually occurs, there must be a three-dimensional extension separate from body. In the arguments of Simplicius translated in the second part, Philoponus is represented as first arguing for the Aristotelian conclusion that no finite body has an infinite capacity (dunamis), and then inferring that no finite body, including the universe, can exist forever. Simplicius responds that Philoponus overlooks an option—the universe might be able to be moved forever without having an infinite capacity to move itself—and that Philoponus wrongly assumes that something must have an infinite capacity to be infinite, while infinity simply involves a never-ending series of finite steps. In a further series of arguments, Simplicius has Philoponus argue that the capacity of the world must be finite in its own nature, although God apparently could keep the world in existence forever. Sorabji argues in his introduction that Simplicius misses the point of the qualification and thereby misdirects his criticisms. Philoponus, Sorabji suggests, rightly insists that the world's own nature would still be finite. This volume is well translated and well produced. It contains material that is historically important. Anyone interested in the history of science or the development of our understanding of place, void, and eternity will find it interesting and useful. [the entire review] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/6Z4EGDinHRCTNE1 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"740","_score":null,"_source":{"id":740,"authors_free":[{"id":1103,"entry_id":740,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":230,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Ide, Harry A.","free_first_name":"Harry A.","free_last_name":"Ide","norm_person":{"id":230,"first_name":"Harry A.","last_name":"Ide","full_name":"Ide, Harry A.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Review of: Place, Void, and Eternity. Philoponus: Corollaries on Place and Void. Simplicius: Against Philoponus on the Eternity of the World. By Philoponus and Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Review of: Place, Void, and Eternity. Philoponus: Corollaries on Place and Void. Simplicius: Against Philoponus on the Eternity of the World. By Philoponus and Simplicius"},"abstract":"This volume is one of a series of translations of later ancient philosophy, edited by Richard Sorabji. These works have never been translated into modern European languages, although there are Renaissance Latin editions of many of them. Earlier volumes in the series include other works by Simplicius and Philoponus, as well as Alexander of Aphrodisias and Dexippus. These names are not now household names among philosophers, but work prompted and generated by this series will probably result in their receiving the increased attention and respect they deserve.\r\n\r\nJohn Philoponus, a sixth-century Christian, may be the best known of these authors among the general philosophical community. For more than a century, historians of science have known that he was an important influence on Galileo. This volume makes some of his important texts available in English.\r\n\r\nThe first part comprises two selections from Philoponus's commentary on Aristotle's Physics, which are self-contained essays on place and void. The second part consists of selections from an attack against Philoponus by Simplicius, a non-Christian Neoplatonist contemporary with Philoponus. In these selections, Simplicius reports and responds to Philoponus's arguments that the world can perish. Simplicius took these arguments from a treatise of Philoponus's that no longer exists. The volume includes the extensive subject and word indices that are standard in this series, and brief introductions to each of the parts.\r\n\r\nIn Physics 4, Aristotle argues that a body's place cannot be the three-dimensional extension within its boundaries, but must be the two-dimensional boundaries. Philoponus argues against Aristotle that place must be three-dimensional. He argues, for example, from wine's bursting a wineskin when it ferments: if there were no three-dimensional extension, it would not need a larger one. This is connected to the existence of void, since Aristotle argues against void because it relies on three-dimensional place. Philoponus correspondingly claims that void is in some sense possible (although it can't occur). His Corollary on Void attempts to prove against Aristotle that motion is possible even if there is a void, and that motion in fact requires void. Aristotle suggests that an object moving in a void would move instantaneously, which is impossible. Philoponus responds that bodies' speed is determined not only by external resistance, but also by their internal impetus. Even in an actually existing vacuum, the internal impetus would still cause only a finite speed. And void is required for motion, since bodies can move only if they have a three-dimensional extension to move into. So, although a three-dimensional extension without any body never actually occurs, there must be a three-dimensional extension separate from body.\r\n\r\nIn the arguments of Simplicius translated in the second part, Philoponus is represented as first arguing for the Aristotelian conclusion that no finite body has an infinite capacity (dunamis), and then inferring that no finite body, including the universe, can exist forever. Simplicius responds that Philoponus overlooks an option\u2014the universe might be able to be moved forever without having an infinite capacity to move itself\u2014and that Philoponus wrongly assumes that something must have an infinite capacity to be infinite, while infinity simply involves a never-ending series of finite steps.\r\n\r\nIn a further series of arguments, Simplicius has Philoponus argue that the capacity of the world must be finite in its own nature, although God apparently could keep the world in existence forever. Sorabji argues in his introduction that Simplicius misses the point of the qualification and thereby misdirects his criticisms. Philoponus, Sorabji suggests, rightly insists that the world's own nature would still be finite.\r\n\r\nThis volume is well translated and well produced. It contains material that is historically important. Anyone interested in the history of science or the development of our understanding of place, void, and eternity will find it interesting and useful. [the entire review]","btype":3,"date":"1993","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/6Z4EGDinHRCTNE1","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":230,"full_name":"Ide, Harry A.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":740,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The Philosophical Review","volume":"102","issue":"1","pages":"89-91"}},"sort":["Review of: Place, Void, and Eternity. Philoponus: Corollaries on Place and Void. Simplicius: Against Philoponus on the Eternity of the World. By Philoponus and Simplicius"]}