Title | Diogenes revisited |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 2008 |
Published in | |
Pages | 281-290 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Laks, André |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
In the first edition of this book (1983), I made an attempt to take Diogenes somewhat more seriously than he had usually been taken, at least after Diels’ devastating 1881 article, in which he portrayed Diogenes as a second-rate eclectic thinker. Diels showed, particularly through an analysis of Diogenian echoes in Aristophanes’ Clouds, that Diogenes was quite popular in the last third of the 5th century (a popularity that has been confirmed by the discovery in 1962 of the Derveni Papyrus). His popularity, however, was in Diels’ view a confirmation of the unserious quality of Diogenes’ thinking (are not serious thinkers always ignored by the vulgar?). Has this attempt been successful? The fact that some collections and translations of Presocratic philosophers leave him out may or may not be significant—some publishing companies obviously think that the corpus is too bulky. But Diogenes is certainly still lacking general recognition. Histories of archaic philosophy tend to overlook him and often offer little more than an implicit justification for his exclusion, the core of which is encapsulated in the term “eclecticism.” What makes him visible is his absence rather than any discussion about him. One complaint made by a reviewer of the Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy was that it nowhere happens even to mention the one achievement Diogenes is credited with, namely his alleged role in the history of teleology, for which he is occasionally praised. It is all the more noteworthy that Graham (2006) has made Diogenes a landmark in the history of Presocratic philosophy by making him, rather than the older Anaximenes, the real initiator of the doctrine of “Material Monism” (chap. 10). I personally tend to think that Diogenes’ contribution on this point is rather to have explicitly stated the implications of Anaximenes’ monism, rather than substituting a material monism for an Anaximenean pluralism, which is Graham’s paradoxical point (see above, p. 70). In what follows, I just want to restate briefly what seem to me to be the two basic points about Diogenes. The first one concerns what I take to be the center of Diogenes’ own thought, namely the relation between his noetics (so I shall call his doctrine of Intelligence) and his teleology. The second is about the reception of Diogenes’ thought and the origin of his reputation as an eclectic. [introduction p. 281-282] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/q5b1PHFAeBZnhpa |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1186","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1186,"authors_free":[{"id":1758,"entry_id":1186,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":225,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","free_first_name":"Andr\u00e9","free_last_name":"Laks","norm_person":{"id":225,"first_name":"Andr\u00e9","last_name":"Laks","full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/135869161","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Diogenes revisited","main_title":{"title":"Diogenes revisited"},"abstract":"In the first edition of this book (1983), I made an attempt to take Diogenes somewhat more seriously than he had usually been taken, at least after Diels\u2019 devastating 1881 article, in which he portrayed Diogenes as a second-rate eclectic thinker. Diels showed, particularly through an analysis of Diogenian echoes in Aristophanes\u2019 Clouds, that Diogenes was quite popular in the last third of the 5th century (a popularity that has been confirmed by the discovery in 1962 of the Derveni Papyrus). His popularity, however, was in Diels\u2019 view a confirmation of the unserious quality of Diogenes\u2019 thinking (are not serious thinkers always ignored by the vulgar?).\r\n\r\nHas this attempt been successful? The fact that some collections and translations of Presocratic philosophers leave him out may or may not be significant\u2014some publishing companies obviously think that the corpus is too bulky. But Diogenes is certainly still lacking general recognition. Histories of archaic philosophy tend to overlook him and often offer little more than an implicit justification for his exclusion, the core of which is encapsulated in the term \u201ceclecticism.\u201d What makes him visible is his absence rather than any discussion about him. One complaint made by a reviewer of the Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy was that it nowhere happens even to mention the one achievement Diogenes is credited with, namely his alleged role in the history of teleology, for which he is occasionally praised.\r\n\r\nIt is all the more noteworthy that Graham (2006) has made Diogenes a landmark in the history of Presocratic philosophy by making him, rather than the older Anaximenes, the real initiator of the doctrine of \u201cMaterial Monism\u201d (chap. 10). I personally tend to think that Diogenes\u2019 contribution on this point is rather to have explicitly stated the implications of Anaximenes\u2019 monism, rather than substituting a material monism for an Anaximenean pluralism, which is Graham\u2019s paradoxical point (see above, p. 70).\r\n\r\nIn what follows, I just want to restate briefly what seem to me to be the two basic points about Diogenes. The first one concerns what I take to be the center of Diogenes\u2019 own thought, namely the relation between his noetics (so I shall call his doctrine of Intelligence) and his teleology. The second is about the reception of Diogenes\u2019 thought and the origin of his reputation as an eclectic. [introduction p. 281-282]","btype":2,"date":"2008","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/q5b1PHFAeBZnhpa","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":225,"full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1186,"section_of":351,"pages":"281-290","is_catalog":null,"book":null},"article":null},"sort":[2008]}
Title | Pour une histoire de l’interprétation de Diogène |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 2008 |
Published in | |
Pages | 21-36 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Laks, André |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
This text discusses the interpretation of Diogenes of Apollonia, a philosopher whose work is thought to date back to the 5th century BC. While Diogenes is often referred to as "the last of the physicists," there were other contemporaries who could also claim that title. Despite this, Diogenes' ideas on philosophy represented a culmination of previous philosophies, particularly those of Anaxagoras and Socrates. Diogenes criticized Anaxagoras' perspective and introduced the idea that "intellection" is immanent in the air, constructing a new universe based on this premise. The text notes that while Socratic-Platonic critique overshadowed Diogenes' exegesis, his work remains relevant due to its internal critique of Anaxagoras' ideas. [introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/uMTvuWxbtSS0NTk |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1189","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1189,"authors_free":[{"id":1761,"entry_id":1189,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":225,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","free_first_name":"Andr\u00e9","free_last_name":"Laks","norm_person":{"id":225,"first_name":"Andr\u00e9","last_name":"Laks","full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/135869161","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Pour une histoire de l\u2019interpr\u00e9tation de Diog\u00e8ne","main_title":{"title":"Pour une histoire de l\u2019interpr\u00e9tation de Diog\u00e8ne"},"abstract":"This text discusses the interpretation of Diogenes of Apollonia, a philosopher whose work is thought to date back to the 5th century BC. While Diogenes is often referred to as \"the last of the physicists,\" there were other contemporaries who could also claim that title. Despite this, Diogenes' ideas on philosophy represented a culmination of previous philosophies, particularly those of Anaxagoras and Socrates. Diogenes criticized Anaxagoras' perspective and introduced the idea that \"intellection\" is immanent in the air, constructing a new universe based on this premise. The text notes that while Socratic-Platonic critique overshadowed Diogenes' exegesis, his work remains relevant due to its internal critique of Anaxagoras' ideas. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"2008","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/uMTvuWxbtSS0NTk","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":225,"full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1189,"section_of":351,"pages":"21-36","is_catalog":null,"book":null},"article":null},"sort":[2008]}
Title | Les fragments |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 2008 |
Published in | |
Pages | 62-71, 118-125, 132-159, 198-201 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Laks, André |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
A commentary of Fragments in Simplicius: Fragment 4 (B2 FK); Fragment 5 (B7 DK); T3 a and b (A7 and 13A4 DK); T4 (A5 DK); T8 (A19 DK); T23a, b, c, and d (A10 and 13A11 DK); T24 (A10 DK) |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/Du6NCbF1wmtuJiM |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1192","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1192,"authors_free":[{"id":1763,"entry_id":1192,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":225,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","free_first_name":"Andr\u00e9","free_last_name":"Laks","norm_person":{"id":225,"first_name":"Andr\u00e9","last_name":"Laks","full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/135869161","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Les fragments","main_title":{"title":"Les fragments"},"abstract":"A commentary of Fragments in Simplicius: Fragment 4 (B2 FK); Fragment 5 (B7 DK); T3 a and b (A7 and 13A4 DK); T4 (A5 DK); T8 (A19 DK); T23a, b, c, and d (A10 and 13A11 DK); T24 (A10 DK) ","btype":2,"date":"2008","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Du6NCbF1wmtuJiM","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":225,"full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1192,"section_of":351,"pages":"62-71, 118-125, 132-159, 198-201","is_catalog":null,"book":null},"article":null},"sort":[2008]}
Title | Diogène d’Apollonie: Edition, traduction et commentaire des fragments et témoignages |
Type | Monograph |
Language | French |
Date | 2008 |
Publication Place | Sankt Augustin |
Publisher | Academia Verlag |
Series | International Pre-Platonic Studies |
Volume | 6 |
Edition No. | 2 (1st 1983) |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Laks, André |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
Depuis la première édition de ce livre, Diogène d'Apollonie, un des derniers "physiciens" présocratiques, longtemps dévalorisé par la réputation d' "éclectique" que H. Diels avait attachée à son nom dans un article de 1881, a suscité un regain d'intérêt. Cette seconde édition d'un ouvrage qui reste à ce jour le seul commentaire exhaustif des fragments et des témoignages de Diogène, a été revue et corrigée, mais elle prend aussi en compte, dans une série d'ajouts marqués comme tels, les travaux parus au cours des vint-cinq années écoulées. Le livre retrace l'histoire de la transmission des fragments de Diogène, analyse les positions de la critique moderne depuis l'article séminal de F. Schleiermacher (1811), et offre, pour chacun des douze fragments et des quelques trente-six témoignages, dont un nouveau classement est proposé, une analyse visant à reconstruire la logique de l'original perdu. Quatre des Notes additionnelles abordent des problèmes spécifiques, qui requéraient un traitement séparé. Une cinquième, en anglais, offre une présentation synthétique de l'interprétation ici défendue, qui situe l'importance de Diogène dans son rapport à Anaxagore et à sa doctrine de l' "intellect". [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/l5eQc4K0fWglpHt |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1367","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1367,"authors_free":[{"id":2054,"entry_id":1367,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":225,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","free_first_name":"Andr\u00e9","free_last_name":"Laks","norm_person":{"id":225,"first_name":"Andr\u00e9","last_name":"Laks","full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/135869161","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Diog\u00e8ne d\u2019Apollonie: Edition, traduction et commentaire des fragments et t\u00e9moignages","main_title":{"title":"Diog\u00e8ne d\u2019Apollonie: Edition, traduction et commentaire des fragments et t\u00e9moignages"},"abstract":"Depuis la premi\u00e8re \u00e9dition de ce livre, Diog\u00e8ne d'Apollonie, un des derniers \"physiciens\" pr\u00e9socratiques, longtemps d\u00e9valoris\u00e9 par la r\u00e9putation d' \"\u00e9clectique\" que H. Diels avait attach\u00e9e \u00e0 son nom dans un article de 1881, a suscit\u00e9 un regain d'int\u00e9r\u00eat.\r\n\r\nCette seconde \u00e9dition d'un ouvrage qui reste \u00e0 ce jour le seul commentaire exhaustif des fragments et des t\u00e9moignages de Diog\u00e8ne, a \u00e9t\u00e9 revue et corrig\u00e9e, mais elle prend aussi en compte, dans une s\u00e9rie d'ajouts marqu\u00e9s comme tels, les travaux parus au cours des vint-cinq ann\u00e9es \u00e9coul\u00e9es. Le livre retrace l'histoire de la transmission des fragments de Diog\u00e8ne, analyse les positions de la critique moderne depuis l'article s\u00e9minal de F. Schleiermacher (1811), et offre, pour chacun des douze fragments et des quelques trente-six t\u00e9moignages, dont un nouveau classement est propos\u00e9, une analyse visant \u00e0 reconstruire la logique de l'original perdu.\r\n\r\nQuatre des Notes additionnelles abordent des probl\u00e8mes sp\u00e9cifiques, qui requ\u00e9raient un traitement s\u00e9par\u00e9. Une cinqui\u00e8me, en anglais, offre une pr\u00e9sentation synth\u00e9tique de l'interpr\u00e9tation ici d\u00e9fendue, qui situe l'importance de Diog\u00e8ne dans son rapport \u00e0 Anaxagore et \u00e0 sa doctrine de l' \"intellect\". [author's abstract]","btype":1,"date":"2008","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/l5eQc4K0fWglpHt","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":225,"full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":1367,"pubplace":"Sankt Augustin","publisher":"Academia Verlag","series":"International Pre-Platonic Studies","volume":"6","edition_no":"2 (1st 1983)","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2008]}
Title | Speculating about Diogenes |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 2008 |
Published in | The Oxford Handbook of Presocratic Philosophy |
Pages | 353-364 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Laks, André |
Editor(s) | Curd, Patricia , Graham, Daniel W. |
Translator(s) |
Twenty-five years ago, I made an attempt (in my book Diogène d’Apollonie, 1983) to take Diogenes somewhat more seriously than he had usually been taken, at least since Diels’s devastating 1881 article in which he portrayed Diogenes as a second-rate eclectic thinker. Diogenes’ popularity in the last third of the fifth century, which Diels greatly contributed to establishing through an analysis of Diogenian echoes in Aristophanes’ Clouds and was confirmed by the discovery in 1962 of the Derveni Papyrus, went along with Diogenes’ depreciated intellectual status: Are not serious thinkers ignored by the vulgar? Has this attempt been successful? The fact that some collections and translations of Presocratic philosophers leave him out may or may not be significant: some publishers obviously think the corpus is too bulky. But Diogenes is certainly still lacking general recognition. Histories of archaic philosophy tend to overlook him and often offer little more than an implicit justification for his exclusion, the core of which is encapsulated in the term “eclecticism.” What makes him visible is his absence, rather than any discussion about him. One complaint made by a reviewer of the Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy was that it nowhere happens even to mention the one achievement Diogenes is credited with, namely his alleged role in the history of teleology, for which he is occasionally praised. It is all the more noteworthy that Graham, in his recent book, has made of Diogenes a landmark in the history of Presocratic philosophy by making him, rather than the older Anaximenes, the real promoter of the doctrine of “material monism.” I personally tend to think that Diogenes’ contribution, on this point, is rather to have explicitly stated the implications of Anaximenes’ monism, rather than substituting a material monism to an Anaximenean pluralism (Graham’s paradoxical point); but Graham’s book came out after this contribution was submitted and could not be taken into account. I shall consequently restate in a rather perfunctory manner, without adding much to what I have written before, what seem to be two basic points about Diogenes. The first one concerns what I take to be the center of Diogenes’ own thought, namely the relation between his noetics (so I shall call his doctrine of Intelligence) and his teleology; the second is about the reception of Diogenes’ thought and the origin of his reputation as an eclectic. [introduction p. 353-354] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/438sP1InUW9fsIE |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1399","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1399,"authors_free":[{"id":2178,"entry_id":1399,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":225,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","free_first_name":"Andr\u00e9","free_last_name":"Laks","norm_person":{"id":225,"first_name":"Andr\u00e9","last_name":"Laks","full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/135869161","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2181,"entry_id":1399,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":58,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Curd, Patricia","free_first_name":"Patricia","free_last_name":"Curd","norm_person":{"id":58,"first_name":"Patricia","last_name":"Curd","full_name":"Curd, Patricia","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/13843980X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2182,"entry_id":1399,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":374,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Graham, Daniel W.","free_first_name":"Daniel W.","free_last_name":"Graham","norm_person":{"id":374,"first_name":"Daniel W.","last_name":"Graham","full_name":"Graham, Daniel W.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/121454800","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Speculating about Diogenes","main_title":{"title":"Speculating about Diogenes"},"abstract":"Twenty-five years ago, I made an attempt (in my book Diog\u00e8ne d\u2019Apollonie, 1983) to take Diogenes somewhat more seriously than he had usually been taken, at least since Diels\u2019s devastating 1881 article in which he portrayed Diogenes as a second-rate eclectic thinker. Diogenes\u2019 popularity in the last third of the fifth century, which Diels greatly contributed to establishing through an analysis of Diogenian echoes in Aristophanes\u2019 Clouds and was confirmed by the discovery in 1962 of the Derveni Papyrus, went along with Diogenes\u2019 depreciated intellectual status: Are not serious thinkers ignored by the vulgar?\r\n\r\nHas this attempt been successful? The fact that some collections and translations of Presocratic philosophers leave him out may or may not be significant: some publishers obviously think the corpus is too bulky. But Diogenes is certainly still lacking general recognition. Histories of archaic philosophy tend to overlook him and often offer little more than an implicit justification for his exclusion, the core of which is encapsulated in the term \u201ceclecticism.\u201d What makes him visible is his absence, rather than any discussion about him. One complaint made by a reviewer of the Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy was that it nowhere happens even to mention the one achievement Diogenes is credited with, namely his alleged role in the history of teleology, for which he is occasionally praised. It is all the more noteworthy that Graham, in his recent book, has made of Diogenes a landmark in the history of Presocratic philosophy by making him, rather than the older Anaximenes, the real promoter of the doctrine of \u201cmaterial monism.\u201d\r\n\r\nI personally tend to think that Diogenes\u2019 contribution, on this point, is rather to have explicitly stated the implications of Anaximenes\u2019 monism, rather than substituting a material monism to an Anaximenean pluralism (Graham\u2019s paradoxical point); but Graham\u2019s book came out after this contribution was submitted and could not be taken into account. I shall consequently restate in a rather perfunctory manner, without adding much to what I have written before, what seem to be two basic points about Diogenes. The first one concerns what I take to be the center of Diogenes\u2019 own thought, namely the relation between his noetics (so I shall call his doctrine of Intelligence) and his teleology; the second is about the reception of Diogenes\u2019 thought and the origin of his reputation as an eclectic. [introduction p. 353-354]","btype":2,"date":"2008","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/438sP1InUW9fsIE","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":225,"full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":58,"full_name":"Curd, Patricia","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":374,"full_name":"Graham, Daniel W.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1399,"section_of":1400,"pages":"353-364","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1400,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"The Oxford Handbook of Presocratic Philosophy","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Curd2008","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2008","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"The Oxford Handbook of Presocratic Philosophy brings together leading international scholars to study the diverse figures, movements, and approaches that constitute Presocratic philosophy. In the sixth and fifth centuries bc a new kind of thinker appeared in Greek city-states, dedicated to finding the origins of the world and everything in it, using observation and reason rather than tradition and myth. We call these thinkers Presocratic philosophers, and recognize them as the first philosophers of the Western tradition, as well as the originators of scientific thinking. New textual discoveries and new approaches make a reconsideration of the Presocratics at the beginning of the twenty-first century especially timely. More than a survey of scholarship, this study presents new interpretations and evaluations of the Presocratics' accomplishments, from Thales to the sophists, from theology to science, and from pre-philosophical background to their influence on later thinkers. Many positions presented here challenge accepted wisdom and offer alternative accounts of Presocratic theories. This book includes chapters on the Milesians (Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes), Xenophanes, Heraclitus, Parmenides, Anaxagoras, Empedocles, the Pythagoreans, the atomists, and the sophists. Special studies are devoted to the sources of Presocratic philosophy, oriental influences, Hippocratic medicine, cosmology, explanation, epistemology, theology, and the reception of Presocratic thought in Aristotle and other ancient authors. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/mXFwMNnXTnju9zT","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1400,"pubplace":"New York","publisher":"Oxford University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2008]}
Title | Diogenes revisited |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 2008 |
Published in | |
Pages | 281-290 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Laks, André |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
In the first edition of this book (1983), I made an attempt to take Diogenes somewhat more seriously than he had usually been taken, at least after Diels’ devastating 1881 article, in which he portrayed Diogenes as a second-rate eclectic thinker. Diels showed, particularly through an analysis of Diogenian echoes in Aristophanes’ Clouds, that Diogenes was quite popular in the last third of the 5th century (a popularity that has been confirmed by the discovery in 1962 of the Derveni Papyrus). His popularity, however, was in Diels’ view a confirmation of the unserious quality of Diogenes’ thinking (are not serious thinkers always ignored by the vulgar?). Has this attempt been successful? The fact that some collections and translations of Presocratic philosophers leave him out may or may not be significant—some publishing companies obviously think that the corpus is too bulky. But Diogenes is certainly still lacking general recognition. Histories of archaic philosophy tend to overlook him and often offer little more than an implicit justification for his exclusion, the core of which is encapsulated in the term “eclecticism.” What makes him visible is his absence rather than any discussion about him. One complaint made by a reviewer of the Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy was that it nowhere happens even to mention the one achievement Diogenes is credited with, namely his alleged role in the history of teleology, for which he is occasionally praised. It is all the more noteworthy that Graham (2006) has made Diogenes a landmark in the history of Presocratic philosophy by making him, rather than the older Anaximenes, the real initiator of the doctrine of “Material Monism” (chap. 10). I personally tend to think that Diogenes’ contribution on this point is rather to have explicitly stated the implications of Anaximenes’ monism, rather than substituting a material monism for an Anaximenean pluralism, which is Graham’s paradoxical point (see above, p. 70). In what follows, I just want to restate briefly what seem to me to be the two basic points about Diogenes. The first one concerns what I take to be the center of Diogenes’ own thought, namely the relation between his noetics (so I shall call his doctrine of Intelligence) and his teleology. The second is about the reception of Diogenes’ thought and the origin of his reputation as an eclectic. [introduction p. 281-282] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/q5b1PHFAeBZnhpa |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1186","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1186,"authors_free":[{"id":1758,"entry_id":1186,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":225,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","free_first_name":"Andr\u00e9","free_last_name":"Laks","norm_person":{"id":225,"first_name":"Andr\u00e9","last_name":"Laks","full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/135869161","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Diogenes revisited","main_title":{"title":"Diogenes revisited"},"abstract":"In the first edition of this book (1983), I made an attempt to take Diogenes somewhat more seriously than he had usually been taken, at least after Diels\u2019 devastating 1881 article, in which he portrayed Diogenes as a second-rate eclectic thinker. Diels showed, particularly through an analysis of Diogenian echoes in Aristophanes\u2019 Clouds, that Diogenes was quite popular in the last third of the 5th century (a popularity that has been confirmed by the discovery in 1962 of the Derveni Papyrus). His popularity, however, was in Diels\u2019 view a confirmation of the unserious quality of Diogenes\u2019 thinking (are not serious thinkers always ignored by the vulgar?).\r\n\r\nHas this attempt been successful? The fact that some collections and translations of Presocratic philosophers leave him out may or may not be significant\u2014some publishing companies obviously think that the corpus is too bulky. But Diogenes is certainly still lacking general recognition. Histories of archaic philosophy tend to overlook him and often offer little more than an implicit justification for his exclusion, the core of which is encapsulated in the term \u201ceclecticism.\u201d What makes him visible is his absence rather than any discussion about him. One complaint made by a reviewer of the Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy was that it nowhere happens even to mention the one achievement Diogenes is credited with, namely his alleged role in the history of teleology, for which he is occasionally praised.\r\n\r\nIt is all the more noteworthy that Graham (2006) has made Diogenes a landmark in the history of Presocratic philosophy by making him, rather than the older Anaximenes, the real initiator of the doctrine of \u201cMaterial Monism\u201d (chap. 10). I personally tend to think that Diogenes\u2019 contribution on this point is rather to have explicitly stated the implications of Anaximenes\u2019 monism, rather than substituting a material monism for an Anaximenean pluralism, which is Graham\u2019s paradoxical point (see above, p. 70).\r\n\r\nIn what follows, I just want to restate briefly what seem to me to be the two basic points about Diogenes. The first one concerns what I take to be the center of Diogenes\u2019 own thought, namely the relation between his noetics (so I shall call his doctrine of Intelligence) and his teleology. The second is about the reception of Diogenes\u2019 thought and the origin of his reputation as an eclectic. [introduction p. 281-282]","btype":2,"date":"2008","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/q5b1PHFAeBZnhpa","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":225,"full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1186,"section_of":351,"pages":"281-290","is_catalog":null,"book":null},"article":null},"sort":["Diogenes revisited"]}
Title | Diogène d’Apollonie: Edition, traduction et commentaire des fragments et témoignages |
Type | Monograph |
Language | French |
Date | 2008 |
Publication Place | Sankt Augustin |
Publisher | Academia Verlag |
Series | International Pre-Platonic Studies |
Volume | 6 |
Edition No. | 2 (1st 1983) |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Laks, André |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
Depuis la première édition de ce livre, Diogène d'Apollonie, un des derniers "physiciens" présocratiques, longtemps dévalorisé par la réputation d' "éclectique" que H. Diels avait attachée à son nom dans un article de 1881, a suscité un regain d'intérêt. Cette seconde édition d'un ouvrage qui reste à ce jour le seul commentaire exhaustif des fragments et des témoignages de Diogène, a été revue et corrigée, mais elle prend aussi en compte, dans une série d'ajouts marqués comme tels, les travaux parus au cours des vint-cinq années écoulées. Le livre retrace l'histoire de la transmission des fragments de Diogène, analyse les positions de la critique moderne depuis l'article séminal de F. Schleiermacher (1811), et offre, pour chacun des douze fragments et des quelques trente-six témoignages, dont un nouveau classement est proposé, une analyse visant à reconstruire la logique de l'original perdu. Quatre des Notes additionnelles abordent des problèmes spécifiques, qui requéraient un traitement séparé. Une cinquième, en anglais, offre une présentation synthétique de l'interprétation ici défendue, qui situe l'importance de Diogène dans son rapport à Anaxagore et à sa doctrine de l' "intellect". [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/l5eQc4K0fWglpHt |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1367","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1367,"authors_free":[{"id":2054,"entry_id":1367,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":225,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","free_first_name":"Andr\u00e9","free_last_name":"Laks","norm_person":{"id":225,"first_name":"Andr\u00e9","last_name":"Laks","full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/135869161","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Diog\u00e8ne d\u2019Apollonie: Edition, traduction et commentaire des fragments et t\u00e9moignages","main_title":{"title":"Diog\u00e8ne d\u2019Apollonie: Edition, traduction et commentaire des fragments et t\u00e9moignages"},"abstract":"Depuis la premi\u00e8re \u00e9dition de ce livre, Diog\u00e8ne d'Apollonie, un des derniers \"physiciens\" pr\u00e9socratiques, longtemps d\u00e9valoris\u00e9 par la r\u00e9putation d' \"\u00e9clectique\" que H. Diels avait attach\u00e9e \u00e0 son nom dans un article de 1881, a suscit\u00e9 un regain d'int\u00e9r\u00eat.\r\n\r\nCette seconde \u00e9dition d'un ouvrage qui reste \u00e0 ce jour le seul commentaire exhaustif des fragments et des t\u00e9moignages de Diog\u00e8ne, a \u00e9t\u00e9 revue et corrig\u00e9e, mais elle prend aussi en compte, dans une s\u00e9rie d'ajouts marqu\u00e9s comme tels, les travaux parus au cours des vint-cinq ann\u00e9es \u00e9coul\u00e9es. Le livre retrace l'histoire de la transmission des fragments de Diog\u00e8ne, analyse les positions de la critique moderne depuis l'article s\u00e9minal de F. Schleiermacher (1811), et offre, pour chacun des douze fragments et des quelques trente-six t\u00e9moignages, dont un nouveau classement est propos\u00e9, une analyse visant \u00e0 reconstruire la logique de l'original perdu.\r\n\r\nQuatre des Notes additionnelles abordent des probl\u00e8mes sp\u00e9cifiques, qui requ\u00e9raient un traitement s\u00e9par\u00e9. Une cinqui\u00e8me, en anglais, offre une pr\u00e9sentation synth\u00e9tique de l'interpr\u00e9tation ici d\u00e9fendue, qui situe l'importance de Diog\u00e8ne dans son rapport \u00e0 Anaxagore et \u00e0 sa doctrine de l' \"intellect\". [author's abstract]","btype":1,"date":"2008","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/l5eQc4K0fWglpHt","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":225,"full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":1367,"pubplace":"Sankt Augustin","publisher":"Academia Verlag","series":"International Pre-Platonic Studies","volume":"6","edition_no":"2 (1st 1983)","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Diog\u00e8ne d\u2019Apollonie: Edition, traduction et commentaire des fragments et t\u00e9moignages"]}
Title | Les fragments |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 2008 |
Published in | |
Pages | 62-71, 118-125, 132-159, 198-201 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Laks, André |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
A commentary of Fragments in Simplicius: Fragment 4 (B2 FK); Fragment 5 (B7 DK); T3 a and b (A7 and 13A4 DK); T4 (A5 DK); T8 (A19 DK); T23a, b, c, and d (A10 and 13A11 DK); T24 (A10 DK) |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/Du6NCbF1wmtuJiM |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1192","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1192,"authors_free":[{"id":1763,"entry_id":1192,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":225,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","free_first_name":"Andr\u00e9","free_last_name":"Laks","norm_person":{"id":225,"first_name":"Andr\u00e9","last_name":"Laks","full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/135869161","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Les fragments","main_title":{"title":"Les fragments"},"abstract":"A commentary of Fragments in Simplicius: Fragment 4 (B2 FK); Fragment 5 (B7 DK); T3 a and b (A7 and 13A4 DK); T4 (A5 DK); T8 (A19 DK); T23a, b, c, and d (A10 and 13A11 DK); T24 (A10 DK) ","btype":2,"date":"2008","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Du6NCbF1wmtuJiM","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":225,"full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1192,"section_of":351,"pages":"62-71, 118-125, 132-159, 198-201","is_catalog":null,"book":null},"article":null},"sort":["Les fragments"]}
Title | Pour une histoire de l’interprétation de Diogène |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 2008 |
Published in | |
Pages | 21-36 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Laks, André |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
This text discusses the interpretation of Diogenes of Apollonia, a philosopher whose work is thought to date back to the 5th century BC. While Diogenes is often referred to as "the last of the physicists," there were other contemporaries who could also claim that title. Despite this, Diogenes' ideas on philosophy represented a culmination of previous philosophies, particularly those of Anaxagoras and Socrates. Diogenes criticized Anaxagoras' perspective and introduced the idea that "intellection" is immanent in the air, constructing a new universe based on this premise. The text notes that while Socratic-Platonic critique overshadowed Diogenes' exegesis, his work remains relevant due to its internal critique of Anaxagoras' ideas. [introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/uMTvuWxbtSS0NTk |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1189","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1189,"authors_free":[{"id":1761,"entry_id":1189,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":225,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","free_first_name":"Andr\u00e9","free_last_name":"Laks","norm_person":{"id":225,"first_name":"Andr\u00e9","last_name":"Laks","full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/135869161","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Pour une histoire de l\u2019interpr\u00e9tation de Diog\u00e8ne","main_title":{"title":"Pour une histoire de l\u2019interpr\u00e9tation de Diog\u00e8ne"},"abstract":"This text discusses the interpretation of Diogenes of Apollonia, a philosopher whose work is thought to date back to the 5th century BC. While Diogenes is often referred to as \"the last of the physicists,\" there were other contemporaries who could also claim that title. Despite this, Diogenes' ideas on philosophy represented a culmination of previous philosophies, particularly those of Anaxagoras and Socrates. Diogenes criticized Anaxagoras' perspective and introduced the idea that \"intellection\" is immanent in the air, constructing a new universe based on this premise. The text notes that while Socratic-Platonic critique overshadowed Diogenes' exegesis, his work remains relevant due to its internal critique of Anaxagoras' ideas. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"2008","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/uMTvuWxbtSS0NTk","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":225,"full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1189,"section_of":351,"pages":"21-36","is_catalog":null,"book":null},"article":null},"sort":["Pour une histoire de l\u2019interpr\u00e9tation de Diog\u00e8ne"]}
Title | Speculating about Diogenes |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 2008 |
Published in | The Oxford Handbook of Presocratic Philosophy |
Pages | 353-364 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Laks, André |
Editor(s) | Curd, Patricia , Graham, Daniel W. |
Translator(s) |
Twenty-five years ago, I made an attempt (in my book Diogène d’Apollonie, 1983) to take Diogenes somewhat more seriously than he had usually been taken, at least since Diels’s devastating 1881 article in which he portrayed Diogenes as a second-rate eclectic thinker. Diogenes’ popularity in the last third of the fifth century, which Diels greatly contributed to establishing through an analysis of Diogenian echoes in Aristophanes’ Clouds and was confirmed by the discovery in 1962 of the Derveni Papyrus, went along with Diogenes’ depreciated intellectual status: Are not serious thinkers ignored by the vulgar? Has this attempt been successful? The fact that some collections and translations of Presocratic philosophers leave him out may or may not be significant: some publishers obviously think the corpus is too bulky. But Diogenes is certainly still lacking general recognition. Histories of archaic philosophy tend to overlook him and often offer little more than an implicit justification for his exclusion, the core of which is encapsulated in the term “eclecticism.” What makes him visible is his absence, rather than any discussion about him. One complaint made by a reviewer of the Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy was that it nowhere happens even to mention the one achievement Diogenes is credited with, namely his alleged role in the history of teleology, for which he is occasionally praised. It is all the more noteworthy that Graham, in his recent book, has made of Diogenes a landmark in the history of Presocratic philosophy by making him, rather than the older Anaximenes, the real promoter of the doctrine of “material monism.” I personally tend to think that Diogenes’ contribution, on this point, is rather to have explicitly stated the implications of Anaximenes’ monism, rather than substituting a material monism to an Anaximenean pluralism (Graham’s paradoxical point); but Graham’s book came out after this contribution was submitted and could not be taken into account. I shall consequently restate in a rather perfunctory manner, without adding much to what I have written before, what seem to be two basic points about Diogenes. The first one concerns what I take to be the center of Diogenes’ own thought, namely the relation between his noetics (so I shall call his doctrine of Intelligence) and his teleology; the second is about the reception of Diogenes’ thought and the origin of his reputation as an eclectic. [introduction p. 353-354] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/438sP1InUW9fsIE |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1399","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1399,"authors_free":[{"id":2178,"entry_id":1399,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":225,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","free_first_name":"Andr\u00e9","free_last_name":"Laks","norm_person":{"id":225,"first_name":"Andr\u00e9","last_name":"Laks","full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/135869161","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2181,"entry_id":1399,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":58,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Curd, Patricia","free_first_name":"Patricia","free_last_name":"Curd","norm_person":{"id":58,"first_name":"Patricia","last_name":"Curd","full_name":"Curd, Patricia","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/13843980X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2182,"entry_id":1399,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":374,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Graham, Daniel W.","free_first_name":"Daniel W.","free_last_name":"Graham","norm_person":{"id":374,"first_name":"Daniel W.","last_name":"Graham","full_name":"Graham, Daniel W.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/121454800","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Speculating about Diogenes","main_title":{"title":"Speculating about Diogenes"},"abstract":"Twenty-five years ago, I made an attempt (in my book Diog\u00e8ne d\u2019Apollonie, 1983) to take Diogenes somewhat more seriously than he had usually been taken, at least since Diels\u2019s devastating 1881 article in which he portrayed Diogenes as a second-rate eclectic thinker. Diogenes\u2019 popularity in the last third of the fifth century, which Diels greatly contributed to establishing through an analysis of Diogenian echoes in Aristophanes\u2019 Clouds and was confirmed by the discovery in 1962 of the Derveni Papyrus, went along with Diogenes\u2019 depreciated intellectual status: Are not serious thinkers ignored by the vulgar?\r\n\r\nHas this attempt been successful? The fact that some collections and translations of Presocratic philosophers leave him out may or may not be significant: some publishers obviously think the corpus is too bulky. But Diogenes is certainly still lacking general recognition. Histories of archaic philosophy tend to overlook him and often offer little more than an implicit justification for his exclusion, the core of which is encapsulated in the term \u201ceclecticism.\u201d What makes him visible is his absence, rather than any discussion about him. One complaint made by a reviewer of the Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy was that it nowhere happens even to mention the one achievement Diogenes is credited with, namely his alleged role in the history of teleology, for which he is occasionally praised. It is all the more noteworthy that Graham, in his recent book, has made of Diogenes a landmark in the history of Presocratic philosophy by making him, rather than the older Anaximenes, the real promoter of the doctrine of \u201cmaterial monism.\u201d\r\n\r\nI personally tend to think that Diogenes\u2019 contribution, on this point, is rather to have explicitly stated the implications of Anaximenes\u2019 monism, rather than substituting a material monism to an Anaximenean pluralism (Graham\u2019s paradoxical point); but Graham\u2019s book came out after this contribution was submitted and could not be taken into account. I shall consequently restate in a rather perfunctory manner, without adding much to what I have written before, what seem to be two basic points about Diogenes. The first one concerns what I take to be the center of Diogenes\u2019 own thought, namely the relation between his noetics (so I shall call his doctrine of Intelligence) and his teleology; the second is about the reception of Diogenes\u2019 thought and the origin of his reputation as an eclectic. [introduction p. 353-354]","btype":2,"date":"2008","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/438sP1InUW9fsIE","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":225,"full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":58,"full_name":"Curd, Patricia","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":374,"full_name":"Graham, Daniel W.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1399,"section_of":1400,"pages":"353-364","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1400,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"The Oxford Handbook of Presocratic Philosophy","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Curd2008","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2008","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"The Oxford Handbook of Presocratic Philosophy brings together leading international scholars to study the diverse figures, movements, and approaches that constitute Presocratic philosophy. In the sixth and fifth centuries bc a new kind of thinker appeared in Greek city-states, dedicated to finding the origins of the world and everything in it, using observation and reason rather than tradition and myth. We call these thinkers Presocratic philosophers, and recognize them as the first philosophers of the Western tradition, as well as the originators of scientific thinking. New textual discoveries and new approaches make a reconsideration of the Presocratics at the beginning of the twenty-first century especially timely. More than a survey of scholarship, this study presents new interpretations and evaluations of the Presocratics' accomplishments, from Thales to the sophists, from theology to science, and from pre-philosophical background to their influence on later thinkers. Many positions presented here challenge accepted wisdom and offer alternative accounts of Presocratic theories. This book includes chapters on the Milesians (Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes), Xenophanes, Heraclitus, Parmenides, Anaxagoras, Empedocles, the Pythagoreans, the atomists, and the sophists. Special studies are devoted to the sources of Presocratic philosophy, oriental influences, Hippocratic medicine, cosmology, explanation, epistemology, theology, and the reception of Presocratic thought in Aristotle and other ancient authors. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/mXFwMNnXTnju9zT","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1400,"pubplace":"New York","publisher":"Oxford University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Speculating about Diogenes"]}