Title | The Text Tradition of the Commentary On the Soul attributed to Simplicius |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 2024 |
Published in | Aristoteles-Kommentare und ihre Überlieferung. Wichtige Etappen von der Antike bis in die frühe Neuzeit |
Pages | 225-268 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | Christian Brockmann , Daniel Deckers , Stefano Valente |
Translator(s) |
About fifty years ago I published together with Fernand Bossier an article todemonstrate that theCommentary On the Soultraditionally attributed toSimplicius was not his work, but most probably that of a fellow member ofthe Athenian Academy, Priscian of Lydia.1An examination of the text tradi-tion of the commentary did not yield any indications to question the tradi-tional attribution. Nevertheless, arguments based on style, content, self-refer-ences are so convincing that it is now commonly accepted that the author ofthe commentary is not Simplicius.2The Hamburg colloquium offered me theincentive for a new and comprehensive study of the complicated text tradi-tion of this commentary, which enjoyed an extraordinary fortune in the re-ception of Aristotle’s treatiseOn the Soulamong Byzantine and Renaissancescholars.3For practical reasons, I keep using in this contribution the author’sname ‘Simplicius’ as it is known in the tradition but put it between singlequotations marks to distinguish him from the real Simplicius. [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/j1NGkXq4FVGx9hw |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"245","_score":null,"_source":{"id":245,"authors_free":[{"id":314,"entry_id":245,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2775,"entry_id":245,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Christian Brockmann","free_first_name":"Christian","free_last_name":"Brockmann","norm_person":null},{"id":2776,"entry_id":245,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Daniel Deckers ","free_first_name":"Daniel ","free_last_name":"Deckers","norm_person":null},{"id":2777,"entry_id":245,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Stefano Valente","free_first_name":"Stefano","free_last_name":"Valente","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"The Text Tradition of the Commentary On the Soul attributed to Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"The Text Tradition of the Commentary On the Soul attributed to Simplicius"},"abstract":"About fifty years ago I published together with Fernand Bossier an article todemonstrate that theCommentary On the Soultraditionally attributed toSimplicius was not his work, but most probably that of a fellow member ofthe Athenian Academy, Priscian of Lydia.1An examination of the text tradi-tion of the commentary did not yield any indications to question the tradi-tional attribution. Nevertheless, arguments based on style, content, self-refer-ences are so convincing that it is now commonly accepted that the author ofthe commentary is not Simplicius.2The Hamburg colloquium offered me theincentive for a new and comprehensive study of the complicated text tradi-tion of this commentary, which enjoyed an extraordinary fortune in the re-ception of Aristotle\u2019s treatiseOn the Soulamong Byzantine and Renaissancescholars.3For practical reasons, I keep using in this contribution the author\u2019sname \u2018Simplicius\u2019 as it is known in the tradition but put it between singlequotations marks to distinguish him from the real Simplicius. [author's abstract]","btype":2,"date":"2024","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/j1NGkXq4FVGx9hw","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":245,"pubplace":"","publisher":"","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":{"id":245,"section_of":1573,"pages":"225-268","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1573,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aristoteles-Kommentare und ihre \u00dcberlieferung. Wichtige Etappen von der Antike bis in die fr\u00fche Neuzeit","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Brockmann\/Deckers\/Valente2024","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2024","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"Von der Antike und der Sp\u00e4tantike bis ins Mittelalter und in die Neuzeit stellt die Kommentierung der aristotelischen Schriften eine der fundamentalen Formen philosophischer T\u00e4tigkeit dar. In diesem Sammelband werden wesentliche Etappen der griechischen Kommentartradition zu den Schriften des Aristoteles sowie ihre philosophische und kulturgeschichtliche Bedeutung an ausgew\u00e4hlten Beispielen analysiert und interpretiert. Die Autorinnen und Autoren setzen sich dabei sowohl mit den Manuskripten und der \u00dcberlieferung einzelner Schriften als auch mit der Rezeption und Weiterentwicklung der Aristotelischen Philosophie auseinander.\r\n\r\nDer Kernbestand der hier versammelten Beitr\u00e4ge geht auf die dreit\u00e4gige internationale Konferenz \u201eAristoteles-Kommentare und ihre \u00dcberlieferung in Sp\u00e4tantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance\" (26.\u201328.10.2017) zur\u00fcck, die dank der F\u00f6rderung der Karl und Gertrud Abel-Stiftung an der Universit\u00e4t Hamburg am Centre for the Study of Manuscript Cultures stattgefunden hat. [publisher's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ABLmF9W1WrH4QDt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1573,"pubplace":"Berlin\/Boston","publisher":"De Gruyter","series":"Philosophie der Antike","volume":"44","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":{"id":245,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"unpublished","volume":"","issue":"","pages":""}},"sort":[2024]}
Title | The Text Tradition of the 'Commentary On the Soul' Attributed to Simplicius |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 2024 |
Published in | Aristoteles-Kommentare und ihre Überlieferung. Wichtige Etappen von der Antike bis in die frühe Neuzeit |
Pages | 225-268 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | Deckers, Daniel , Brockmann, Christian , Valente, Stefano |
Translator(s) |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/r4x9UiKcqVzpdhL |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1575","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1575,"authors_free":[{"id":2748,"entry_id":1575,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2749,"entry_id":1575,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":570,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Deckers, Daniel","free_first_name":"Daniel","free_last_name":"Deckers","norm_person":{"id":570,"first_name":"Daniel","last_name":"Deckers","full_name":"Deckers, Daniel","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"https:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1145076017","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2750,"entry_id":1575,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":473,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Brockmann, Christian","free_first_name":"Christian","free_last_name":"Brockmann","norm_person":{"id":473,"first_name":"Christian","last_name":"Brockmann","full_name":"Brockmann, Christian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/137576218","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2751,"entry_id":1575,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":571,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Valente, Stefano","free_first_name":"Stefano","free_last_name":"Valente","norm_person":{"id":571,"first_name":"Stefano","last_name":"Valente","full_name":"Valente, Stefano","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"https:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1147906939","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Text Tradition of the 'Commentary On the Soul' Attributed to Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"The Text Tradition of the 'Commentary On the Soul' Attributed to Simplicius"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"2024","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/r4x9UiKcqVzpdhL","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":570,"full_name":"Deckers, Daniel","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":473,"full_name":"Brockmann, Christian","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":571,"full_name":"Valente, Stefano","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1575,"section_of":1573,"pages":"225-268","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1573,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aristoteles-Kommentare und ihre \u00dcberlieferung. Wichtige Etappen von der Antike bis in die fr\u00fche Neuzeit","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Brockmann\/Deckers\/Valente2024","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2024","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"Von der Antike und der Sp\u00e4tantike bis ins Mittelalter und in die Neuzeit stellt die Kommentierung der aristotelischen Schriften eine der fundamentalen Formen philosophischer T\u00e4tigkeit dar. In diesem Sammelband werden wesentliche Etappen der griechischen Kommentartradition zu den Schriften des Aristoteles sowie ihre philosophische und kulturgeschichtliche Bedeutung an ausgew\u00e4hlten Beispielen analysiert und interpretiert. Die Autorinnen und Autoren setzen sich dabei sowohl mit den Manuskripten und der \u00dcberlieferung einzelner Schriften als auch mit der Rezeption und Weiterentwicklung der Aristotelischen Philosophie auseinander.\r\n\r\nDer Kernbestand der hier versammelten Beitr\u00e4ge geht auf die dreit\u00e4gige internationale Konferenz \u201eAristoteles-Kommentare und ihre \u00dcberlieferung in Sp\u00e4tantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance\" (26.\u201328.10.2017) zur\u00fcck, die dank der F\u00f6rderung der Karl und Gertrud Abel-Stiftung an der Universit\u00e4t Hamburg am Centre for the Study of Manuscript Cultures stattgefunden hat. [publisher's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ABLmF9W1WrH4QDt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1573,"pubplace":"Berlin\/Boston","publisher":"De Gruyter","series":"Philosophie der Antike","volume":"44","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2024]}
Title | The Soul never thinks withous a Phantasm: How platonic commentators interpret a controversal aristotelian Thesis |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 2018 |
Published in | Die Kunst der philosophischen Exegese bei den spätanitken Platon- und Aristoteles Kommentatoren. Akten der 15. Tagung der Karl und Gertrud Abel-Stiftung vom 4. bis 6. Oktober 2012 in Trier |
Pages | 185-223 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, C. |
Editor(s) | Strobel, Benedikt |
Translator(s) |
Even Platonists, it seems, have to accept that the intellective soul, when connected to this earthy body, can never be entirely without imagination, not only in (1) practical thought or in (2) understanding sensible objects or in (3) mathematics, but even in its most excellent thought, (4) the contemplation of the intelligible forms. The role of imagination is, however, different in the four cases, as we have seen. Therefore, a good philosophical teacher will not only warn his students of the danger of imaginations, which may distort their thoughts, but also helps them to train and discipline their imagination so that it may be an obedient servant of the intellect. For that reason, he will use images and fantastic stories besides rational arguments. As Proclus explains in his introduction to his commentary of the myth of Er: The souls, which are by essence intellectual and full of incorporeal and intellectual reasons, have put on (ἐνδυσαμέναις) the imaginative intellect and cannot live without it in this place of generation [...] – for these souls, which have become impassible passible and without figures figurative (γενομέναις ἀπαθέσι παθητικαῖς, ἀμορφώτοις μορφωτικαῖς) this teaching through myths [as here in the myth of Er] is appropriate. Myths are particularly needed for those who only live according to imagination and only have practised the passive intellect, as is the case with the vulgar masses, who are incapable of following a purely rational argument. By contrast, some exceptional souls, which have set their mind on pure intellections, will be content with the intellectual light of the truth without needing the imaginary mise-en-scène of myths. But for us, Proclus says, who are ‘both together and have a twofold intellect’, the one which we really are and the one we have put on and projected outwards (i.e. the passive intellect linked to imagination), we find pleasures both in the fictive clothing of the story and in its deeper truth. Whereas the imaginative intellect ‘is stricken by the external and becomes thus ready for the path towards science,’ our true intellect ‘is nourished by what is inside the stories and becomes the contemplator of truth.’ [conclusion p. 211-212] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/iQkklQKce7ANXjV |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1170","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1170,"authors_free":[{"id":1746,"entry_id":1170,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, C.","free_first_name":"C.","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2507,"entry_id":1170,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":326,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Strobel, Benedikt","free_first_name":"Benedikt","free_last_name":"Strobel","norm_person":{"id":326,"first_name":" Benedikt","last_name":"Strobel,","full_name":"Strobel, Benedikt","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/173882056","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Soul never thinks withous a Phantasm: How platonic commentators interpret a controversal aristotelian Thesis","main_title":{"title":"The Soul never thinks withous a Phantasm: How platonic commentators interpret a controversal aristotelian Thesis"},"abstract":"Even Platonists, it seems, have to accept that the intellective soul, when connected to this earthy body, can never be entirely without imagination, not only in (1) practical thought or in (2) understanding sensible objects or in (3) mathematics, but even in its most excellent thought, (4) the contemplation of the intelligible forms. The role of imagination is, however, different in the four cases, as we have seen. Therefore, a good philosophical teacher will not only warn his students of the danger of imaginations, which may distort their thoughts, but also helps them to train and discipline their imagination so that it may be an obedient servant of the intellect. For that reason, he will use images and fantastic stories besides rational arguments. As Proclus explains in his introduction to his commentary of the myth of Er:\r\n\r\nThe souls, which are by essence intellectual and full of incorporeal and intellectual reasons, have put on (\u1f10\u03bd\u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2) the imaginative intellect and cannot live without it in this place of generation [...] \u2013 for these souls, which have become impassible passible and without figures figurative (\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03ce\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03c9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2) this teaching through myths [as here in the myth of Er] is appropriate.\r\n\r\nMyths are particularly needed for those who only live according to imagination and only have practised the passive intellect, as is the case with the vulgar masses, who are incapable of following a purely rational argument. By contrast, some exceptional souls, which have set their mind on pure intellections, will be content with the intellectual light of the truth without needing the imaginary mise-en-sc\u00e8ne of myths. But for us, Proclus says, who are \u2018both together and have a twofold intellect\u2019, the one which we really are and the one we have put on and projected outwards (i.e. the passive intellect linked to imagination), we find pleasures both in the fictive clothing of the story and in its deeper truth. Whereas the imaginative intellect \u2018is stricken by the external and becomes thus ready for the path towards science,\u2019 our true intellect \u2018is nourished by what is inside the stories and becomes the contemplator of truth.\u2019 [conclusion p. 211-212]","btype":2,"date":"2018","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/iQkklQKce7ANXjV","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":326,"full_name":"Strobel, Benedikt","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1170,"section_of":289,"pages":"185-223","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":289,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Die Kunst der philosophischen Exegese bei den sp\u00e4tanitken Platon- und Aristoteles Kommentatoren. Akten der 15. Tagung der Karl und Gertrud Abel-Stiftung vom 4. bis 6. Oktober 2012 in Trier","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Strobel2019","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2018","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2018","abstract":"This volume uses prominent case examples to examine the amalgam of exegetical and philosophical interests that characterize the literature of Neoplatonist commentary in late antiquity. The essays consistently reveal the linguistic difficulties encountered by the commentators due to the complex relationship between Platonic and Aristotelian theory.","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/rOy7sqluVGEXcC1","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":289,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 Boston","publisher":"De Gruyter","series":"Philosophie der Antike","volume":"36","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2018]}
Title | Surface Reading and Deeper Meaning. On Aristotle reading Plato and Platonists reading Aristotle |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 2013 |
Published in | Argument und literarische Form in antiker Philosophie. Akten des 3. Kongresses der Gesellschaft für antike Philosophie 2010 |
Pages | 469-494 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | Erler, Michael , Heßler, Jan Erik , Blumenfelder, Benedikt (Collaborator) |
Translator(s) |
We are here together to discuss various forms of philosophy in antiquity. There is a surprising variety of literary genres of philosophy so different from the narrow academic format of proceedings, handbooks, and referred journal articles. Already among the works of Aristotle, as the commentators noticed, there is a great variety, and Aristotle always adapted his style to the genre: dialogues, letters, protreptics, documentation works, research discussions, treatises on ethics and politics aiming at a broader public. And if we take the whole literary production of ancient philosophy, the variety is even more impressive. Besides the treatises and commentaries, the summaries and paraphrases, refutations and replies, the handbooks, manuals, and doxographies, there are dialogues and diatribes and orations, letters and catechisms with sentences to be set in practice, epigraphical posters in public city galleries, philosophical poems and political pamphlets, revelations of Hermes Trismegistos, Chaldean oracles, and we must include the manifold Jewish and Christian interpretations of biblical texts, sermons, and theological polemics. They all require other ways of reading and interpreting. The title of this introductory lecture does not mean that I would recommend us to seek for deeper meaning hidden under the many literary forms. It was undoubtedly a very influential hermeneutical model, in particular when combined with the esoteric/exoteric distinction. But in my view, it remains primarily a model for interpreting mythical and sacred texts and, since the secularization of sacred hermeneutics, for reading “challenging literary texts.” It is not a method for the interpretation of philosophical texts, where analysis, insight into the structure of arguments, questioning, and criticism are required. To play with a well-known quote from Thoreau: “In this part of the world (i.e., in philosophy), it is considered a ground for complaint if a man’s writings admit of more than one interpretation.” This refusal of a search for deeper meaning in philosophy, however, does not mean that we should remain just superficial readers, surfing on the text. Let us use all the possibilities we have, including attention to the literary context, to better understand the argument of the author. To avoid the impression that I am finally agreeing with Aristotle against Plato, let me conclude with a remarkable statement of Plato in the Phaedo. It comes from the crucial section of the debate where Socrates starts his critique of Simmias’ argument that the soul is the harmony of the body and will disappear once the substrate is destroyed. All participants are deeply impressed by the harmony argument, and there is an uneasy silence, as they thought it was a fatal blow to Socrates’ belief in immortality, but Socrates is not impressed. He confronts Simmias with a difficult choice: If you stick to the harmony doctrine, you will have to give up the other doctrine you just accepted, because it is incompatible with the harmony thesis, namely that all knowledge is recollection. What will you keep then, Simmias, this new theory or the former you already accepted? Simmias answers without hesitation that he would stand by the anamnesis doctrine. For this other (sc. the doctrine that the soul is like a harmony) came to me without demonstration; it merely seemed probable and attractive, which is the reason why many people hold it. I am conscious that arguments which base their demonstrations on mere probability are deceptive, and if we are not on our guard against them, they deceive us greatly, in geometry and in all other things. When commenting on this passage, Damascius, the last head of the Platonic Academy in Athens, distinguishes between what he calls superficial (ἐπιπόλαιοι) and profound (βαθύτεροι) thinkers, but not in any esoteric sense. Superficial thinkers, he says, “find pleasure in plausible arguments,” based on analogies and comparisons, metaphors. That is why the analogy of the soul with the harmony of the lyre is so attractive. “The more profound thinkers, who scorn the world of senses and its ready-at-hand (πρόχειρον) beliefs, rise above plausibilities and love arguments that are connected by necessity.” In this sense, I would also like to be a ‘profound’ reader ... alas, there arises again a problem. The doctrine that, according to Socrates, is supposedly demonstrated by sound, almost geometrical arguments, and not by analogy, as the rejected harmony thesis, is itself based on analogy and metaphor. For, Aristotle, sitting in this hall, would stand up and say: “What do you mean, Socrates, by that anamnesis? Is it not a metaphor and poetical phrase?” [conclusion p. 490-492] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/3r4OKQesOkyPwb0 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"482","_score":null,"_source":{"id":482,"authors_free":[{"id":653,"entry_id":482,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":654,"entry_id":482,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":164,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Erler, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Erler","norm_person":{"id":164,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Erler","full_name":"Erler, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122153847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2424,"entry_id":482,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":478,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","free_first_name":"Jan Erik","free_last_name":"He\u00dfler","norm_person":{"id":478,"first_name":"Jan Erik","last_name":"He\u00dfler","full_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1059760533","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2425,"entry_id":482,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":479,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Blumenfelder, Benedikt (Collaborator)","free_first_name":"Benedikt","free_last_name":"Blumenfelder","norm_person":{"id":479,"first_name":"Benedikt","last_name":"Blumenfelder","full_name":"Blumenfelder, Benedikt","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Surface Reading and Deeper Meaning. On Aristotle reading Plato and Platonists reading Aristotle","main_title":{"title":"Surface Reading and Deeper Meaning. On Aristotle reading Plato and Platonists reading Aristotle"},"abstract":"We are here together to discuss various forms of philosophy in antiquity. There is a surprising variety of literary genres of philosophy so different from the narrow academic format of proceedings, handbooks, and referred journal articles. Already among the works of Aristotle, as the commentators noticed, there is a great variety, and Aristotle always adapted his style to the genre: dialogues, letters, protreptics, documentation works, research discussions, treatises on ethics and politics aiming at a broader public.\r\n\r\nAnd if we take the whole literary production of ancient philosophy, the variety is even more impressive. Besides the treatises and commentaries, the summaries and paraphrases, refutations and replies, the handbooks, manuals, and doxographies, there are dialogues and diatribes and orations, letters and catechisms with sentences to be set in practice, epigraphical posters in public city galleries, philosophical poems and political pamphlets, revelations of Hermes Trismegistos, Chaldean oracles, and we must include the manifold Jewish and Christian interpretations of biblical texts, sermons, and theological polemics. They all require other ways of reading and interpreting.\r\n\r\nThe title of this introductory lecture does not mean that I would recommend us to seek for deeper meaning hidden under the many literary forms. It was undoubtedly a very influential hermeneutical model, in particular when combined with the esoteric\/exoteric distinction. But in my view, it remains primarily a model for interpreting mythical and sacred texts and, since the secularization of sacred hermeneutics, for reading \u201cchallenging literary texts.\u201d It is not a method for the interpretation of philosophical texts, where analysis, insight into the structure of arguments, questioning, and criticism are required.\r\n\r\nTo play with a well-known quote from Thoreau: \u201cIn this part of the world (i.e., in philosophy), it is considered a ground for complaint if a man\u2019s writings admit of more than one interpretation.\u201d This refusal of a search for deeper meaning in philosophy, however, does not mean that we should remain just superficial readers, surfing on the text. Let us use all the possibilities we have, including attention to the literary context, to better understand the argument of the author.\r\n\r\nTo avoid the impression that I am finally agreeing with Aristotle against Plato, let me conclude with a remarkable statement of Plato in the Phaedo. It comes from the crucial section of the debate where Socrates starts his critique of Simmias\u2019 argument that the soul is the harmony of the body and will disappear once the substrate is destroyed.\r\n\r\nAll participants are deeply impressed by the harmony argument, and there is an uneasy silence, as they thought it was a fatal blow to Socrates\u2019 belief in immortality, but Socrates is not impressed. He confronts Simmias with a difficult choice: If you stick to the harmony doctrine, you will have to give up the other doctrine you just accepted, because it is incompatible with the harmony thesis, namely that all knowledge is recollection. What will you keep then, Simmias, this new theory or the former you already accepted? Simmias answers without hesitation that he would stand by the anamnesis doctrine.\r\n\r\nFor this other (sc. the doctrine that the soul is like a harmony) came to me without demonstration; it merely seemed probable and attractive, which is the reason why many people hold it. I am conscious that arguments which base their demonstrations on mere probability are deceptive, and if we are not on our guard against them, they deceive us greatly, in geometry and in all other things.\r\n\r\nWhen commenting on this passage, Damascius, the last head of the Platonic Academy in Athens, distinguishes between what he calls superficial (\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9) and profound (\u03b2\u03b1\u03b8\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9) thinkers, but not in any esoteric sense. Superficial thinkers, he says, \u201cfind pleasure in plausible arguments,\u201d based on analogies and comparisons, metaphors. That is why the analogy of the soul with the harmony of the lyre is so attractive. \u201cThe more profound thinkers, who scorn the world of senses and its ready-at-hand (\u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd) beliefs, rise above plausibilities and love arguments that are connected by necessity.\u201d\r\n\r\nIn this sense, I would also like to be a \u2018profound\u2019 reader ... alas, there arises again a problem. The doctrine that, according to Socrates, is supposedly demonstrated by sound, almost geometrical arguments, and not by analogy, as the rejected harmony thesis, is itself based on analogy and metaphor.\r\n\r\nFor, Aristotle, sitting in this hall, would stand up and say: \u201cWhat do you mean, Socrates, by that anamnesis? Is it not a metaphor and poetical phrase?\u201d [conclusion p. 490-492]","btype":2,"date":"2013","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/3r4OKQesOkyPwb0","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":164,"full_name":"Erler, Michael ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":478,"full_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":479,"full_name":"Blumenfelder, Benedikt","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":482,"section_of":322,"pages":"469-494","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":322,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Argument und literarische Form in antiker Philosophie. Akten des 3. Kongresses der Gesellschaft f\u00fcr antike Philosophie 2010","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Erler2013","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2013","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2013","abstract":"In der modernen Universit\u00e4t werden Literatur, Philologie und Philosophie als unterschiedliche Bereiche betrachtet. Damit wird eine im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert zunehmende Entfremdung zwischen der Erforschung antiker Philosophie und Philologie manifest, die den urspr\u00fcnglichen Gegebenheiten in der Antike keineswegs gerecht wird. Denn die Philosophie entwickelt sich in Griechenland und Rom in enger Verbindung mit und oft in einem Spannungsverh\u00e4ltnis zu unterschiedlichen literarischen Genres. Dies hat zur Folge, dass die Autoren und Interpreten infolge der Wahl bestimmter Gattungen als Medium philosophischer Botschaften neben der eigentlichen Argumentation auch Darstellungsformen der jeweiligen Gattungen zu w\u00fcrdigen haben. Dieses oft spannungsvolle Verh\u00e4ltnis von philosophischem Argument und literarischer Form auszuleuchten hatte sich der 3. Kongress der Gesellschaft f\u00fcr antike Philosophie vorgenommen. In Vortr\u00e4gen und Diskussionsrunden von Philosophen und Philologen wurde diese Frage unter verschiedenen Aspekten mit Blick auf antike Philosophen verschiedener Epochen lebendig diskutiert. Dieser Band, der den Gro\u00dfteil dieser Beitr\u00e4ge versammelt, mag einen Eindruck von der Diskussion vermitteln und Philologen, Philosophen und an der Antike Interessierte zu weiteren \u00dcberlegungen anregen. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/0QiKNhBCl16gJMn","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":322,"pubplace":"Berlin","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2013]}
Title | ‘Simplicius.’ On Aristotle, On the Soul 3.6–13 |
Type | Edited Book |
Language | English |
Date | 2013 |
Publication Place | Bristol - London |
Publisher | Bristol Classical Press |
Series | Ancient Commentators on Aristotle |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Simplicius |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) | Steel, Carlos(Steel, Carlos ) , Ritups, Arnis(Ritups, Arnis) , |
This is the fourth and last volume of the translation in this series of the commentary on Aristotle On the Soul, wrongly attributed to Simplicius. Its real author, most probably Priscian of Lydia, proves in this work to be an original philosopher who deserves to be studied, not only because of his detailed explanation of an often difficult Aristotelian text, but also because of his own psychological doctrines. In chapter six the author discusses the objects of the intellect. In chapters seven to eight he sees Aristotle as moving towards practical intellect, thus preparing the way for discussing what initiates movement in chapters nine to 11. His interpretation offers a brilliant investigation of practical reasoning and of the interaction between desire and cognition from the level of perception to the intellect. In the commentator's view, Aristotle in the last chapters (12-13) investigates the different type of organic bodies corresponding to the different forms of life (vegetative and sensory, from the most basic, touch, to the most complex). |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/W0nXXZcYBUmaS3B |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"211","_score":null,"_source":{"id":211,"authors_free":[{"id":269,"entry_id":211,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":270,"entry_id":211,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":73,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Ritups, Arnis","free_first_name":"Arnis","free_last_name":"Ritups","norm_person":{"id":73,"first_name":"Arnis","last_name":"Ritups","full_name":"Ritups, Arnis","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1883,"entry_id":211,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":62,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Simplicius","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":62,"first_name":"Cilicius","last_name":"Simplicius ","full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118642421","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"\u2018Simplicius.\u2019 On Aristotle, On the Soul 3.6\u201313","main_title":{"title":"\u2018Simplicius.\u2019 On Aristotle, On the Soul 3.6\u201313"},"abstract":"This is the fourth and last volume of the translation in this series of the commentary on Aristotle On the Soul, wrongly attributed to Simplicius. Its real author, most probably Priscian of Lydia, proves in this work to be an original philosopher who deserves to be studied, not only because of his detailed explanation of an often difficult Aristotelian text, but also because of his own psychological doctrines. In chapter six the author discusses the objects of the intellect. In chapters seven to eight he sees Aristotle as moving towards practical intellect, thus preparing the way for discussing what initiates movement in chapters nine to 11. His interpretation offers a brilliant investigation of practical reasoning and of the interaction between desire and cognition from the level of perception to the intellect. In the commentator's view, Aristotle in the last chapters (12-13) investigates the different type of organic bodies corresponding to the different forms of life (vegetative and sensory, from the most basic, touch, to the most complex).","btype":4,"date":"2013","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/W0nXXZcYBUmaS3B","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":73,"full_name":"Ritups, Arnis","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":62,"full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":211,"pubplace":"Bristol - London","publisher":"Bristol Classical Press","series":"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2013]}
Title | Platons Timaios als Grundtext der Kosmologie in Spätantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance - Plato's Timaeus and the Foundations of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance |
Type | Edited Book |
Language | undefined |
Date | 2005 |
Publication Place | Leuven |
Publisher | Leuven University Press |
Series | Ancient and Medieval Philosophy de Wulf-Mansion Centre, Series 1 |
Volume | 29 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | |
Editor(s) | Leinkauf, Thomas , Steel, Carlos |
Translator(s) |
The particular focus of this volume is a study of the influence of Timaeus on the development of Western cosmology in three axial periods of European culture: Late Antiquity, Middle Ages and Renaissance. In each period, the Timaeus was read in a different context and from different perspectives. During the Middle Ages, scholars were mostly interested in reconciling the rational cosmology of the Timaeus with the Christian understanding of creation. In Late Antiquity, the concordance of Plato with Aristotle was considered the most important issue, whereas in early modern times, the confrontation with the new mathematical physics offered possibilities for a fresh assessment of Plato's explanation of the cosmos. The present volume has three sections corresponding to these three periods of interpreting the Timaeus, each sectionis introduced by a synthesis of the main issues at discussion. This 'epochal' approach gives this volume its particular character. [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/KnuUmtY75XXXeEK |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"321","_score":null,"_source":{"id":321,"authors_free":[{"id":406,"entry_id":321,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":152,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","free_first_name":"Thomas","free_last_name":"Leinkauf","norm_person":{"id":152,"first_name":"Thomas","last_name":"Leinkauf","full_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122040309","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":407,"entry_id":321,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Platons Timaios als Grundtext der Kosmologie in Sp\u00e4tantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance - Plato's Timaeus and the Foundations of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance","main_title":{"title":"Platons Timaios als Grundtext der Kosmologie in Sp\u00e4tantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance - Plato's Timaeus and the Foundations of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance"},"abstract":"The particular focus of this volume is a study of the influence of Timaeus on the development of Western cosmology in three axial periods of European culture: Late Antiquity, Middle Ages and Renaissance. In each period, the Timaeus was read in a different context and from different perspectives. During the Middle Ages, scholars were mostly interested in reconciling the rational cosmology of the Timaeus with the Christian understanding of creation. In Late Antiquity, the concordance of Plato with Aristotle was considered the most important issue, whereas in early modern times, the confrontation with the new mathematical physics offered possibilities for a fresh assessment of Plato's explanation of the cosmos. The present volume has three sections corresponding to these three periods of interpreting the Timaeus, each sectionis introduced by a synthesis of the main issues at discussion. This 'epochal' approach gives this volume its particular character. [author's abstract]","btype":4,"date":"2005","language":"","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/KnuUmtY75XXXeEK","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":152,"full_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":321,"pubplace":"Leuven","publisher":"Leuven University Press","series":"Ancient and Medieval Philosophy de Wulf-Mansion Centre, Series 1","volume":"29","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2005]}
Title | Proclus' Defence of the Timaeus against Aristotle's Objections. A reconstruction of a lost polemical treatise |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 2005 |
Published in | Platons Timaios als Grundtext der Kosmologie in Spätantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance - Plato's Timaeus and the Foundations of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance |
Pages | 163-193 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | Leinkauf, Thomas , Steel, Carlos |
Translator(s) |
In this paper, we have made a reconstruction of an early treatise of Proclus in which he attempted to refute the objections Aristotle had put forward against Plato’s doctrine in the Timaeus. Simplicius, Philoponus, and Proclus himself have been our sources. Proclus recycles the arguments of his earlier treatise in his great commentary on the Timaeus. Philoponus fully exploits Proclus’ treatise against Proclus himself to refute his views on the eternity of the world. In this question and in many others, Philoponus believes Plato and Aristotle are radically opposed. Proclus does not dissimulate their disagreement, but, to Philoponus' anger, he does not take distance from Aristotle's interpretation of the Timaeus in the discussion about the eternity of the world. Instead of sincerely accepting with Plato that the world is generated and temporal, he defects to the Aristotelian view and thus comes in contradiction with his earlier work, as Philoponus demonstrates. Simplicius also read the early treatise of Proclus, and he quotes large extracts from it in his commentary on the De Caelo. Simplicius, who is a great advocate of the harmony of Plato and Aristotle, is often embarrassed with Proclus’ polemics. Whenever Proclus quotes a text from Aristotle to convince the philosopher that he too is “forced” to admit the truth of the Platonic principles, Simplicius makes of it an argument to demonstrate that Aristotle is fundamentally in agreement with Plato. How different their ultimate goals may have been in this polemic, both ideological opponents, Philoponus and Simplicius, offer us valuable information on a lost work of Proclus, in which he attacked Aristotle with youthful zeal in defense of the Timaeus. The treatise witnesses both his admiration for the Timaeus and his irritation at Aristotle’s unfair treatment. [conclusion p. 193] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/kMYAmCjyTBGx2oh |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"483","_score":null,"_source":{"id":483,"authors_free":[{"id":656,"entry_id":483,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":657,"entry_id":483,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":152,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","free_first_name":"Thomas","free_last_name":"Leinkauf","norm_person":{"id":152,"first_name":"Thomas","last_name":"Leinkauf","full_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122040309","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":658,"entry_id":483,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Proclus' Defence of the Timaeus against Aristotle's Objections. A reconstruction of a lost polemical treatise","main_title":{"title":"Proclus' Defence of the Timaeus against Aristotle's Objections. A reconstruction of a lost polemical treatise"},"abstract":"In this paper, we have made a reconstruction of an early treatise of Proclus in which he attempted to refute the objections Aristotle had put forward against Plato\u2019s doctrine in the Timaeus. Simplicius, Philoponus, and Proclus himself have been our sources. Proclus recycles the arguments of his earlier treatise in his great commentary on the Timaeus. Philoponus fully exploits Proclus\u2019 treatise against Proclus himself to refute his views on the eternity of the world.\r\n\r\nIn this question and in many others, Philoponus believes Plato and Aristotle are radically opposed. Proclus does not dissimulate their disagreement, but, to Philoponus' anger, he does not take distance from Aristotle's interpretation of the Timaeus in the discussion about the eternity of the world. Instead of sincerely accepting with Plato that the world is generated and temporal, he defects to the Aristotelian view and thus comes in contradiction with his earlier work, as Philoponus demonstrates.\r\n\r\nSimplicius also read the early treatise of Proclus, and he quotes large extracts from it in his commentary on the De Caelo. Simplicius, who is a great advocate of the harmony of Plato and Aristotle, is often embarrassed with Proclus\u2019 polemics. Whenever Proclus quotes a text from Aristotle to convince the philosopher that he too is \u201cforced\u201d to admit the truth of the Platonic principles, Simplicius makes of it an argument to demonstrate that Aristotle is fundamentally in agreement with Plato.\r\n\r\nHow different their ultimate goals may have been in this polemic, both ideological opponents, Philoponus and Simplicius, offer us valuable information on a lost work of Proclus, in which he attacked Aristotle with youthful zeal in defense of the Timaeus. The treatise witnesses both his admiration for the Timaeus and his irritation at Aristotle\u2019s unfair treatment. [conclusion p. 193]","btype":2,"date":"2005","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/kMYAmCjyTBGx2oh","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":152,"full_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":483,"section_of":321,"pages":"163-193","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":321,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Platons Timaios als Grundtext der Kosmologie in Sp\u00e4tantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance - Plato's Timaeus and the Foundations of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Leinkauf\/Steel2005","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2005","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2005","abstract":"The particular focus of this volume is a study of the influence of Timaeus on the development of Western cosmology in three axial periods of European culture: Late Antiquity, Middle Ages and Renaissance. In each period, the Timaeus was read in a different context and from different perspectives. During the Middle Ages, scholars were mostly interested in reconciling the rational cosmology of the Timaeus with the Christian understanding of creation. In Late Antiquity, the concordance of Plato with Aristotle was considered the most important issue, whereas in early modern times, the confrontation with the new mathematical physics offered possibilities for a fresh assessment of Plato's explanation of the cosmos. The present volume has three sections corresponding to these three periods of interpreting the Timaeus, each sectionis introduced by a synthesis of the main issues at discussion. This 'epochal' approach gives this volume its particular character. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/KnuUmtY75XXXeEK","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":321,"pubplace":"Leuven","publisher":"Leuven University Press","series":"Ancient and Medieval Philosophy de Wulf-Mansion Centre, Series 1","volume":"29","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2005]}
Title | Plato's Timaeus in Simplicius' In De Caelo. A confrontation with Alexander |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 2005 |
Published in | Platons Timaios als Grundtext der Kosmologie in Spätantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance - Plato's Timaeus and the Foundations of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance |
Pages | 195-212 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Guldentops, Guy |
Editor(s) | Steel, Carlos , Leinkauf, Thomas |
Translator(s) |
In this paper, I shall try to shed some light on Simplicius’ use of the Ti maeus in his commentary on De Caelo, and particularly on the difference between his own interpretation and that of Alexander of Aphrodisias. [...] In what follows, I’ll try to detail some differences between Alexander’s and Simplicius' uses and interpretations o f the Timaeus-, in particular, I’ll focus on their arguments concerning the generation of the world, the world soul, and the immobility of the earth. Before looking at some selected pas sages, however, it is necessary to outline Simplicius’ general attitude toward Alexander of Aphrodisias and to sketch their overall interpretations of the theme of De Caelo. [Introduction, pp. 196 f.] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/650gVOAyvHZdk8u |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"526","_score":null,"_source":{"id":526,"authors_free":[{"id":736,"entry_id":526,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":151,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Guldentops, Guy","free_first_name":"Guy","free_last_name":"Guldentops","norm_person":{"id":151,"first_name":"Guy","last_name":"Guldentops","full_name":"Guldentops, Guy","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1031934898","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":737,"entry_id":526,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":738,"entry_id":526,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":152,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","free_first_name":"Thomas","free_last_name":"Leinkauf","norm_person":{"id":152,"first_name":"Thomas","last_name":"Leinkauf","full_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122040309","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Plato's Timaeus in Simplicius' In De Caelo. A confrontation with Alexander","main_title":{"title":"Plato's Timaeus in Simplicius' In De Caelo. A confrontation with Alexander"},"abstract":"In this paper, I shall try to shed some light on Simplicius\u2019 use of the Ti\u00ad\r\nmaeus in his commentary on De Caelo, and particularly on the difference \r\nbetween his own interpretation and that of Alexander of Aphrodisias. [...] In what follows, I\u2019ll try to detail some differences between Alexander\u2019s \r\nand Simplicius' uses and interpretations o f the Timaeus-, in particular, I\u2019ll \r\nfocus on their arguments concerning the generation of the world, the world \r\nsoul, and the immobility of the earth. Before looking at some selected pas\u00ad\r\nsages, however, it is necessary to outline Simplicius\u2019 general attitude toward \r\nAlexander of Aphrodisias and to sketch their overall interpretations of the \r\ntheme of De Caelo. [Introduction, pp. 196 f.]","btype":2,"date":"2005","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/650gVOAyvHZdk8u","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":151,"full_name":"Guldentops, Guy","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":152,"full_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":526,"section_of":321,"pages":"195-212","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":321,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Platons Timaios als Grundtext der Kosmologie in Sp\u00e4tantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance - Plato's Timaeus and the Foundations of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Leinkauf\/Steel2005","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2005","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2005","abstract":"The particular focus of this volume is a study of the influence of Timaeus on the development of Western cosmology in three axial periods of European culture: Late Antiquity, Middle Ages and Renaissance. In each period, the Timaeus was read in a different context and from different perspectives. During the Middle Ages, scholars were mostly interested in reconciling the rational cosmology of the Timaeus with the Christian understanding of creation. In Late Antiquity, the concordance of Plato with Aristotle was considered the most important issue, whereas in early modern times, the confrontation with the new mathematical physics offered possibilities for a fresh assessment of Plato's explanation of the cosmos. The present volume has three sections corresponding to these three periods of interpreting the Timaeus, each sectionis introduced by a synthesis of the main issues at discussion. This 'epochal' approach gives this volume its particular character. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/KnuUmtY75XXXeEK","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":321,"pubplace":"Leuven","publisher":"Leuven University Press","series":"Ancient and Medieval Philosophy de Wulf-Mansion Centre, Series 1","volume":"29","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2005]}
Title | Neue Forschungen zum Neuplatonismus (1995-2003). Teil II |
Type | Article |
Language | German |
Date | 2004 |
Journal | Allgemeine Zeitschrift für Philosophie |
Volume | 29 |
Pages | 225-247 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos , Helmig, Christoph |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
Dieser Artikel berichtete über weniger als zehn Jahre Forschung im Bereich des Neuplatonismus. Und doch ist es erfreulich festzustellen, wie viel seit Mitte der 90er Jahre zustande gekommen ist, auch wenn es für die Zukunft noch viel zu tun gibt. Die Aufgabe stellt sich in doppelter Hinsicht: philologisch und philosophisch. In erster Linie ist es notwendig, das so rasant angewachsene Interesse für die neuplatonische Philosophie dahingehend zu nutzen, dass die Editionen und kommentierten Übersetzungen wichtiger Texte weitergeführt werden. Das ist eine intensive, mühevolle und oft undankbare Arbeit, weil so etwas im heutigen „Forschungsklima“ nicht immer in ausreichendem Maße gewürdigt wird. Und dennoch bleibt es eine der drängendsten Aufgaben, und das umso mehr, weil wir befürchten müssen, dass die Kenntnis der alten Sprachen immer weiter zurückgeht. Wie im Mittelalter die antike Philosophie nur überleben und neuen Einfluss gewinnen konnte durch massive Übersetzungsaktivitäten (ins Arabische und Lateinische), so werden in diesem Jahrhundert – ob man es nun bedauert oder nicht – viele neuplatonische Autoren nur noch in Reihen wie „The Ancient Commentators on Aristotle“ oder in anderen Übersetzungen gelesen werden. Darum ist es wichtig, dass die Übersetzungen zuverlässig sind und auf guten Editionen fußen. Es wäre daher wünschenswert, dass gerade auch in Deutschland vermehrt zentrale Texte aus dem späteren Neuplatonismus übersetzt und kommentiert würden. Aber neben dieser Editions- und Übersetzungsarbeit sollte das eigentliche Ziel der Forschung eine philosophische Annäherung sein an diese große Tradition der Geistesgeschichte mit ihren vielfachen kulturellen Verzweigungen im Mittelalter (von Syrien über den Irak und Andalusien bis nach Köln), in der Renaissance und in der Neuzeit. Dabei müssen wir uns aber davor hüten, den Neuplatonismus allzu leicht mit Schwärmerei oder einer Art von Esoterik in Verbindung zu bringen. Er ist und bleibt vor allem eine Philosophie, auch wenn er eine Philosophie ist, die rational die Grenzen der Rationalität einsieht. Gerade in der deutschsprachigen Forschung haben wir schöne Beispiele für ein fruchtbares Zusammengehen von philologischer akribeia und philosophischer Annäherung. Ein Paradigma einer solchen Forschung am Neuplatonismus bleiben für uns die zahlreichen philosophisch anregenden Arbeiten von Werner Beierwaltes. [p. 246-247] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/J1gdFPhAmlKlP6l |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"481","_score":null,"_source":{"id":481,"authors_free":[{"id":651,"entry_id":481,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":652,"entry_id":481,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":146,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Helmig, Christoph","free_first_name":"Christoph","free_last_name":"Helmig","norm_person":{"id":146,"first_name":"Christoph","last_name":"Helmig","full_name":"Helmig, Christoph","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1107028760","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Neue Forschungen zum Neuplatonismus (1995-2003). Teil II","main_title":{"title":"Neue Forschungen zum Neuplatonismus (1995-2003). Teil II"},"abstract":"Dieser Artikel berichtete \u00fcber weniger als zehn Jahre Forschung im Bereich des Neuplatonismus. Und doch ist es erfreulich festzustellen, wie viel seit Mitte der 90er Jahre zustande gekommen ist, auch wenn es f\u00fcr die Zukunft noch viel zu tun gibt. Die Aufgabe stellt sich in doppelter Hinsicht: philologisch und philosophisch.\r\n\r\nIn erster Linie ist es notwendig, das so rasant angewachsene Interesse f\u00fcr die neuplatonische Philosophie dahingehend zu nutzen, dass die Editionen und kommentierten \u00dcbersetzungen wichtiger Texte weitergef\u00fchrt werden. Das ist eine intensive, m\u00fchevolle und oft undankbare Arbeit, weil so etwas im heutigen \u201eForschungsklima\u201c nicht immer in ausreichendem Ma\u00dfe gew\u00fcrdigt wird. Und dennoch bleibt es eine der dr\u00e4ngendsten Aufgaben, und das umso mehr, weil wir bef\u00fcrchten m\u00fcssen, dass die Kenntnis der alten Sprachen immer weiter zur\u00fcckgeht.\r\n\r\nWie im Mittelalter die antike Philosophie nur \u00fcberleben und neuen Einfluss gewinnen konnte durch massive \u00dcbersetzungsaktivit\u00e4ten (ins Arabische und Lateinische), so werden in diesem Jahrhundert \u2013 ob man es nun bedauert oder nicht \u2013 viele neuplatonische Autoren nur noch in Reihen wie \u201eThe Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\u201c oder in anderen \u00dcbersetzungen gelesen werden. Darum ist es wichtig, dass die \u00dcbersetzungen zuverl\u00e4ssig sind und auf guten Editionen fu\u00dfen.\r\n\r\nEs w\u00e4re daher w\u00fcnschenswert, dass gerade auch in Deutschland vermehrt zentrale Texte aus dem sp\u00e4teren Neuplatonismus \u00fcbersetzt und kommentiert w\u00fcrden. Aber neben dieser Editions- und \u00dcbersetzungsarbeit sollte das eigentliche Ziel der Forschung eine philosophische Ann\u00e4herung sein an diese gro\u00dfe Tradition der Geistesgeschichte mit ihren vielfachen kulturellen Verzweigungen im Mittelalter (von Syrien \u00fcber den Irak und Andalusien bis nach K\u00f6ln), in der Renaissance und in der Neuzeit.\r\n\r\nDabei m\u00fcssen wir uns aber davor h\u00fcten, den Neuplatonismus allzu leicht mit Schw\u00e4rmerei oder einer Art von Esoterik in Verbindung zu bringen. Er ist und bleibt vor allem eine Philosophie, auch wenn er eine Philosophie ist, die rational die Grenzen der Rationalit\u00e4t einsieht.\r\n\r\nGerade in der deutschsprachigen Forschung haben wir sch\u00f6ne Beispiele f\u00fcr ein fruchtbares Zusammengehen von philologischer akribeia und philosophischer Ann\u00e4herung. Ein Paradigma einer solchen Forschung am Neuplatonismus bleiben f\u00fcr uns die zahlreichen philosophisch anregenden Arbeiten von Werner Beierwaltes. [p. 246-247]","btype":3,"date":"2004","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/J1gdFPhAmlKlP6l","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":146,"full_name":"Helmig, Christoph","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":481,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Allgemeine Zeitschrift f\u00fcr Philosophie","volume":"29","issue":"","pages":"225-247"}},"sort":[2004]}
Title | Proclus: On the Existence of Evils |
Type | Monograph |
Language | English |
Date | 2003 |
Publication Place | London |
Publisher | Bloomsbury Academic |
Series | Ancient Commentators on Aristotle |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Opsomer, Jan , Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) | Opsomer, Jan() , Steel, Carlos() . |
Proclus’ On the Existence of Evils is not a commentary, but helps to compensate for the dearth of Neoplatonist ethical commentaries. The central question addressed in the work is: how can there be evil in a providential world? Neoplatonists agree that it cannot be caused by higher and worthier beings. Plotinus had said that evil is matter, which, unlike Aristotle, he collapsed into mere privation or lack, thus reducing its reality. He also protected higher causes from responsibility by saying that evil may result from a combination of goods. Proclus objects: evil is real, and not a privation. Rather, it is a parasite feeding off good. Parasites have no proper cause, and higher beings are thus vindicated as being the causes only of the good off which evil feeds. [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/jf422McdNmgpCnP |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1442","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1442,"authors_free":[{"id":2303,"entry_id":1442,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":211,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Opsomer, Jan","free_first_name":"Jan","free_last_name":"Opsomer","norm_person":{"id":211,"first_name":"Jan","last_name":"Opsomer","full_name":"Opsomer, Jan","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1120966310","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2304,"entry_id":1442,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2657,"entry_id":1442,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Opsomer, Jan","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":null},{"id":2658,"entry_id":1442,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Proclus: On the Existence of Evils","main_title":{"title":"Proclus: On the Existence of Evils"},"abstract":"Proclus\u2019 On the Existence of Evils is not a commentary, but helps to compensate for the dearth of Neoplatonist ethical commentaries. The central question addressed in the work is: how can there be evil in a providential world? Neoplatonists agree that it cannot be caused by higher and worthier beings. Plotinus had said that evil is matter, which, unlike Aristotle, he collapsed into mere privation or lack, thus reducing its reality. He also protected higher causes from responsibility by saying that evil may result from a combination of goods. Proclus objects: evil is real, and not a privation. Rather, it is a parasite feeding off good. Parasites have no proper cause, and higher beings are thus vindicated as being the causes only of the good off which evil feeds. [author's abstract]","btype":1,"date":"2003","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/jf422McdNmgpCnP","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":211,"full_name":"Opsomer, Jan","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":1442,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Bloomsbury Academic","series":"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2003]}
Title | La triade chaldaïque ἔρως, ἀλήθεια, πίστις: De Proclus à Simplicius |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 2000 |
Published in | Proclus et la théologie platonicienne. Actes du colloque international de Louvain (13 -16 mai 1998). En l'honneur de H.D. Saffrey et L.G. Westerink |
Pages | 459-489 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hoffmann, Philippe |
Editor(s) | Segonds, A. Ph. , Steel, Carlos , Mettraux, A. F. (Coll.) , Luna, Concetta (Coll.) |
Translator(s) |
L'analyse des textes montre que dans l’œuvre de Simplicius s'établit une correspondance ferme entre le prologue de son Commentaire à la Physique et la prière finale du Commentaire au De caelo. Selon l’ordre néoplatonicien de lecture des traités d'Aristote, la Physique précède le De caelo. Ne peut-on, dans ces conditions, et malgré un ordre chronologique de composition inverse, expliquer par une raison de fond - c'est-à-dire par une sorte de continuité intentionnelle entre les deux ouvrages - l’absence d’une prière à la fin du Commentaire à la Physique, en considérant que la prière finale de l'In De caelo couronne à la fois ces deux commentaires, puisque l'un comme l'autre instruisent une polémique contre l'impiété de Jean Philopon, et font remonter l'exégète - et avec lui ses lecteurs - jusqu’à une forme d'union avec le corps céleste et avec le Démiurge, c’est-à-dire jusqu'à une « sympathie » donatrice de félicité? Ainsi se trouve atteint le telos évoqué dans le prologue du Commentaire aux Catégories, tandis qu'un fil thématique précis unit les trois Commentaires de Simplicius sur Aristote. [conclusion, p. 489] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/Z6GulpIldCyTgq3 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"681","_score":null,"_source":{"id":681,"authors_free":[{"id":1009,"entry_id":681,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":138,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe","free_first_name":"Philippe","free_last_name":"Hoffmann","norm_person":{"id":138,"first_name":"Philippe ","last_name":"Hoffmann","full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/189361905","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1010,"entry_id":681,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":196,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Segonds, A. Ph.","free_first_name":"A. Ph. ","free_last_name":"Segonds","norm_person":{"id":196,"first_name":"A. Ph. ","last_name":"Segonds","full_name":"Segonds, A. Ph.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1031742743","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2039,"entry_id":681,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2395,"entry_id":681,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":461,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Mettraux, A. F. (Coll.)","free_first_name":"A. F.","free_last_name":"Mettraux","norm_person":{"id":461,"first_name":"A. F.","last_name":"Mettraux","full_name":"Mettraux, A. F. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2396,"entry_id":681,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":458,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Luna, Concetta (Coll.)","free_first_name":"Concetta","free_last_name":"Luna","norm_person":{"id":458,"first_name":"Concetta","last_name":"Luna","full_name":"Luna, Concetta","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1153489031","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"La triade chalda\u00efque \u1f14\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2: De Proclus \u00e0 Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"La triade chalda\u00efque \u1f14\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2: De Proclus \u00e0 Simplicius"},"abstract":"L'analyse des textes montre que dans l\u2019\u0153uvre de Simplicius s'\u00e9tablit une correspondance ferme entre le prologue de son Commentaire \u00e0 la Physique et la pri\u00e8re finale du Commentaire au \r\nDe caelo. Selon l\u2019ordre n\u00e9oplatonicien de lecture des trait\u00e9s d'Aristote, la Physique pr\u00e9c\u00e8de le De caelo. Ne peut-on, dans ces conditions, et malgr\u00e9 un ordre chronologique de composition in\u00adverse, expliquer par une raison de fond - c'est-\u00e0-dire par une sorte de continuit\u00e9 intentionnelle entre les deux ouvrages - \r\nl\u2019absence d\u2019une pri\u00e8re \u00e0 la fin du Commentaire \u00e0 la Physique, en consid\u00e9rant que la pri\u00e8re finale de l'In De caelo couronne \u00e0 la fois \r\nces deux commentaires, puisque l'un comme l'autre instruisent une pol\u00e9mique contre l'impi\u00e9t\u00e9 de Jean Philopon, et font remonter l'ex\u00e9g\u00e8te - et avec lui ses lecteurs - jusqu\u2019\u00e0 une forme d'union avec le corps c\u00e9leste et avec le D\u00e9miurge, c\u2019est-\u00e0-dire jusqu'\u00e0 une \r\n\u00ab sympathie \u00bb donatrice de f\u00e9licit\u00e9? Ainsi se trouve atteint le telos \u00e9voqu\u00e9 dans le prologue du Commentaire aux Cat\u00e9gories, tandis qu'un fil th\u00e9matique pr\u00e9cis unit les trois Commentaires de Simplicius sur Aristote. [conclusion, p. 489]","btype":2,"date":"2000","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Z6GulpIldCyTgq3","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":138,"full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":196,"full_name":"Segonds, A. Ph.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":461,"full_name":"Mettraux, A. F. ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":458,"full_name":"Luna, Concetta","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":681,"section_of":369,"pages":"459-489","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":369,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Proclus et la th\u00e9ologie platonicienne. Actes du colloque international de Louvain (13 -16 mai 1998). En l'honneur de H.D. Saffrey et L.G. Westerink","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Segonds2000","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2000","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2000","abstract":"In his Platonic Theology, Proclus offers a systematic exposition of the theology of Plato. Integrating within the \u2018scienti-fic\u2019 framework of the Parmenides all the theological doctrines which are scattered throughout the Plato\u2019s dialogues, Proclus develops the Platonic doctrines on the One, the gods and the hierarchical procession of reality.\r\n\r\nThe present volume, which celebrates the completion of the critical edition of Proclus\u2019 Platonic Theology by H.-D. Saffrey and L.G. Westerink (+), contains thirty-one contributions by leading scholars in the field of Neoplatonic studies. They present their views on the organisation and principles of Proclus\u2019 theology, on the hermeneutics of Platonic dialogues, on the antecedents of this theological synthesis, and on its posterity, from Proclus\u2019 immediate successors through the Byzantine, Arabic and Latin Middle Ages.\r\n\r\nThis monumental volume, which is the result of three decades of dedicated scholarly research on the philosophy of Proclus, will stand for many years as an indispensable guide for all those interested in Neoplatonic studies. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/SbKzMkxqkUtsN6U","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":369,"pubplace":"Leuven - Paris","publisher":"Leuven University Press - Paris Les Belles Lettres","series":"Ancient and medieval philosophy, Series 1","volume":"26","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2000]}
Title | Proclus et la théologie platonicienne. Actes du colloque international de Louvain (13 -16 mai 1998). En l'honneur de H.D. Saffrey et L.G. Westerink |
Type | Edited Book |
Language | undefined |
Date | 2000 |
Publication Place | Leuven - Paris |
Publisher | Leuven University Press - Paris Les Belles Lettres |
Series | Ancient and medieval philosophy, Series 1 |
Volume | 26 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | |
Editor(s) | Segonds, A. Ph. , Steel, Carlos , Luna, Concetta (Coll.) , Mettraux, A. F. (Coll.) |
Translator(s) |
In his Platonic Theology, Proclus offers a systematic exposition of the theology of Plato. Integrating within the ‘scienti-fic’ framework of the Parmenides all the theological doctrines which are scattered throughout the Plato’s dialogues, Proclus develops the Platonic doctrines on the One, the gods and the hierarchical procession of reality. The present volume, which celebrates the completion of the critical edition of Proclus’ Platonic Theology by H.-D. Saffrey and L.G. Westerink (+), contains thirty-one contributions by leading scholars in the field of Neoplatonic studies. They present their views on the organisation and principles of Proclus’ theology, on the hermeneutics of Platonic dialogues, on the antecedents of this theological synthesis, and on its posterity, from Proclus’ immediate successors through the Byzantine, Arabic and Latin Middle Ages. This monumental volume, which is the result of three decades of dedicated scholarly research on the philosophy of Proclus, will stand for many years as an indispensable guide for all those interested in Neoplatonic studies. [official abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/SbKzMkxqkUtsN6U |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"369","_score":null,"_source":{"id":369,"authors_free":[{"id":486,"entry_id":369,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":196,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Segonds, A. Ph.","free_first_name":"A. Ph.","free_last_name":"Segonds","norm_person":{"id":196,"first_name":"A. Ph. ","last_name":"Segonds","full_name":"Segonds, A. Ph.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1031742743","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2040,"entry_id":369,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2393,"entry_id":369,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":458,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Luna, Concetta (Coll.)","free_first_name":"Concetta","free_last_name":"Luna","norm_person":{"id":458,"first_name":"Concetta","last_name":"Luna","full_name":"Luna, Concetta","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1153489031","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2394,"entry_id":369,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":461,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Mettraux, A. F. (Coll.)","free_first_name":"A. F.","free_last_name":"Mettraux","norm_person":{"id":461,"first_name":"A. F.","last_name":"Mettraux","full_name":"Mettraux, A. F. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Proclus et la th\u00e9ologie platonicienne. Actes du colloque international de Louvain (13 -16 mai 1998). En l'honneur de H.D. Saffrey et L.G. Westerink","main_title":{"title":"Proclus et la th\u00e9ologie platonicienne. Actes du colloque international de Louvain (13 -16 mai 1998). En l'honneur de H.D. Saffrey et L.G. Westerink"},"abstract":"In his Platonic Theology, Proclus offers a systematic exposition of the theology of Plato. Integrating within the \u2018scienti-fic\u2019 framework of the Parmenides all the theological doctrines which are scattered throughout the Plato\u2019s dialogues, Proclus develops the Platonic doctrines on the One, the gods and the hierarchical procession of reality.\r\n\r\nThe present volume, which celebrates the completion of the critical edition of Proclus\u2019 Platonic Theology by H.-D. Saffrey and L.G. Westerink (+), contains thirty-one contributions by leading scholars in the field of Neoplatonic studies. They present their views on the organisation and principles of Proclus\u2019 theology, on the hermeneutics of Platonic dialogues, on the antecedents of this theological synthesis, and on its posterity, from Proclus\u2019 immediate successors through the Byzantine, Arabic and Latin Middle Ages.\r\n\r\nThis monumental volume, which is the result of three decades of dedicated scholarly research on the philosophy of Proclus, will stand for many years as an indispensable guide for all those interested in Neoplatonic studies. [official abstract]","btype":4,"date":"2000","language":"","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/SbKzMkxqkUtsN6U","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":196,"full_name":"Segonds, A. Ph.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":458,"full_name":"Luna, Concetta","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":461,"full_name":"Mettraux, A. F. ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":369,"pubplace":"Leuven - Paris","publisher":"Leuven University Press - Paris Les Belles Lettres","series":"Ancient and medieval philosophy, Series 1","volume":"26","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2000]}
Title | Priscian: On Theophrastus on Sense-Perception with 'Simplicius': On Aristotle On the Soul 2.5-12 |
Type | Edited Book |
Language | English |
Date | 1997 |
Publication Place | London |
Publisher | Duckworth |
Series | Ancient commentators on Aristotle |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Simplicius , Priscianus |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) | Huby, Pamela M.(Huby, Pamela M.) , Steel, Carlos(Steel, Carlos ) , |
Simplicius and Priscian were two of the seven Neoplatonists who left Athens when the Christian Emperor Justinian closed the paganschool there in A.D. 529. The commentaries ascribed to them on works on sense-perception, one by Aristotle and one by his successor Theophrastus, are translated here in this single volume. Both commentaries give a highly Neoplatonic reading to their Aristotelian subjects and tell us much about late Neoplatonist psychology. This volume is also designed to enable readers to assess a recent major controversy: it has been argued by Carlos Steel and Fernand Bossier that the commentary ascribed to Simplicius is in fact by Priscian, and their article, hitherto only available in Dutch, is here published in revised form and in English for the first time. This book therefore contains all the evidence necessary for readers to judge this intriguing question for themselves. [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/hL1tgg0HzTg3lxb |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"142","_score":null,"_source":{"id":142,"authors_free":[{"id":2498,"entry_id":142,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":200,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Huby, Pamela M.","free_first_name":"Pamela M.","free_last_name":"Huby","norm_person":{"id":200,"first_name":"Pamela M.","last_name":"Huby","full_name":"Huby, Pamela M.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/120868962","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2500,"entry_id":142,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2519,"entry_id":142,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":62,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Simplicius","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":62,"first_name":"Cilicius","last_name":"Simplicius ","full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118642421","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2520,"entry_id":142,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":369,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Priscianus","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":369,"first_name":"","last_name":"","full_name":"Priscianus","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118596624","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Priscian: On Theophrastus on Sense-Perception with 'Simplicius': On Aristotle On the Soul 2.5-12","main_title":{"title":"Priscian: On Theophrastus on Sense-Perception with 'Simplicius': On Aristotle On the Soul 2.5-12"},"abstract":"Simplicius and Priscian were two of the seven Neoplatonists who left Athens when the Christian Emperor Justinian closed the paganschool there in A.D. 529. The commentaries ascribed to them on works on sense-perception, one by Aristotle and one by his successor Theophrastus, are translated here in this single volume. Both commentaries give a highly Neoplatonic reading to their Aristotelian subjects and tell us much about late Neoplatonist psychology.\r\nThis volume is also designed to enable readers to assess a recent major controversy: it has been argued by Carlos Steel and Fernand Bossier that the commentary ascribed to Simplicius is in fact by Priscian, and their article, hitherto only available in Dutch, is here published in revised form and in English for the first time. This book therefore contains all the evidence necessary for readers to judge this intriguing question for themselves. [author's abstract]","btype":4,"date":"1997","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/hL1tgg0HzTg3lxb","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":200,"full_name":"Huby, Pamela M.","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":62,"full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":369,"full_name":"Priscianus","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":142,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"Ancient commentators on Aristotle","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[1997]}
Title | Simplicius, On Aristotle 'On the Soul 2.5–12' |
Type | Monograph |
Language | English |
Date | 1997 |
Publication Place | London |
Publisher | Duckworth |
Series | Ancient Commentators on Aristotle |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Simplicius |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) | Steel, Carlos(Steel, Carlos ) . |
This is the fourth and last volume of the translation in this series of the commentary on Aristotle On the Soul, wrongly attributed to Simplicius. Its real author, most probably Priscian of Lydia, proves in this work to be an original philosopher who deserves to be studied, not only because of his detailed explanation of an often difficult Aristotelian text, but also because of his own psychological doctrines. In chapter six the author discusses the objects of the intellect. In chapters seven to eight he sees Aristotle as moving towards practical intellect, thus preparing the way for discussing what initiates movement in chapters nine to 11. His interpretation offers a brilliant investigation of practical reasoning and of the interaction between desire and cognition from the level of perception to the intellect. In the commentator's view, Aristotle in the last chapters (12-13) investigates the different type of organic bodies corresponding to the different forms of life (vegetative and sensory, from the most basic, touch, to the most complex). [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/RDdJthQ7ArOSLv5 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1446","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1446,"authors_free":[{"id":2315,"entry_id":1446,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":62,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Simplicius","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":62,"first_name":"Cilicius","last_name":"Simplicius ","full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118642421","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2316,"entry_id":1446,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius, On Aristotle 'On the Soul 2.5\u201312'","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius, On Aristotle 'On the Soul 2.5\u201312'"},"abstract":"This is the fourth and last volume of the translation in this series of the commentary on Aristotle On the Soul, wrongly attributed to Simplicius. Its real author, most probably Priscian of Lydia, proves in this work to be an original philosopher who deserves to be studied, not only because of his detailed explanation of an often difficult Aristotelian text, but also because of his own psychological doctrines. In chapter six the author discusses the objects of the intellect. In chapters seven to eight he sees Aristotle as moving towards practical intellect, thus preparing the way for discussing what initiates movement in chapters nine to 11. His interpretation offers a brilliant investigation of practical reasoning and of the interaction between desire and cognition from the level of perception to the intellect. In the commentator's view, Aristotle in the last chapters (12-13) investigates the different type of organic bodies corresponding to the different forms of life (vegetative and sensory, from the most basic, touch, to the most complex). [author's abstract]","btype":1,"date":"1997","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/RDdJthQ7ArOSLv5","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":62,"full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}}],"book":{"id":1446,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[1997]}
Title | Guillaume de Moerbeke et Saint Thomas |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1989 |
Published in | Guillaume de Moerbeke. Recueil d’études à l’occasion du 700e anniversaire de sa mort (1286) |
Pages | 57-82 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | Brams, Jozef , Vanhamel, Willy |
Translator(s) |
On peut difficilement expliquer l’utilisation privilégiée des traductions de Moerbeke dont témoigne l’œuvre de saint Thomas, si on n’admet pas que les deux hommes aient été en relation directe. Certes, Guillaume a commencé son projet de traduction sans l’initiative ou l’encouragement de Thomas. Mais, quand ce dernier eut pris connaissance du travail de son confrère (probablement lors d’une rencontre à Viterbe), il a commencé à utiliser ses traductions. Il est même probable qu’il a commandé quelques fois lui-même une traduction. Les données manquent pour pouvoir parler d’une véritable collaboration entre les deux hommes. D’ailleurs, je n’ai pas l’impression que leurs intérêts intellectuels étaient convergents. Si on peut prendre le prologue de la Perspectiva de Witelo comme un témoignage indirect sur la pensée de Guillaume, il semble qu’il avait une préférence pour une philosophie platonisante, avec un intérêt particulier pour la philosophie de la nature et l’astronomie (-logie?). Il avait probablement plus de connaturalité intellectuelle avec son jeune ami et compatriote Henri Bate (qui lui a dédié son traité sur la composition de l’astrolabe) qu’avec le théologien-philosophe Thomas d’Aquin. Quoi qu’il en soit, il est hors de doute que Thomas a pu profiter largement du travail de son confrère. Selon la tradition, Thomas aurait pris des initiatives pour obtenir de nouvelles traductions d’Aristote. Les faits que nous avons examinés ne sont pas en contradiction avec ce témoignage. Mais, comme il arrive fréquemment dans une tradition hagiographique, on accentue tellement les exploits du héros principal qu’on a tendance à réduire l’activité des contemporains à celle de « collaborateurs » et à minimiser leur apport original. D’où la tradition que Guillaume de Moerbeke aurait entrepris tout son travail ad instantiam fratris Thomae. L’étude de l’histoire des traductions et les remarques critiques du F. Gauthier nous ont obligés à limiter nettement la portée de ce témoignage. Cette étude a restitué ainsi à Moerbeke son autonomie et son originalité intellectuelle. Mais elle a confirmé également qu’il y a eu communication scientifique entre les deux dominicains (ce qui est le noyau solide de la tradition). Thomas a très vite compris l’importance du travail de son confrère. Il en a profité le premier, et c’est probablement grâce à son autorité que des traductions de Moerbeke ont commencé à circuler à Paris, et à partir de là dans la culture latine. [conclusion p. 81-82] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/3D0JB4FJderQiIl |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1388","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1388,"authors_free":[{"id":2147,"entry_id":1388,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2148,"entry_id":1388,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":337,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Brams, Jozef","free_first_name":"Jozef","free_last_name":"Brams","norm_person":{"id":337,"first_name":"Jozef","last_name":"Brams","full_name":"Brams, Jozef","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1145645712","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2149,"entry_id":1388,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":338,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","free_first_name":"Willy","free_last_name":"Vanhamel","norm_person":{"id":338,"first_name":"Willy","last_name":"Vanhamel","full_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/141109661","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Guillaume de Moerbeke et Saint Thomas","main_title":{"title":"Guillaume de Moerbeke et Saint Thomas"},"abstract":"On peut difficilement expliquer l\u2019utilisation privil\u00e9gi\u00e9e des traductions de Moerbeke dont t\u00e9moigne l\u2019\u0153uvre de saint Thomas, si on n\u2019admet pas que les deux hommes aient \u00e9t\u00e9 en relation directe. Certes, Guillaume a commenc\u00e9 son projet de traduction sans l\u2019initiative ou l\u2019encouragement de Thomas. Mais, quand ce dernier eut pris connaissance du travail de son confr\u00e8re (probablement lors d\u2019une rencontre \u00e0 Viterbe), il a commenc\u00e9 \u00e0 utiliser ses traductions. Il est m\u00eame probable qu\u2019il a command\u00e9 quelques fois lui-m\u00eame une traduction. Les donn\u00e9es manquent pour pouvoir parler d\u2019une v\u00e9ritable collaboration entre les deux hommes.\r\n\r\nD\u2019ailleurs, je n\u2019ai pas l\u2019impression que leurs int\u00e9r\u00eats intellectuels \u00e9taient convergents. Si on peut prendre le prologue de la Perspectiva de Witelo comme un t\u00e9moignage indirect sur la pens\u00e9e de Guillaume, il semble qu\u2019il avait une pr\u00e9f\u00e9rence pour une philosophie platonisante, avec un int\u00e9r\u00eat particulier pour la philosophie de la nature et l\u2019astronomie (-logie?). Il avait probablement plus de connaturalit\u00e9 intellectuelle avec son jeune ami et compatriote Henri Bate (qui lui a d\u00e9di\u00e9 son trait\u00e9 sur la composition de l\u2019astrolabe) qu\u2019avec le th\u00e9ologien-philosophe Thomas d\u2019Aquin.\r\n\r\nQuoi qu\u2019il en soit, il est hors de doute que Thomas a pu profiter largement du travail de son confr\u00e8re. Selon la tradition, Thomas aurait pris des initiatives pour obtenir de nouvelles traductions d\u2019Aristote. Les faits que nous avons examin\u00e9s ne sont pas en contradiction avec ce t\u00e9moignage. Mais, comme il arrive fr\u00e9quemment dans une tradition hagiographique, on accentue tellement les exploits du h\u00e9ros principal qu\u2019on a tendance \u00e0 r\u00e9duire l\u2019activit\u00e9 des contemporains \u00e0 celle de \u00ab collaborateurs \u00bb et \u00e0 minimiser leur apport original.\r\n\r\nD\u2019o\u00f9 la tradition que Guillaume de Moerbeke aurait entrepris tout son travail ad instantiam fratris Thomae. L\u2019\u00e9tude de l\u2019histoire des traductions et les remarques critiques du F. Gauthier nous ont oblig\u00e9s \u00e0 limiter nettement la port\u00e9e de ce t\u00e9moignage. Cette \u00e9tude a restitu\u00e9 ainsi \u00e0 Moerbeke son autonomie et son originalit\u00e9 intellectuelle. Mais elle a confirm\u00e9 \u00e9galement qu\u2019il y a eu communication scientifique entre les deux dominicains (ce qui est le noyau solide de la tradition).\r\n\r\nThomas a tr\u00e8s vite compris l\u2019importance du travail de son confr\u00e8re. Il en a profit\u00e9 le premier, et c\u2019est probablement gr\u00e2ce \u00e0 son autorit\u00e9 que des traductions de Moerbeke ont commenc\u00e9 \u00e0 circuler \u00e0 Paris, et \u00e0 partir de l\u00e0 dans la culture latine. [conclusion p. 81-82]","btype":2,"date":"1989","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/3D0JB4FJderQiIl","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":337,"full_name":"Brams, Jozef","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":338,"full_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1388,"section_of":326,"pages":"57-82","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":326,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Guillaume de Moerbeke. Recueil d\u2019\u00e9tudes \u00e0 l\u2019occasion du 700e anniversaire de sa mort (1286)","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Brams1989","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1989","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1989","abstract":"T h e following articles are included in this volume: \"Moerbeke, traducteur et inter-\r\nprete: Un texte et une pensee\" by Gerard Verbeke (pp. 1-21); \"Guillaume de Moer-\r\nbeke et la cour pontificale\" by Agostino Paravicini Bagliani (pp. 23-52); \"Note con-\r\ncernant certaines missions qui auraient ete confiees a Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by\r\nWilly Vanhamel (pp. 53-56); \"Guillaume de Moerbeke et saint Thomas\" by Carlos\r\nSteel (pp. 57-82); \"Pietro d'Abano e l'utilizzazione della traduzione di Guglielmo di\r\nMoerbeke del commento di Simplicio al \/\/ De caelo di Aristotele\" by Graziella Federici\r\nVescovini (pp. 83-106); \"Quelques utilisateurs des textes rares de Moerbeke\r\n(Philopon, Tria opuscula) et particulierement Jacques de Viterbe\" by Louis Jacques\r\nBataillon (pp. 107-12); \"Quelques remarques codicologiques et paleographiques\r\nau sujet du ms. Vaticano Ottob. lat. 1850\" by Robert Wielockx (pp. 113-33);\r\n\"La liste des ceuvres d'Hippocrate dans le Vindobonensis phil. gr. 100: Un\r\nautographe de Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Gudrun Vuillemin-Diem (pp. 135-83);\r\n\"Note concernant la collation d'un deuxieme manuscrit grec de la Physique\r\npar Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Jozef Brams and Gudrun Vuillemin-Diem (pp.\r\n185-92); \"La 'Recensio Matritensis' de la Physique\" by Jozef Brams (pp. 193-220);\r\n\"La Translatio anonyma e la Translatio Guillelmi del De partibus animalium (Analisi del\r\nlibro I)\" by Pietro Rossi (pp. 221-45); \"L'attribution de la Translatio nova du De\r\ngenerations et corruptione a Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Joanna Judycka (pp. 247-51);\r\n\"Iudicialia ad Syrum: Une traduction de Guillaume de Moerbeke du Quadripartitum\r\nde Cl. Ptol\u00a3mee\" by Luc Anthonis (pp. 253-55); \"Methode de traduction et\r\nproblemes de chronologie\" by Fernand Bossier (pp. 257-94); \"L'usage des mots\r\nhybrides greco-latins par Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Louis Jacques Bataillon (pp.\r\n295-99); and \"Biobibliographie de Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Willy Vanhamel\r\n(pp. 301-83).","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/kM52uB2YgiCytgt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":326,"pubplace":"Leuven","publisher":"Leuven University Press","series":"Ancient and Medieval Philosophy de Wulf-Mansion Centre, Series 1","volume":"7","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1989]}
Title | (Neo-) Platonica |
Type | Article |
Language | Dutch |
Date | 1984 |
Journal | Tijdschrift voor Filosofie |
Volume | 46 |
Issue | 2 |
Pages | 319-330 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
Filosofie is ons vooral in de vorm van teksten toegankelijk. Wie filosofie wil studeren, zal onvermijdelijk teksten moeten bestuderen en zal het resultaat van zijn eigen onderzoek weer in de vorm van teksten produceren. Wel heeft de filosofie van oudsher ook met de mogelijkheid rekening gehouden dat men inzichten kan verwerven die niet discursief uitgedrukt kunnen worden, die niet „textfähig“ zijn; maar toch is de filosofie weinig beïnvloed geworden door deze principiële mogelijkheid. Tenslotte kan men weer reflecteren en schrijven over deze niet-tekstmatige inzichten, zodat het erop lijkt dat men nooit uit de toverban van de tekst geraken kan. Niemand zal eraan denken het voordeel prijs te geven dat de filosofie heeft door zich aan teksten te binden en zo haar inzichten te objectiveren. Maar toch is het bedenkelijk dat men de binding van filosofisch inzicht aan de tekst als vanzelfsprekend ziet. Zo wordt ook niet meer duidelijk wat de „zaak“ is waarop de filosofische tekst betrekking heeft. Is er wel een „zaak-los-van-de-tekst“? Het is bekend dat Plato tegenover het fenomeen „tekst“ bewust afstand heeft genomen. Men kan hem zeker niet verwijten dat hij een naïef vertrouwen heeft in de tekst als medium van filosofisch inzicht: waar het in de filosofie eigenlijk om gaat is niet in tekst uit te drukken. Al is hij zelf meer dan wie ook tekst-kunstenaar, hij blijft zich bewust van de grenzen van de tekst. Wie uit Plato’s dialogen een doctrine construeert, een systeem van uitspraken over „wat het geval is“, verliest deze reserve ten opzichte van de tekst en reduceert de vele „vormen van kennis“ tot objectief „propositioneel“ kennen. Dit is de invalshoek van waaruit Wolfgang Wieland, vooral bekend wegens zijn originele studie over Aristoteles’ Physica, zijn Plato-boek geschreven heeft: Platon und die Formen des Wissens. Het boek bevat drie delen. Het eerste is gewijd aan Plato’s verhouding tot de geschreven tekst. Uitgaande van de bekende passage in de Phaidros onderzoekt Wieland waarom Plato zo kritisch is ten opzichte van het schrift. Plato verzet zich tegen elke poging om het weten te objectiveren alsof men in de tekst over inzicht als over een stuk bezit zou kunnen beschikken. Elke formulering in taal blijft werktuig, iets voorlopigs. Het „gebruiksweten“ dat in de omgang met de dingen tot stand komt, heeft voorrang op het weten dat in proposities is uitgedrukt. Hier staan we meteen voor het centrale thema van Wielands boek. Het is echter de vraag of dit bij Plato wel zo centraal is. Bij Plato gaat het vooreerst om kritiek op het schrift, en niet op het propositionele weten als zodanig. Vanuit de schriftkritiek kan men ook de dialoog als medium van filosofisch denken begrijpen. Indien men ondanks alle reserves toch niet aan tekst verzaken kan, dan biedt de dialoogvorm een uitweg. Eén van de tekorten van de tekst heeft namelijk te maken met het ontbreken van een reële context van het woord. De dialoog brengt deze context op dramatisch-fictieve wijze tot stand. De dialoog is geen didactisch hulpmiddel, geen inkleding van een leer. De uitspraken blijven er als „werktuigen“ in de gespreksactie fungeren. Vanuit de schriftkritiek kan men ook het statuut van de mythe binnen de tekst begrijpen, het metaforische karakter van vele passages, het gebruik van de ironie. Tenslotte wijst Wieland in § 5 op het belang van de fictieve chronologie bij het beoordelen van een dialoog. Men kan namelijk, uitgaande van de dramatische situatie van de verschillende dialogen, een fictieve chronologie opstellen: zo zal niemand betwisten dat de Parmenides later is geschreven dan de Phaidon (reële chronologie), maar in de fictieve chronologie komt de Parmenides veel eerder, omdat hierin de jonge Socrates optreedt, terwijl in de Phaidon Socrates voor de dood staat. In de interpretatie heeft men te weinig rekening gehouden met de plaats van een dialoog in deze fictieve chronologie. [introduction p. 319-320] Übersetzung: Philosophie ist uns vor allem in der Form von Texten zugänglich. Wer Philosophie studieren will, muss zwangsläufig Texte studieren und wird die Ergebnisse seiner eigenen Forschung wiederum in Form von Texten präsentieren. Die Philosophie hat jedoch seit jeher auch die Möglichkeit berücksichtigt, dass Erkenntnisse gewonnen werden können, die nicht diskursiv ausgedrückt werden können, die also nicht „textfähig“ sind. Dennoch hat diese prinzipielle Möglichkeit die Philosophie kaum beeinflusst. Letztendlich kann man auch über diese nicht-textlichen Erkenntnisse reflektieren und schreiben, sodass es scheint, als könne man niemals aus dem Bann des Textes entkommen. Niemand wird daran denken, den Vorteil aufzugeben, den die Philosophie dadurch hat, sich an Texte zu binden und ihre Erkenntnisse so zu objektivieren. Doch es ist bedenklich, dass man die Bindung philosophischer Erkenntnis an den Text als selbstverständlich betrachtet. Dadurch wird auch unklar, was die „Sache“ ist, auf die sich der philosophische Text bezieht. Gibt es überhaupt eine „Sache außerhalb des Textes“? Es ist bekannt, dass Platon dem Phänomen „Text“ bewusst distanziert gegenüberstand. Man kann ihm sicher nicht vorwerfen, ein naives Vertrauen in den Text als Medium philosophischer Erkenntnis gehabt zu haben: Worauf es in der Philosophie eigentlich ankommt, lässt sich nicht in Texten ausdrücken. Auch wenn er selbst mehr als jeder andere ein Künstler des Textes war, war er sich stets der Grenzen des Textes bewusst. Wer aus Platons Dialogen eine Doktrin konstruiert, ein System von Aussagen über „das, was der Fall ist“, verliert diese kritische Distanz zum Text und reduziert die vielen „Formen des Wissens“ auf ein objektives „propositionales“ Wissen. Dies ist die Perspektive, aus der Wolfgang Wieland, vor allem bekannt für seine originelle Studie über Aristoteles’ Physik, sein Platon-Buch Platon und die Formen des Wissens geschrieben hat. Das Buch besteht aus drei Teilen. Der erste Teil widmet sich Platons Verhältnis zum geschriebenen Text. Ausgehend von der bekannten Passage im Phaidros untersucht Wieland, warum Platon dem Schreiben so kritisch gegenüberstand. Platon wendet sich gegen jede Versuchung, Wissen zu objektivieren, als könne man in einem Text über Erkenntnisse verfügen wie über einen Besitz. Jede Formulierung in Sprache bleibt ein Werkzeug, etwas Vorläufiges. Das „Gebrauchswissen“, das im Umgang mit den Dingen entsteht, hat Vorrang vor dem Wissen, das in Propositionen ausgedrückt ist. Hier begegnen wir dem zentralen Thema von Wielands Buch. Es bleibt jedoch die Frage, ob dies bei Platon tatsächlich zentral ist. Bei Platon geht es zunächst um Kritik am Schreiben und nicht um Kritik am propositionalen Wissen als solches. Aus der Schriftkritik lässt sich auch die Dialogform als Medium des philosophischen Denkens verstehen. Wenn man trotz aller Vorbehalte nicht auf den Text verzichten kann, bietet die Dialogform einen Ausweg. Ein Mangel des Textes liegt nämlich im Fehlen eines realen Kontexts des Wortes. Der Dialog stellt diesen Kontext auf dramatisch-fiktive Weise her. Der Dialog ist kein didaktisches Hilfsmittel, keine Verpackung einer Lehre. Die Aussagen fungieren in der Dialoghandlung weiterhin als „Werkzeuge“. Aus der Schriftkritik lässt sich auch der Status des Mythos im Text verstehen, ebenso wie der metaphorische Charakter vieler Passagen und die Verwendung von Ironie. Schließlich weist Wieland in § 5 auf die Bedeutung der fiktiven Chronologie für die Beurteilung eines Dialogs hin. Ausgehend von der dramatischen Situation der verschiedenen Dialoge lässt sich eine fiktive Chronologie erstellen: Niemand wird bestreiten, dass der Parmenides später geschrieben wurde als der Phaidon (reale Chronologie), aber in der fiktiven Chronologie kommt der Parmenides viel früher, da dort der junge Sokrates auftritt, während im Phaidon Sokrates vor seinem Tod steht. In der Interpretation hat man die Stellung eines Dialogs in dieser fiktiven Chronologie bisher zu wenig berücksichtigt. |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/H1e3T5fZsfMIh5O |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"845","_score":null,"_source":{"id":845,"authors_free":[{"id":1249,"entry_id":845,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"(Neo-) Platonica","main_title":{"title":"(Neo-) Platonica"},"abstract":"Filosofie is ons vooral in de vorm van teksten toegankelijk. Wie filosofie wil studeren, zal onvermijdelijk teksten moeten bestuderen en zal het resultaat van zijn eigen onderzoek weer in de vorm van teksten produceren. Wel heeft de filosofie van oudsher ook met de mogelijkheid rekening gehouden dat men inzichten kan verwerven die niet discursief uitgedrukt kunnen worden, die niet \u201etextf\u00e4hig\u201c zijn; maar toch is de filosofie weinig be\u00efnvloed geworden door deze principi\u00eble mogelijkheid. Tenslotte kan men weer reflecteren en schrijven over deze niet-tekstmatige inzichten, zodat het erop lijkt dat men nooit uit de toverban van de tekst geraken kan. Niemand zal eraan denken het voordeel prijs te geven dat de filosofie heeft door zich aan teksten te binden en zo haar inzichten te objectiveren. Maar toch is het bedenkelijk dat men de binding van filosofisch inzicht aan de tekst als vanzelfsprekend ziet. Zo wordt ook niet meer duidelijk wat de \u201ezaak\u201c is waarop de filosofische tekst betrekking heeft. Is er wel een \u201ezaak-los-van-de-tekst\u201c? Het is bekend dat Plato tegenover het fenomeen \u201etekst\u201c bewust afstand heeft genomen. Men kan hem zeker niet verwijten dat hij een na\u00efef vertrouwen heeft in de tekst als medium van filosofisch inzicht: waar het in de filosofie eigenlijk om gaat is niet in tekst uit te drukken. Al is hij zelf meer dan wie ook tekst-kunstenaar, hij blijft zich bewust van de grenzen van de tekst. Wie uit Plato\u2019s dialogen een doctrine construeert, een systeem van uitspraken over \u201ewat het geval is\u201c, verliest deze reserve ten opzichte van de tekst en reduceert de vele \u201evormen van kennis\u201c tot objectief \u201epropositioneel\u201c kennen.\r\n\r\nDit is de invalshoek van waaruit Wolfgang Wieland, vooral bekend wegens zijn originele studie over Aristoteles\u2019 Physica, zijn Plato-boek geschreven heeft: Platon und die Formen des Wissens. Het boek bevat drie delen. Het eerste is gewijd aan Plato\u2019s verhouding tot de geschreven tekst. Uitgaande van de bekende passage in de Phaidros onderzoekt Wieland waarom Plato zo kritisch is ten opzichte van het schrift. Plato verzet zich tegen elke poging om het weten te objectiveren alsof men in de tekst over inzicht als over een stuk bezit zou kunnen beschikken. Elke formulering in taal blijft werktuig, iets voorlopigs. Het \u201egebruiksweten\u201c dat in de omgang met de dingen tot stand komt, heeft voorrang op het weten dat in proposities is uitgedrukt. Hier staan we meteen voor het centrale thema van Wielands boek. Het is echter de vraag of dit bij Plato wel zo centraal is. Bij Plato gaat het vooreerst om kritiek op het schrift, en niet op het propositionele weten als zodanig.\r\n\r\nVanuit de schriftkritiek kan men ook de dialoog als medium van filosofisch denken begrijpen. Indien men ondanks alle reserves toch niet aan tekst verzaken kan, dan biedt de dialoogvorm een uitweg. E\u00e9n van de tekorten van de tekst heeft namelijk te maken met het ontbreken van een re\u00eble context van het woord. De dialoog brengt deze context op dramatisch-fictieve wijze tot stand. De dialoog is geen didactisch hulpmiddel, geen inkleding van een leer. De uitspraken blijven er als \u201ewerktuigen\u201c in de gespreksactie fungeren. Vanuit de schriftkritiek kan men ook het statuut van de mythe binnen de tekst begrijpen, het metaforische karakter van vele passages, het gebruik van de ironie. Tenslotte wijst Wieland in \u00a7 5 op het belang van de fictieve chronologie bij het beoordelen van een dialoog. Men kan namelijk, uitgaande van de dramatische situatie van de verschillende dialogen, een fictieve chronologie opstellen: zo zal niemand betwisten dat de Parmenides later is geschreven dan de Phaidon (re\u00eble chronologie), maar in de fictieve chronologie komt de Parmenides veel eerder, omdat hierin de jonge Socrates optreedt, terwijl in de Phaidon Socrates voor de dood staat. In de interpretatie heeft men te weinig rekening gehouden met de plaats van een dialoog in deze fictieve chronologie.\r\n[introduction p. 319-320] \u00dcbersetzung: Philosophie ist uns vor allem in der Form von Texten zug\u00e4nglich. Wer Philosophie studieren will, muss zwangsl\u00e4ufig Texte studieren und wird die Ergebnisse seiner eigenen Forschung wiederum in Form von Texten pr\u00e4sentieren. Die Philosophie hat jedoch seit jeher auch die M\u00f6glichkeit ber\u00fccksichtigt, dass Erkenntnisse gewonnen werden k\u00f6nnen, die nicht diskursiv ausgedr\u00fcckt werden k\u00f6nnen, die also nicht \u201etextf\u00e4hig\u201c sind. Dennoch hat diese prinzipielle M\u00f6glichkeit die Philosophie kaum beeinflusst. Letztendlich kann man auch \u00fcber diese nicht-textlichen Erkenntnisse reflektieren und schreiben, sodass es scheint, als k\u00f6nne man niemals aus dem Bann des Textes entkommen. Niemand wird daran denken, den Vorteil aufzugeben, den die Philosophie dadurch hat, sich an Texte zu binden und ihre Erkenntnisse so zu objektivieren. Doch es ist bedenklich, dass man die Bindung philosophischer Erkenntnis an den Text als selbstverst\u00e4ndlich betrachtet. Dadurch wird auch unklar, was die \u201eSache\u201c ist, auf die sich der philosophische Text bezieht. Gibt es \u00fcberhaupt eine \u201eSache au\u00dferhalb des Textes\u201c?\r\n\r\nEs ist bekannt, dass Platon dem Ph\u00e4nomen \u201eText\u201c bewusst distanziert gegen\u00fcberstand. Man kann ihm sicher nicht vorwerfen, ein naives Vertrauen in den Text als Medium philosophischer Erkenntnis gehabt zu haben: Worauf es in der Philosophie eigentlich ankommt, l\u00e4sst sich nicht in Texten ausdr\u00fccken. Auch wenn er selbst mehr als jeder andere ein K\u00fcnstler des Textes war, war er sich stets der Grenzen des Textes bewusst. Wer aus Platons Dialogen eine Doktrin konstruiert, ein System von Aussagen \u00fcber \u201edas, was der Fall ist\u201c, verliert diese kritische Distanz zum Text und reduziert die vielen \u201eFormen des Wissens\u201c auf ein objektives \u201epropositionales\u201c Wissen.\r\n\r\nDies ist die Perspektive, aus der Wolfgang Wieland, vor allem bekannt f\u00fcr seine originelle Studie \u00fcber Aristoteles\u2019 Physik, sein Platon-Buch Platon und die Formen des Wissens geschrieben hat. Das Buch besteht aus drei Teilen. Der erste Teil widmet sich Platons Verh\u00e4ltnis zum geschriebenen Text. Ausgehend von der bekannten Passage im Phaidros untersucht Wieland, warum Platon dem Schreiben so kritisch gegen\u00fcberstand. Platon wendet sich gegen jede Versuchung, Wissen zu objektivieren, als k\u00f6nne man in einem Text \u00fcber Erkenntnisse verf\u00fcgen wie \u00fcber einen Besitz. Jede Formulierung in Sprache bleibt ein Werkzeug, etwas Vorl\u00e4ufiges. Das \u201eGebrauchswissen\u201c, das im Umgang mit den Dingen entsteht, hat Vorrang vor dem Wissen, das in Propositionen ausgedr\u00fcckt ist. Hier begegnen wir dem zentralen Thema von Wielands Buch. Es bleibt jedoch die Frage, ob dies bei Platon tats\u00e4chlich zentral ist. Bei Platon geht es zun\u00e4chst um Kritik am Schreiben und nicht um Kritik am propositionalen Wissen als solches.\r\n\r\nAus der Schriftkritik l\u00e4sst sich auch die Dialogform als Medium des philosophischen Denkens verstehen. Wenn man trotz aller Vorbehalte nicht auf den Text verzichten kann, bietet die Dialogform einen Ausweg. Ein Mangel des Textes liegt n\u00e4mlich im Fehlen eines realen Kontexts des Wortes. Der Dialog stellt diesen Kontext auf dramatisch-fiktive Weise her. Der Dialog ist kein didaktisches Hilfsmittel, keine Verpackung einer Lehre. Die Aussagen fungieren in der Dialoghandlung weiterhin als \u201eWerkzeuge\u201c. Aus der Schriftkritik l\u00e4sst sich auch der Status des Mythos im Text verstehen, ebenso wie der metaphorische Charakter vieler Passagen und die Verwendung von Ironie. Schlie\u00dflich weist Wieland in \u00a7 5 auf die Bedeutung der fiktiven Chronologie f\u00fcr die Beurteilung eines Dialogs hin. Ausgehend von der dramatischen Situation der verschiedenen Dialoge l\u00e4sst sich eine fiktive Chronologie erstellen: Niemand wird bestreiten, dass der Parmenides sp\u00e4ter geschrieben wurde als der Phaidon (reale Chronologie), aber in der fiktiven Chronologie kommt der Parmenides viel fr\u00fcher, da dort der junge Sokrates auftritt, w\u00e4hrend im Phaidon Sokrates vor seinem Tod steht. In der Interpretation hat man die Stellung eines Dialogs in dieser fiktiven Chronologie bisher zu wenig ber\u00fccksichtigt.","btype":3,"date":"1984","language":"Dutch","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/H1e3T5fZsfMIh5O","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":845,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Tijdschrift voor Filosofie","volume":"46","issue":"2","pages":"319-330"}},"sort":[1984]}
Title | Review of: Ilsetraut Hadot, Le problème du néoplatonisme Alexandrin, Hiéroclès et Simplicius |
Type | Article |
Language | Dutch |
Date | 1980 |
Journal | Tijdschrift voor Filosofie |
Volume | 42 |
Issue | 3 |
Pages | 606-608 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
The whole review: In een historisch overzicht van de antieke wijsbegeerte wordt doorgaans, wanneer over het Neoplatonisme gehandeld wordt, een onderscheid gemaakt tussen de 'school' van Athene en die van Alexandrië. Dit onderscheid gaat terug op de bekende studies van K. Praechter (1910-12). Volgens deze geleerde zou er een opvallend doctrineel verschil bestaan tussen beide richtingen in het latere Neoplatonisme. In Alexandrië zou de invloed van de christelijke omgeving zo groot geweest zijn dat de heidense filosofen zich verplicht zagen bepaalde wijzigingen in de doctrine aan te brengen. Het Neoplatonisme vertoont hier niet de complexe structuur die kenmerkend is voor het Atheense speculatieve denken (cf. de hiërarchie van de goddelijke principes zoals die door Proclus ontwikkeld is); het geeft een eenvoudiger verklaring van de leer waarbij dikwijls teruggegrepen wordt naar het Midden-Platonisme (vóór Plotinus); op sommige gebieden (zoals de scheppingsleer) benadert het christelijke standpunten. Deze originaliteit van het Alexandrijnse Neoplatonisme komt het duidelijkst tot uiting in het œuvre van Hierocles (eerste helft 5de eeuw) en in de commentaar van Simplicius (eerste helft 6de eeuw) op Epictetus. Deze visie van Praechter werd kritiekloos overgenomen in talrijke studies over deze periode. Zo verscheen in 1976 nog een boek over Hierocles (Th. Kobusch, Studien zur Philosophie des Hierokles von Alexandrien, München) waarin de thesis verdedigd wordt dat Hierocles' filosofie „vermittelt“ tussen het Christendom en het „excessieve“ Neoplatonisme zoals het vooral door Proclus uitgewerkt is. „Die Interpretation ergab dass die Hierokleische Philosophie im wesentlichen auf vorneuplatonischer Basis beruht“ (Besluit, p. 193). Het boek van Mme Hadot, die sinds jaren een uitgave voorbereidt van Simplicius' commentaar op Epictetus, komt tot een conclusie die precies het tegenovergestelde beweert. Op grond van een nieuwe lectuur van Hierocles en Simplicius toont zij aan dat de hypothese van Praechter over het latere Neoplatonisme totaal ongegrond is; er bestaat geen enkel doctrineel verschil tussen het Atheense en het Alexandrijnse Neoplatonisme: „l'évolution du néoplatonisme s'est poursuivie d'une manière homogène“. Het is verkeerd Hierocles of Simplicius vanuit het Midden-Platonisme te willen interpreteren: hun uiteenzetting veronderstelt de ontwikkeling van het latere Neoplatonisme, wat kan geïllustreerd worden door talrijke parallelle passages met Iamblichus en Proclus, en zelfs – voor Simplicius – met Damascius. In het eerste deel van dit boek worden de historische gegevens over beide filosofen onderzocht. Het tweede deel onderzoekt in welke mate zij kunnen beschouwd worden als vertegenwoordigers van een originele Alexandrijnse traditie. Achtereenvolgens worden bestudeerd: de theologie van Simplicius in het Epictetus-commentaar, de opvattingen van Hierocles over de ontwikkeling van het Platonisme, over de materie, over de demiurg en de schepping, over de voorzienigheid en het noodlot. In het derde deel volgen enige capita selecta betreffende de commentaar van Simplicius (o.a. zijn leer over de ziel). Uit al deze analyses komt de auteur tot het besluit dat er geen enkele doctrinaire divergentie aan te wijzen is ten opzichte van de Atheense school. Wel geven beide werken – de commentaar van Hierocles op Pythagoras en die van Simplicius op Epictetus – een eenvoudiger en minder complexe versie van het Neoplatonisme. Dit kan echter verklaard worden door het feit dat beide commentaren bedoeld waren als inleidingen en gericht tot beginnelingen in de school. In een appendix gaat de auteur uitvoerig in op een artikel dat ik zelf samen met F. Bossier in dit tijdschrift gepubliceerd heb (1972, 761-822) over de authenticiteit van de De Anima-commentaar die aan Simplicius wordt toegeschreven. Alhoewel zij onze conclusie aanvaardt – het werk is waarschijnlijk door Priscianus Lydus geschreven – toch meent zij dat er geen enkel doctrineel verschil met de authentieke Simplicius kan aangewezen worden. Haar argumenten lijken ons soms erg zwak: het is echter niet mogelijk om hierover in deze recensie polemiek te voeren. Slechts één ding: indien men aanvaardt dat de In de Anima door iemand anders geschreven is dan Simplicius, waarom is het dan zo nodig te beklemtonen dat zijn opvattingen over de ziel in niets van die van Simplicius verschillen? Dit bezwaar geldt ook voor het gehele werk. Terecht wijst de auteur op de continuïteit die er bestond tussen de school van Athene en die van Alexandrië (zoals dit o.m. tot uiting komt in de veelvuldige persoonlijke relaties van docenten en studenten). Het lijkt ons echter overdreven elk doctrineel verschil tussen beide scholen te ontkennen. De ontwikkeling binnen het latere Neoplatonisme was zeker niet zo homogeen als mevrouw Hadot beweert. Reeds ten tijde van Plotinus bestonden er belangrijke controversen over de doctrine, en die discussies werden verder gezet in de latere school. Indien men de originaliteit van de Alexandrijnse school in vraag stelt, dan volstaat het niet Hierocles en één werk van Simplicius te onderzoeken. Men zou er ook de andere filosofen uit de school moeten bij betrekken, voornamelijk Ammonius. Men kan moeilijk betwisten dat het Neoplatonisme dat door Ammonius uiteengezet werd nogal verschillend is van het systeem van Damascius. En is het ook niet opvallend dat Simplicius, die zowel bij Ammonius als Damascius studeerde, dikwijls afstand neemt van de al te speculatieve beschouwingen van Iamblichus en Damascius? Het boek van mevrouw Hadot is, zoals de auteur zelf toegeeft, vooral polemisch van aard: zij weerlegt hypothesen en interpretaties die niet op de teksten gegrond zijn. Door een nauwkeurige analyse van de teksten ontmaskert zij het stereotiepe beeld dat men over het Alexandrijnse Neoplatonisme geeft. Haar studie is zo een waardevolle bijdrage tot beter inzicht in deze laatste ontwikkeling van het antieke denken. [p. 606-608] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/lIWBQQ2Q5dbWMLm |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"484","_score":null,"_source":{"id":484,"authors_free":[{"id":659,"entry_id":484,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Review of: Ilsetraut Hadot, Le probl\u00e8me du n\u00e9oplatonisme Alexandrin, Hi\u00e9rocl\u00e8s et Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Review of: Ilsetraut Hadot, Le probl\u00e8me du n\u00e9oplatonisme Alexandrin, Hi\u00e9rocl\u00e8s et Simplicius"},"abstract":"The whole review: In een historisch overzicht van de antieke wijsbegeerte wordt doorgaans, wanneer over het Neoplatonisme gehandeld wordt, een onderscheid gemaakt tussen de 'school' van Athene en die van Alexandri\u00eb. Dit onderscheid gaat terug op de bekende studies van K. Praechter (1910-12). Volgens deze geleerde zou er een opvallend doctrineel verschil bestaan tussen beide richtingen in het latere Neoplatonisme. In Alexandri\u00eb zou de invloed van de christelijke omgeving zo groot geweest zijn dat de heidense filosofen zich verplicht zagen bepaalde wijzigingen in de doctrine aan te brengen.\r\n\r\nHet Neoplatonisme vertoont hier niet de complexe structuur die kenmerkend is voor het Atheense speculatieve denken (cf. de hi\u00ebrarchie van de goddelijke principes zoals die door Proclus ontwikkeld is); het geeft een eenvoudiger verklaring van de leer waarbij dikwijls teruggegrepen wordt naar het Midden-Platonisme (v\u00f3\u00f3r Plotinus); op sommige gebieden (zoals de scheppingsleer) benadert het christelijke standpunten. Deze originaliteit van het Alexandrijnse Neoplatonisme komt het duidelijkst tot uiting in het \u0153uvre van Hierocles (eerste helft 5de eeuw) en in de commentaar van Simplicius (eerste helft 6de eeuw) op Epictetus.\r\n\r\nDeze visie van Praechter werd kritiekloos overgenomen in talrijke studies over deze periode. Zo verscheen in 1976 nog een boek over Hierocles (Th. Kobusch, Studien zur Philosophie des Hierokles von Alexandrien, M\u00fcnchen) waarin de thesis verdedigd wordt dat Hierocles' filosofie \u201evermittelt\u201c tussen het Christendom en het \u201eexcessieve\u201c Neoplatonisme zoals het vooral door Proclus uitgewerkt is. \u201eDie Interpretation ergab dass die Hierokleische Philosophie im wesentlichen auf vorneuplatonischer Basis beruht\u201c (Besluit, p. 193).\r\n\r\nHet boek van Mme Hadot, die sinds jaren een uitgave voorbereidt van Simplicius' commentaar op Epictetus, komt tot een conclusie die precies het tegenovergestelde beweert. Op grond van een nieuwe lectuur van Hierocles en Simplicius toont zij aan dat de hypothese van Praechter over het latere Neoplatonisme totaal ongegrond is; er bestaat geen enkel doctrineel verschil tussen het Atheense en het Alexandrijnse Neoplatonisme: \u201el'\u00e9volution du n\u00e9oplatonisme s'est poursuivie d'une mani\u00e8re homog\u00e8ne\u201c.\r\n\r\nHet is verkeerd Hierocles of Simplicius vanuit het Midden-Platonisme te willen interpreteren: hun uiteenzetting veronderstelt de ontwikkeling van het latere Neoplatonisme, wat kan ge\u00efllustreerd worden door talrijke parallelle passages met Iamblichus en Proclus, en zelfs \u2013 voor Simplicius \u2013 met Damascius.\r\n\r\nIn het eerste deel van dit boek worden de historische gegevens over beide filosofen onderzocht. Het tweede deel onderzoekt in welke mate zij kunnen beschouwd worden als vertegenwoordigers van een originele Alexandrijnse traditie. Achtereenvolgens worden bestudeerd: de theologie van Simplicius in het Epictetus-commentaar, de opvattingen van Hierocles over de ontwikkeling van het Platonisme, over de materie, over de demiurg en de schepping, over de voorzienigheid en het noodlot. In het derde deel volgen enige capita selecta betreffende de commentaar van Simplicius (o.a. zijn leer over de ziel).\r\n\r\nUit al deze analyses komt de auteur tot het besluit dat er geen enkele doctrinaire divergentie aan te wijzen is ten opzichte van de Atheense school. Wel geven beide werken \u2013 de commentaar van Hierocles op Pythagoras en die van Simplicius op Epictetus \u2013 een eenvoudiger en minder complexe versie van het Neoplatonisme. Dit kan echter verklaard worden door het feit dat beide commentaren bedoeld waren als inleidingen en gericht tot beginnelingen in de school.\r\n\r\nIn een appendix gaat de auteur uitvoerig in op een artikel dat ik zelf samen met F. Bossier in dit tijdschrift gepubliceerd heb (1972, 761-822) over de authenticiteit van de De Anima-commentaar die aan Simplicius wordt toegeschreven. Alhoewel zij onze conclusie aanvaardt \u2013 het werk is waarschijnlijk door Priscianus Lydus geschreven \u2013 toch meent zij dat er geen enkel doctrineel verschil met de authentieke Simplicius kan aangewezen worden.\r\n\r\nHaar argumenten lijken ons soms erg zwak: het is echter niet mogelijk om hierover in deze recensie polemiek te voeren. Slechts \u00e9\u00e9n ding: indien men aanvaardt dat de In de Anima door iemand anders geschreven is dan Simplicius, waarom is het dan zo nodig te beklemtonen dat zijn opvattingen over de ziel in niets van die van Simplicius verschillen?\r\n\r\nDit bezwaar geldt ook voor het gehele werk. Terecht wijst de auteur op de continu\u00efteit die er bestond tussen de school van Athene en die van Alexandri\u00eb (zoals dit o.m. tot uiting komt in de veelvuldige persoonlijke relaties van docenten en studenten). Het lijkt ons echter overdreven elk doctrineel verschil tussen beide scholen te ontkennen.\r\n\r\nDe ontwikkeling binnen het latere Neoplatonisme was zeker niet zo homogeen als mevrouw Hadot beweert. Reeds ten tijde van Plotinus bestonden er belangrijke controversen over de doctrine, en die discussies werden verder gezet in de latere school. Indien men de originaliteit van de Alexandrijnse school in vraag stelt, dan volstaat het niet Hierocles en \u00e9\u00e9n werk van Simplicius te onderzoeken. Men zou er ook de andere filosofen uit de school moeten bij betrekken, voornamelijk Ammonius.\r\n\r\nMen kan moeilijk betwisten dat het Neoplatonisme dat door Ammonius uiteengezet werd nogal verschillend is van het systeem van Damascius. En is het ook niet opvallend dat Simplicius, die zowel bij Ammonius als Damascius studeerde, dikwijls afstand neemt van de al te speculatieve beschouwingen van Iamblichus en Damascius?\r\n\r\nHet boek van mevrouw Hadot is, zoals de auteur zelf toegeeft, vooral polemisch van aard: zij weerlegt hypothesen en interpretaties die niet op de teksten gegrond zijn. Door een nauwkeurige analyse van de teksten ontmaskert zij het stereotiepe beeld dat men over het Alexandrijnse Neoplatonisme geeft. Haar studie is zo een waardevolle bijdrage tot beter inzicht in deze laatste ontwikkeling van het antieke denken. [p. 606-608]","btype":3,"date":"1980","language":"Dutch","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/lIWBQQ2Q5dbWMLm","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":484,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Tijdschrift voor Filosofie","volume":"42","issue":"3","pages":"606-608"}},"sort":[1980]}
Title | The Changing Self: A Study on the Soul in Later Neoplatonism; Iamblichus, Damascius and Priscianus |
Type | Monograph |
Language | English |
Date | 1978 |
Publication Place | Brüssel |
Publisher | Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
The later Neoplatonist writers are not easy to read or sympathize with for several reasons. To begin with, it is necessary to reconstruct their views not with the help of their own writings, but with extracts and summaries in later writers. This is particularly true of Iamblichus. Only fragments of his treatise De Anima may be found in Stobaeus (Ecl. 1, 362, 23–367, 9), and to this somewhat exiguous number may be added what is reported in various places by Proclus, Damascius, and Priscianus, fifth- and sixth-century writers living two centuries after the death of Iamblichus in 326. This makes any attempt at reconstruction particularly uncertain. Iamblichus' views, insofar as we can reconstruct them, are primarily interesting because they represent the first and in many ways most serious challenge to the doctrines of Plotinus. And the challenge itself may be said to have split the later Neoplatonists, with Damascius and Priscianus following Iamblichus and Proclus reverting to the views of Plotinus. The real question at issue, and one dealt with with admirable fairness and clarity by Steel, is the nature of the soul and, more particularly, "Does it fall or not?" Plotinus maintained on many occasions that it remained, at least in its upper and true self, unfallen. This is clear, for example, at Enn. IV.1.12. Iamblichus' critique of this view is instructive and sympathetic. The view of Plotinus fails to explain far too many factors in our moral and empirical lives—the fact of sin, our awareness of unhappiness, and the apparent betrayal of the vision of the soul offered by Plato in the Phaedrus 248a ff. Not that Plotinus was unaware of these drawbacks to his theory. He had anticipated and dealt with some already at Enn. I.1 and III.6. Iamblichus also objected to the Plotinian doctrine that all souls were homogeneous (cf. Enn. IV.7.10.19). To obviate these difficulties, Iamblichus developed a theory about the substantial change of the soul (cf. p. 53 ff.). The evidence for this view comes largely from Priscianus, so it is perhaps unwise to be too uncritical about accepting it as Iamblichus' own, especially when considering the reverence in which he was held by many later writers, who, beginning at least as early as Julian, called him "the divine." The arguments produced in favor of such a view of the mutable substance of the soul all seem to argue from perceived activities to the unperceived cause—a methodological principle that derives from Aristotle and seems to run counter to the method employed by Plotinus. The system of Plotinus, like that of the great systematizer Proclus, is deductive rather than inductive. The central vision around which the Iamblichean picture revolves is of a soul that remains in itself and simultaneously proceeds from itself—a view that is often repeated in Priscianus. Whereas in Plotinus the upper, true soul never sallies forth and only the image of the soul does, here it is the whole soul. This reduced cosmic status of the soul may be the reason why Iamblichus was willing to allow people to approach the divine through theurgy and not simply through the activity of the soul. Two points may be mentioned. One is the relation of Iamblichus to Proclus. It has often been assumed that the former had a great influence on the latter, and this is the view put forward by Professor Dodds in his edition of the Elements of Proclus (cf. Introd., xvi ff.). Just how much influence was there? Again, on p. 157, it is stated that much later pagan psychology was occasioned by the desire to refute either the views or objections of Christians, or both. But there is a considerable question as to the knowledge of and interest in what Christians believed and wrote on the part of educated pagans. It really is an open question whether there is any reference at all to anything Christian in Iamblichus or Plotinus. It would be most interesting if any serious evidence could be found in favor of such a hypothesis. [review by Anthony Meredith p. 290-291 ] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/tntYMFyZHiMovai |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1445","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1445,"authors_free":[{"id":2314,"entry_id":1445,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Changing Self: A Study on the Soul in Later Neoplatonism; Iamblichus, Damascius and Priscianus","main_title":{"title":"The Changing Self: A Study on the Soul in Later Neoplatonism; Iamblichus, Damascius and Priscianus"},"abstract":"The later Neoplatonist writers are not easy to read or sympathize with for several reasons. To begin with, it is necessary to reconstruct their views not with the help of their own writings, but with extracts and summaries in later writers. This is particularly true of Iamblichus. Only fragments of his treatise De Anima may be found in Stobaeus (Ecl. 1, 362, 23\u2013367, 9), and to this somewhat exiguous number may be added what is reported in various places by Proclus, Damascius, and Priscianus, fifth- and sixth-century writers living two centuries after the death of Iamblichus in 326. This makes any attempt at reconstruction particularly uncertain.\r\n\r\nIamblichus' views, insofar as we can reconstruct them, are primarily interesting because they represent the first and in many ways most serious challenge to the doctrines of Plotinus. And the challenge itself may be said to have split the later Neoplatonists, with Damascius and Priscianus following Iamblichus and Proclus reverting to the views of Plotinus.\r\n\r\nThe real question at issue, and one dealt with with admirable fairness and clarity by Steel, is the nature of the soul and, more particularly, \"Does it fall or not?\" Plotinus maintained on many occasions that it remained, at least in its upper and true self, unfallen. This is clear, for example, at Enn. IV.1.12. Iamblichus' critique of this view is instructive and sympathetic. The view of Plotinus fails to explain far too many factors in our moral and empirical lives\u2014the fact of sin, our awareness of unhappiness, and the apparent betrayal of the vision of the soul offered by Plato in the Phaedrus 248a ff.\r\n\r\nNot that Plotinus was unaware of these drawbacks to his theory. He had anticipated and dealt with some already at Enn. I.1 and III.6. Iamblichus also objected to the Plotinian doctrine that all souls were homogeneous (cf. Enn. IV.7.10.19). To obviate these difficulties, Iamblichus developed a theory about the substantial change of the soul (cf. p. 53 ff.). The evidence for this view comes largely from Priscianus, so it is perhaps unwise to be too uncritical about accepting it as Iamblichus' own, especially when considering the reverence in which he was held by many later writers, who, beginning at least as early as Julian, called him \"the divine.\"\r\n\r\nThe arguments produced in favor of such a view of the mutable substance of the soul all seem to argue from perceived activities to the unperceived cause\u2014a methodological principle that derives from Aristotle and seems to run counter to the method employed by Plotinus. The system of Plotinus, like that of the great systematizer Proclus, is deductive rather than inductive.\r\n\r\nThe central vision around which the Iamblichean picture revolves is of a soul that remains in itself and simultaneously proceeds from itself\u2014a view that is often repeated in Priscianus. Whereas in Plotinus the upper, true soul never sallies forth and only the image of the soul does, here it is the whole soul. This reduced cosmic status of the soul may be the reason why Iamblichus was willing to allow people to approach the divine through theurgy and not simply through the activity of the soul.\r\n\r\nTwo points may be mentioned. One is the relation of Iamblichus to Proclus. It has often been assumed that the former had a great influence on the latter, and this is the view put forward by Professor Dodds in his edition of the Elements of Proclus (cf. Introd., xvi ff.). Just how much influence was there?\r\n\r\nAgain, on p. 157, it is stated that much later pagan psychology was occasioned by the desire to refute either the views or objections of Christians, or both. But there is a considerable question as to the knowledge of and interest in what Christians believed and wrote on the part of educated pagans. It really is an open question whether there is any reference at all to anything Christian in Iamblichus or Plotinus. It would be most interesting if any serious evidence could be found in favor of such a hypothesis. [review by Anthony Meredith p. 290-291 ]","btype":1,"date":"1978","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/tntYMFyZHiMovai","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":1445,"pubplace":"Br\u00fcssel","publisher":"Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[1978]}
Title | Priscianus Lydus en de "In De Anima" van Pseudo(?)-Simplicius |
Type | Article |
Language | Dutch |
Date | 1972 |
Journal | Tijdschrift voor Filosofie |
Volume | 34 |
Issue | 4 |
Pages | 761-822 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Bossier, Fernand , Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
Dans cet article, nous avons essayé d'examiner la valeur de l'attribution traditionnelle du commentaire In De Anima à Simplicius. En comparant ce traité aux grands commentaires de Simplicius (sur les Catégories, la Physique et le De Caelo d'Aristote), nous avons en effet été frappés par les divergences de style et de langue, ainsi que par la différente manière de commenter. Dans la première partie, nous démontrons que l'auteur de In D.A. a également écrit la Metaphrasis in Theophrastum, qui nous a été transmise sous le nom de Priscien le Lydien. 1° Dans In D.A., l'auteur renvoie à une de ses œuvres, qu'il appelle Epitomé de la Physique de Théophraste. En réalité, cette référence se rapporte à un passage de la Metaphrase de Priscien, où la même problématique est exposée dans des termes identiques. 2° Une comparaison détaillée portant sur l'ensemble des deux œuvres nous révèle une telle ressemblance de style et de pensée – il y a même des phrases à peu près identiques – qu'elle ne peut s'expliquer que par l'hypothèse de l'identité de l'auteur. Dans la deuxième partie, nous essayons d'identifier l'auteur de ces deux œuvres qui, pourtant, nous ont été transmises sous deux noms différents. L'étude de la tradition directe et indirecte n'apporte guère de solution, puisque l'attribution des deux textes, l'un à Simplicius, l'autre à Priscien, y paraît très solide. Ce n'est donc que par une critique interne de In D.A., notamment par la confrontation avec les commentaires de Simplicius, dont l'attribution est certaine, que la question pourra être tranchée. 1° Dans In D.A., l'auteur renvoie trois fois à son commentaire sur la Physique. Pourtant, il est bien difficile de retrouver dans le grand commentaire de Simplicius trois passages dont le contenu et surtout le vocabulaire prouvent que l'auteur s'y réfère. 2° Dans In D.A., on ne retrouve pas les traits caractéristiques de la méthode de commentaire de Simplicius, ni l'approche du texte par la documentation historique, ni les longues discussions avec les exégètes antérieurs, ni l'exposé prolixe et bien structuré. D'autre part, aucun des commentaires de Simplicius ne témoigne de la phraséologie tortueuse de notre œuvre, ni de ses formules stéréotypées. 3° La différence doctrinale est encore plus importante. Nulle part chez Simplicius n'apparaît la théorie de l'âme comme epistêmê, qui est si fondamentale dans In D.A. (epistêmê y est un concept-clé). Les rares digressions de In D.A. à propos de questions physiques et logiques ne correspondent pas aux exposés de Simplicius sur les mêmes problèmes. Ainsi, nous avons confronté la doctrine de la physis, de l'âme et de son automotion, et enfin le rapport entre le genre et les différences constitutives et diérétiques. De tout cela se dégage une telle divergence entre In D.A. et les autres commentaires qu'elle ne peut s'expliquer par une évolution chez Simplicius lui-même. In D.A. lui est donc faussement attribué ; et puisque nous avons établi que ce commentaire est du même auteur que la Metaphrase, nous pouvons conclure qu'il a été vraisemblablement écrit par Priscien le Lydien, un philosophe néoplatonicien dont nous savons seulement qu'il a accompagné Damascius et Simplicius en exil en exil en Perse. [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/r917awdAL4tkrdc |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1077","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1077,"authors_free":[{"id":1632,"entry_id":1077,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":12,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Bossier, Fernand","free_first_name":"Fernand","free_last_name":"Bossier","norm_person":{"id":12,"first_name":"Fernand ","last_name":"Bossier","full_name":"Bossier, Fernand ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1017981663","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1633,"entry_id":1077,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Priscianus Lydus en de \"In De Anima\" van Pseudo(?)-Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Priscianus Lydus en de \"In De Anima\" van Pseudo(?)-Simplicius"},"abstract":"Dans cet article, nous avons essay\u00e9 d'examiner la valeur de l'attribution traditionnelle du commentaire In De Anima \u00e0 Simplicius. En comparant ce trait\u00e9 aux grands commentaires de Simplicius (sur les Cat\u00e9gories, la Physique et le De Caelo d'Aristote), nous avons en effet \u00e9t\u00e9 frapp\u00e9s par les divergences de style et de langue, ainsi que par la diff\u00e9rente mani\u00e8re de commenter.\r\n\r\nDans la premi\u00e8re partie, nous d\u00e9montrons que l'auteur de In D.A. a \u00e9galement \u00e9crit la Metaphrasis in Theophrastum, qui nous a \u00e9t\u00e9 transmise sous le nom de Priscien le Lydien.\r\n1\u00b0 Dans In D.A., l'auteur renvoie \u00e0 une de ses \u0153uvres, qu'il appelle Epitom\u00e9 de la Physique de Th\u00e9ophraste. En r\u00e9alit\u00e9, cette r\u00e9f\u00e9rence se rapporte \u00e0 un passage de la Metaphrase de Priscien, o\u00f9 la m\u00eame probl\u00e9matique est expos\u00e9e dans des termes identiques.\r\n2\u00b0 Une comparaison d\u00e9taill\u00e9e portant sur l'ensemble des deux \u0153uvres nous r\u00e9v\u00e8le une telle ressemblance de style et de pens\u00e9e \u2013 il y a m\u00eame des phrases \u00e0 peu pr\u00e8s identiques \u2013 qu'elle ne peut s'expliquer que par l'hypoth\u00e8se de l'identit\u00e9 de l'auteur.\r\n\r\nDans la deuxi\u00e8me partie, nous essayons d'identifier l'auteur de ces deux \u0153uvres qui, pourtant, nous ont \u00e9t\u00e9 transmises sous deux noms diff\u00e9rents. L'\u00e9tude de la tradition directe et indirecte n'apporte gu\u00e8re de solution, puisque l'attribution des deux textes, l'un \u00e0 Simplicius, l'autre \u00e0 Priscien, y para\u00eet tr\u00e8s solide. Ce n'est donc que par une critique interne de In D.A., notamment par la confrontation avec les commentaires de Simplicius, dont l'attribution est certaine, que la question pourra \u00eatre tranch\u00e9e.\r\n1\u00b0 Dans In D.A., l'auteur renvoie trois fois \u00e0 son commentaire sur la Physique. Pourtant, il est bien difficile de retrouver dans le grand commentaire de Simplicius trois passages dont le contenu et surtout le vocabulaire prouvent que l'auteur s'y r\u00e9f\u00e8re.\r\n2\u00b0 Dans In D.A., on ne retrouve pas les traits caract\u00e9ristiques de la m\u00e9thode de commentaire de Simplicius, ni l'approche du texte par la documentation historique, ni les longues discussions avec les ex\u00e9g\u00e8tes ant\u00e9rieurs, ni l'expos\u00e9 prolixe et bien structur\u00e9. D'autre part, aucun des commentaires de Simplicius ne t\u00e9moigne de la phras\u00e9ologie tortueuse de notre \u0153uvre, ni de ses formules st\u00e9r\u00e9otyp\u00e9es.\r\n3\u00b0 La diff\u00e9rence doctrinale est encore plus importante. Nulle part chez Simplicius n'appara\u00eet la th\u00e9orie de l'\u00e2me comme epist\u00eam\u00ea, qui est si fondamentale dans In D.A. (epist\u00eam\u00ea y est un concept-cl\u00e9). Les rares digressions de In D.A. \u00e0 propos de questions physiques et logiques ne correspondent pas aux expos\u00e9s de Simplicius sur les m\u00eames probl\u00e8mes.\r\n\r\nAinsi, nous avons confront\u00e9 la doctrine de la physis, de l'\u00e2me et de son automotion, et enfin le rapport entre le genre et les diff\u00e9rences constitutives et di\u00e9r\u00e9tiques. De tout cela se d\u00e9gage une telle divergence entre In D.A. et les autres commentaires qu'elle ne peut s'expliquer par une \u00e9volution chez Simplicius lui-m\u00eame. In D.A. lui est donc faussement attribu\u00e9 ; et puisque nous avons \u00e9tabli que ce commentaire est du m\u00eame auteur que la Metaphrase, nous pouvons conclure qu'il a \u00e9t\u00e9 vraisemblablement \u00e9crit par Priscien le Lydien, un philosophe n\u00e9oplatonicien dont nous savons seulement qu'il a accompagn\u00e9 Damascius et Simplicius en exil en exil en Perse. [author's abstract]","btype":3,"date":"1972","language":"Dutch","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/r917awdAL4tkrdc","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":12,"full_name":"Bossier, Fernand ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1077,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Tijdschrift voor Filosofie","volume":"34","issue":"4","pages":"761-822"}},"sort":[1972]}
Title | (Neo-) Platonica |
Type | Article |
Language | Dutch |
Date | 1984 |
Journal | Tijdschrift voor Filosofie |
Volume | 46 |
Issue | 2 |
Pages | 319-330 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
Filosofie is ons vooral in de vorm van teksten toegankelijk. Wie filosofie wil studeren, zal onvermijdelijk teksten moeten bestuderen en zal het resultaat van zijn eigen onderzoek weer in de vorm van teksten produceren. Wel heeft de filosofie van oudsher ook met de mogelijkheid rekening gehouden dat men inzichten kan verwerven die niet discursief uitgedrukt kunnen worden, die niet „textfähig“ zijn; maar toch is de filosofie weinig beïnvloed geworden door deze principiële mogelijkheid. Tenslotte kan men weer reflecteren en schrijven over deze niet-tekstmatige inzichten, zodat het erop lijkt dat men nooit uit de toverban van de tekst geraken kan. Niemand zal eraan denken het voordeel prijs te geven dat de filosofie heeft door zich aan teksten te binden en zo haar inzichten te objectiveren. Maar toch is het bedenkelijk dat men de binding van filosofisch inzicht aan de tekst als vanzelfsprekend ziet. Zo wordt ook niet meer duidelijk wat de „zaak“ is waarop de filosofische tekst betrekking heeft. Is er wel een „zaak-los-van-de-tekst“? Het is bekend dat Plato tegenover het fenomeen „tekst“ bewust afstand heeft genomen. Men kan hem zeker niet verwijten dat hij een naïef vertrouwen heeft in de tekst als medium van filosofisch inzicht: waar het in de filosofie eigenlijk om gaat is niet in tekst uit te drukken. Al is hij zelf meer dan wie ook tekst-kunstenaar, hij blijft zich bewust van de grenzen van de tekst. Wie uit Plato’s dialogen een doctrine construeert, een systeem van uitspraken over „wat het geval is“, verliest deze reserve ten opzichte van de tekst en reduceert de vele „vormen van kennis“ tot objectief „propositioneel“ kennen. Dit is de invalshoek van waaruit Wolfgang Wieland, vooral bekend wegens zijn originele studie over Aristoteles’ Physica, zijn Plato-boek geschreven heeft: Platon und die Formen des Wissens. Het boek bevat drie delen. Het eerste is gewijd aan Plato’s verhouding tot de geschreven tekst. Uitgaande van de bekende passage in de Phaidros onderzoekt Wieland waarom Plato zo kritisch is ten opzichte van het schrift. Plato verzet zich tegen elke poging om het weten te objectiveren alsof men in de tekst over inzicht als over een stuk bezit zou kunnen beschikken. Elke formulering in taal blijft werktuig, iets voorlopigs. Het „gebruiksweten“ dat in de omgang met de dingen tot stand komt, heeft voorrang op het weten dat in proposities is uitgedrukt. Hier staan we meteen voor het centrale thema van Wielands boek. Het is echter de vraag of dit bij Plato wel zo centraal is. Bij Plato gaat het vooreerst om kritiek op het schrift, en niet op het propositionele weten als zodanig. Vanuit de schriftkritiek kan men ook de dialoog als medium van filosofisch denken begrijpen. Indien men ondanks alle reserves toch niet aan tekst verzaken kan, dan biedt de dialoogvorm een uitweg. Eén van de tekorten van de tekst heeft namelijk te maken met het ontbreken van een reële context van het woord. De dialoog brengt deze context op dramatisch-fictieve wijze tot stand. De dialoog is geen didactisch hulpmiddel, geen inkleding van een leer. De uitspraken blijven er als „werktuigen“ in de gespreksactie fungeren. Vanuit de schriftkritiek kan men ook het statuut van de mythe binnen de tekst begrijpen, het metaforische karakter van vele passages, het gebruik van de ironie. Tenslotte wijst Wieland in § 5 op het belang van de fictieve chronologie bij het beoordelen van een dialoog. Men kan namelijk, uitgaande van de dramatische situatie van de verschillende dialogen, een fictieve chronologie opstellen: zo zal niemand betwisten dat de Parmenides later is geschreven dan de Phaidon (reële chronologie), maar in de fictieve chronologie komt de Parmenides veel eerder, omdat hierin de jonge Socrates optreedt, terwijl in de Phaidon Socrates voor de dood staat. In de interpretatie heeft men te weinig rekening gehouden met de plaats van een dialoog in deze fictieve chronologie. [introduction p. 319-320] Übersetzung: Philosophie ist uns vor allem in der Form von Texten zugänglich. Wer Philosophie studieren will, muss zwangsläufig Texte studieren und wird die Ergebnisse seiner eigenen Forschung wiederum in Form von Texten präsentieren. Die Philosophie hat jedoch seit jeher auch die Möglichkeit berücksichtigt, dass Erkenntnisse gewonnen werden können, die nicht diskursiv ausgedrückt werden können, die also nicht „textfähig“ sind. Dennoch hat diese prinzipielle Möglichkeit die Philosophie kaum beeinflusst. Letztendlich kann man auch über diese nicht-textlichen Erkenntnisse reflektieren und schreiben, sodass es scheint, als könne man niemals aus dem Bann des Textes entkommen. Niemand wird daran denken, den Vorteil aufzugeben, den die Philosophie dadurch hat, sich an Texte zu binden und ihre Erkenntnisse so zu objektivieren. Doch es ist bedenklich, dass man die Bindung philosophischer Erkenntnis an den Text als selbstverständlich betrachtet. Dadurch wird auch unklar, was die „Sache“ ist, auf die sich der philosophische Text bezieht. Gibt es überhaupt eine „Sache außerhalb des Textes“? Es ist bekannt, dass Platon dem Phänomen „Text“ bewusst distanziert gegenüberstand. Man kann ihm sicher nicht vorwerfen, ein naives Vertrauen in den Text als Medium philosophischer Erkenntnis gehabt zu haben: Worauf es in der Philosophie eigentlich ankommt, lässt sich nicht in Texten ausdrücken. Auch wenn er selbst mehr als jeder andere ein Künstler des Textes war, war er sich stets der Grenzen des Textes bewusst. Wer aus Platons Dialogen eine Doktrin konstruiert, ein System von Aussagen über „das, was der Fall ist“, verliert diese kritische Distanz zum Text und reduziert die vielen „Formen des Wissens“ auf ein objektives „propositionales“ Wissen. Dies ist die Perspektive, aus der Wolfgang Wieland, vor allem bekannt für seine originelle Studie über Aristoteles’ Physik, sein Platon-Buch Platon und die Formen des Wissens geschrieben hat. Das Buch besteht aus drei Teilen. Der erste Teil widmet sich Platons Verhältnis zum geschriebenen Text. Ausgehend von der bekannten Passage im Phaidros untersucht Wieland, warum Platon dem Schreiben so kritisch gegenüberstand. Platon wendet sich gegen jede Versuchung, Wissen zu objektivieren, als könne man in einem Text über Erkenntnisse verfügen wie über einen Besitz. Jede Formulierung in Sprache bleibt ein Werkzeug, etwas Vorläufiges. Das „Gebrauchswissen“, das im Umgang mit den Dingen entsteht, hat Vorrang vor dem Wissen, das in Propositionen ausgedrückt ist. Hier begegnen wir dem zentralen Thema von Wielands Buch. Es bleibt jedoch die Frage, ob dies bei Platon tatsächlich zentral ist. Bei Platon geht es zunächst um Kritik am Schreiben und nicht um Kritik am propositionalen Wissen als solches. Aus der Schriftkritik lässt sich auch die Dialogform als Medium des philosophischen Denkens verstehen. Wenn man trotz aller Vorbehalte nicht auf den Text verzichten kann, bietet die Dialogform einen Ausweg. Ein Mangel des Textes liegt nämlich im Fehlen eines realen Kontexts des Wortes. Der Dialog stellt diesen Kontext auf dramatisch-fiktive Weise her. Der Dialog ist kein didaktisches Hilfsmittel, keine Verpackung einer Lehre. Die Aussagen fungieren in der Dialoghandlung weiterhin als „Werkzeuge“. Aus der Schriftkritik lässt sich auch der Status des Mythos im Text verstehen, ebenso wie der metaphorische Charakter vieler Passagen und die Verwendung von Ironie. Schließlich weist Wieland in § 5 auf die Bedeutung der fiktiven Chronologie für die Beurteilung eines Dialogs hin. Ausgehend von der dramatischen Situation der verschiedenen Dialoge lässt sich eine fiktive Chronologie erstellen: Niemand wird bestreiten, dass der Parmenides später geschrieben wurde als der Phaidon (reale Chronologie), aber in der fiktiven Chronologie kommt der Parmenides viel früher, da dort der junge Sokrates auftritt, während im Phaidon Sokrates vor seinem Tod steht. In der Interpretation hat man die Stellung eines Dialogs in dieser fiktiven Chronologie bisher zu wenig berücksichtigt. |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/H1e3T5fZsfMIh5O |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"845","_score":null,"_source":{"id":845,"authors_free":[{"id":1249,"entry_id":845,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"(Neo-) Platonica","main_title":{"title":"(Neo-) Platonica"},"abstract":"Filosofie is ons vooral in de vorm van teksten toegankelijk. Wie filosofie wil studeren, zal onvermijdelijk teksten moeten bestuderen en zal het resultaat van zijn eigen onderzoek weer in de vorm van teksten produceren. Wel heeft de filosofie van oudsher ook met de mogelijkheid rekening gehouden dat men inzichten kan verwerven die niet discursief uitgedrukt kunnen worden, die niet \u201etextf\u00e4hig\u201c zijn; maar toch is de filosofie weinig be\u00efnvloed geworden door deze principi\u00eble mogelijkheid. Tenslotte kan men weer reflecteren en schrijven over deze niet-tekstmatige inzichten, zodat het erop lijkt dat men nooit uit de toverban van de tekst geraken kan. Niemand zal eraan denken het voordeel prijs te geven dat de filosofie heeft door zich aan teksten te binden en zo haar inzichten te objectiveren. Maar toch is het bedenkelijk dat men de binding van filosofisch inzicht aan de tekst als vanzelfsprekend ziet. Zo wordt ook niet meer duidelijk wat de \u201ezaak\u201c is waarop de filosofische tekst betrekking heeft. Is er wel een \u201ezaak-los-van-de-tekst\u201c? Het is bekend dat Plato tegenover het fenomeen \u201etekst\u201c bewust afstand heeft genomen. Men kan hem zeker niet verwijten dat hij een na\u00efef vertrouwen heeft in de tekst als medium van filosofisch inzicht: waar het in de filosofie eigenlijk om gaat is niet in tekst uit te drukken. Al is hij zelf meer dan wie ook tekst-kunstenaar, hij blijft zich bewust van de grenzen van de tekst. Wie uit Plato\u2019s dialogen een doctrine construeert, een systeem van uitspraken over \u201ewat het geval is\u201c, verliest deze reserve ten opzichte van de tekst en reduceert de vele \u201evormen van kennis\u201c tot objectief \u201epropositioneel\u201c kennen.\r\n\r\nDit is de invalshoek van waaruit Wolfgang Wieland, vooral bekend wegens zijn originele studie over Aristoteles\u2019 Physica, zijn Plato-boek geschreven heeft: Platon und die Formen des Wissens. Het boek bevat drie delen. Het eerste is gewijd aan Plato\u2019s verhouding tot de geschreven tekst. Uitgaande van de bekende passage in de Phaidros onderzoekt Wieland waarom Plato zo kritisch is ten opzichte van het schrift. Plato verzet zich tegen elke poging om het weten te objectiveren alsof men in de tekst over inzicht als over een stuk bezit zou kunnen beschikken. Elke formulering in taal blijft werktuig, iets voorlopigs. Het \u201egebruiksweten\u201c dat in de omgang met de dingen tot stand komt, heeft voorrang op het weten dat in proposities is uitgedrukt. Hier staan we meteen voor het centrale thema van Wielands boek. Het is echter de vraag of dit bij Plato wel zo centraal is. Bij Plato gaat het vooreerst om kritiek op het schrift, en niet op het propositionele weten als zodanig.\r\n\r\nVanuit de schriftkritiek kan men ook de dialoog als medium van filosofisch denken begrijpen. Indien men ondanks alle reserves toch niet aan tekst verzaken kan, dan biedt de dialoogvorm een uitweg. E\u00e9n van de tekorten van de tekst heeft namelijk te maken met het ontbreken van een re\u00eble context van het woord. De dialoog brengt deze context op dramatisch-fictieve wijze tot stand. De dialoog is geen didactisch hulpmiddel, geen inkleding van een leer. De uitspraken blijven er als \u201ewerktuigen\u201c in de gespreksactie fungeren. Vanuit de schriftkritiek kan men ook het statuut van de mythe binnen de tekst begrijpen, het metaforische karakter van vele passages, het gebruik van de ironie. Tenslotte wijst Wieland in \u00a7 5 op het belang van de fictieve chronologie bij het beoordelen van een dialoog. Men kan namelijk, uitgaande van de dramatische situatie van de verschillende dialogen, een fictieve chronologie opstellen: zo zal niemand betwisten dat de Parmenides later is geschreven dan de Phaidon (re\u00eble chronologie), maar in de fictieve chronologie komt de Parmenides veel eerder, omdat hierin de jonge Socrates optreedt, terwijl in de Phaidon Socrates voor de dood staat. In de interpretatie heeft men te weinig rekening gehouden met de plaats van een dialoog in deze fictieve chronologie.\r\n[introduction p. 319-320] \u00dcbersetzung: Philosophie ist uns vor allem in der Form von Texten zug\u00e4nglich. Wer Philosophie studieren will, muss zwangsl\u00e4ufig Texte studieren und wird die Ergebnisse seiner eigenen Forschung wiederum in Form von Texten pr\u00e4sentieren. Die Philosophie hat jedoch seit jeher auch die M\u00f6glichkeit ber\u00fccksichtigt, dass Erkenntnisse gewonnen werden k\u00f6nnen, die nicht diskursiv ausgedr\u00fcckt werden k\u00f6nnen, die also nicht \u201etextf\u00e4hig\u201c sind. Dennoch hat diese prinzipielle M\u00f6glichkeit die Philosophie kaum beeinflusst. Letztendlich kann man auch \u00fcber diese nicht-textlichen Erkenntnisse reflektieren und schreiben, sodass es scheint, als k\u00f6nne man niemals aus dem Bann des Textes entkommen. Niemand wird daran denken, den Vorteil aufzugeben, den die Philosophie dadurch hat, sich an Texte zu binden und ihre Erkenntnisse so zu objektivieren. Doch es ist bedenklich, dass man die Bindung philosophischer Erkenntnis an den Text als selbstverst\u00e4ndlich betrachtet. Dadurch wird auch unklar, was die \u201eSache\u201c ist, auf die sich der philosophische Text bezieht. Gibt es \u00fcberhaupt eine \u201eSache au\u00dferhalb des Textes\u201c?\r\n\r\nEs ist bekannt, dass Platon dem Ph\u00e4nomen \u201eText\u201c bewusst distanziert gegen\u00fcberstand. Man kann ihm sicher nicht vorwerfen, ein naives Vertrauen in den Text als Medium philosophischer Erkenntnis gehabt zu haben: Worauf es in der Philosophie eigentlich ankommt, l\u00e4sst sich nicht in Texten ausdr\u00fccken. Auch wenn er selbst mehr als jeder andere ein K\u00fcnstler des Textes war, war er sich stets der Grenzen des Textes bewusst. Wer aus Platons Dialogen eine Doktrin konstruiert, ein System von Aussagen \u00fcber \u201edas, was der Fall ist\u201c, verliert diese kritische Distanz zum Text und reduziert die vielen \u201eFormen des Wissens\u201c auf ein objektives \u201epropositionales\u201c Wissen.\r\n\r\nDies ist die Perspektive, aus der Wolfgang Wieland, vor allem bekannt f\u00fcr seine originelle Studie \u00fcber Aristoteles\u2019 Physik, sein Platon-Buch Platon und die Formen des Wissens geschrieben hat. Das Buch besteht aus drei Teilen. Der erste Teil widmet sich Platons Verh\u00e4ltnis zum geschriebenen Text. Ausgehend von der bekannten Passage im Phaidros untersucht Wieland, warum Platon dem Schreiben so kritisch gegen\u00fcberstand. Platon wendet sich gegen jede Versuchung, Wissen zu objektivieren, als k\u00f6nne man in einem Text \u00fcber Erkenntnisse verf\u00fcgen wie \u00fcber einen Besitz. Jede Formulierung in Sprache bleibt ein Werkzeug, etwas Vorl\u00e4ufiges. Das \u201eGebrauchswissen\u201c, das im Umgang mit den Dingen entsteht, hat Vorrang vor dem Wissen, das in Propositionen ausgedr\u00fcckt ist. Hier begegnen wir dem zentralen Thema von Wielands Buch. Es bleibt jedoch die Frage, ob dies bei Platon tats\u00e4chlich zentral ist. Bei Platon geht es zun\u00e4chst um Kritik am Schreiben und nicht um Kritik am propositionalen Wissen als solches.\r\n\r\nAus der Schriftkritik l\u00e4sst sich auch die Dialogform als Medium des philosophischen Denkens verstehen. Wenn man trotz aller Vorbehalte nicht auf den Text verzichten kann, bietet die Dialogform einen Ausweg. Ein Mangel des Textes liegt n\u00e4mlich im Fehlen eines realen Kontexts des Wortes. Der Dialog stellt diesen Kontext auf dramatisch-fiktive Weise her. Der Dialog ist kein didaktisches Hilfsmittel, keine Verpackung einer Lehre. Die Aussagen fungieren in der Dialoghandlung weiterhin als \u201eWerkzeuge\u201c. Aus der Schriftkritik l\u00e4sst sich auch der Status des Mythos im Text verstehen, ebenso wie der metaphorische Charakter vieler Passagen und die Verwendung von Ironie. Schlie\u00dflich weist Wieland in \u00a7 5 auf die Bedeutung der fiktiven Chronologie f\u00fcr die Beurteilung eines Dialogs hin. Ausgehend von der dramatischen Situation der verschiedenen Dialoge l\u00e4sst sich eine fiktive Chronologie erstellen: Niemand wird bestreiten, dass der Parmenides sp\u00e4ter geschrieben wurde als der Phaidon (reale Chronologie), aber in der fiktiven Chronologie kommt der Parmenides viel fr\u00fcher, da dort der junge Sokrates auftritt, w\u00e4hrend im Phaidon Sokrates vor seinem Tod steht. In der Interpretation hat man die Stellung eines Dialogs in dieser fiktiven Chronologie bisher zu wenig ber\u00fccksichtigt.","btype":3,"date":"1984","language":"Dutch","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/H1e3T5fZsfMIh5O","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":845,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Tijdschrift voor Filosofie","volume":"46","issue":"2","pages":"319-330"}},"sort":["(Neo-) Platonica"]}
Title | Guillaume de Moerbeke et Saint Thomas |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1989 |
Published in | Guillaume de Moerbeke. Recueil d’études à l’occasion du 700e anniversaire de sa mort (1286) |
Pages | 57-82 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | Brams, Jozef , Vanhamel, Willy |
Translator(s) |
On peut difficilement expliquer l’utilisation privilégiée des traductions de Moerbeke dont témoigne l’œuvre de saint Thomas, si on n’admet pas que les deux hommes aient été en relation directe. Certes, Guillaume a commencé son projet de traduction sans l’initiative ou l’encouragement de Thomas. Mais, quand ce dernier eut pris connaissance du travail de son confrère (probablement lors d’une rencontre à Viterbe), il a commencé à utiliser ses traductions. Il est même probable qu’il a commandé quelques fois lui-même une traduction. Les données manquent pour pouvoir parler d’une véritable collaboration entre les deux hommes. D’ailleurs, je n’ai pas l’impression que leurs intérêts intellectuels étaient convergents. Si on peut prendre le prologue de la Perspectiva de Witelo comme un témoignage indirect sur la pensée de Guillaume, il semble qu’il avait une préférence pour une philosophie platonisante, avec un intérêt particulier pour la philosophie de la nature et l’astronomie (-logie?). Il avait probablement plus de connaturalité intellectuelle avec son jeune ami et compatriote Henri Bate (qui lui a dédié son traité sur la composition de l’astrolabe) qu’avec le théologien-philosophe Thomas d’Aquin. Quoi qu’il en soit, il est hors de doute que Thomas a pu profiter largement du travail de son confrère. Selon la tradition, Thomas aurait pris des initiatives pour obtenir de nouvelles traductions d’Aristote. Les faits que nous avons examinés ne sont pas en contradiction avec ce témoignage. Mais, comme il arrive fréquemment dans une tradition hagiographique, on accentue tellement les exploits du héros principal qu’on a tendance à réduire l’activité des contemporains à celle de « collaborateurs » et à minimiser leur apport original. D’où la tradition que Guillaume de Moerbeke aurait entrepris tout son travail ad instantiam fratris Thomae. L’étude de l’histoire des traductions et les remarques critiques du F. Gauthier nous ont obligés à limiter nettement la portée de ce témoignage. Cette étude a restitué ainsi à Moerbeke son autonomie et son originalité intellectuelle. Mais elle a confirmé également qu’il y a eu communication scientifique entre les deux dominicains (ce qui est le noyau solide de la tradition). Thomas a très vite compris l’importance du travail de son confrère. Il en a profité le premier, et c’est probablement grâce à son autorité que des traductions de Moerbeke ont commencé à circuler à Paris, et à partir de là dans la culture latine. [conclusion p. 81-82] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/3D0JB4FJderQiIl |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1388","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1388,"authors_free":[{"id":2147,"entry_id":1388,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2148,"entry_id":1388,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":337,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Brams, Jozef","free_first_name":"Jozef","free_last_name":"Brams","norm_person":{"id":337,"first_name":"Jozef","last_name":"Brams","full_name":"Brams, Jozef","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1145645712","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2149,"entry_id":1388,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":338,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","free_first_name":"Willy","free_last_name":"Vanhamel","norm_person":{"id":338,"first_name":"Willy","last_name":"Vanhamel","full_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/141109661","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Guillaume de Moerbeke et Saint Thomas","main_title":{"title":"Guillaume de Moerbeke et Saint Thomas"},"abstract":"On peut difficilement expliquer l\u2019utilisation privil\u00e9gi\u00e9e des traductions de Moerbeke dont t\u00e9moigne l\u2019\u0153uvre de saint Thomas, si on n\u2019admet pas que les deux hommes aient \u00e9t\u00e9 en relation directe. Certes, Guillaume a commenc\u00e9 son projet de traduction sans l\u2019initiative ou l\u2019encouragement de Thomas. Mais, quand ce dernier eut pris connaissance du travail de son confr\u00e8re (probablement lors d\u2019une rencontre \u00e0 Viterbe), il a commenc\u00e9 \u00e0 utiliser ses traductions. Il est m\u00eame probable qu\u2019il a command\u00e9 quelques fois lui-m\u00eame une traduction. Les donn\u00e9es manquent pour pouvoir parler d\u2019une v\u00e9ritable collaboration entre les deux hommes.\r\n\r\nD\u2019ailleurs, je n\u2019ai pas l\u2019impression que leurs int\u00e9r\u00eats intellectuels \u00e9taient convergents. Si on peut prendre le prologue de la Perspectiva de Witelo comme un t\u00e9moignage indirect sur la pens\u00e9e de Guillaume, il semble qu\u2019il avait une pr\u00e9f\u00e9rence pour une philosophie platonisante, avec un int\u00e9r\u00eat particulier pour la philosophie de la nature et l\u2019astronomie (-logie?). Il avait probablement plus de connaturalit\u00e9 intellectuelle avec son jeune ami et compatriote Henri Bate (qui lui a d\u00e9di\u00e9 son trait\u00e9 sur la composition de l\u2019astrolabe) qu\u2019avec le th\u00e9ologien-philosophe Thomas d\u2019Aquin.\r\n\r\nQuoi qu\u2019il en soit, il est hors de doute que Thomas a pu profiter largement du travail de son confr\u00e8re. Selon la tradition, Thomas aurait pris des initiatives pour obtenir de nouvelles traductions d\u2019Aristote. Les faits que nous avons examin\u00e9s ne sont pas en contradiction avec ce t\u00e9moignage. Mais, comme il arrive fr\u00e9quemment dans une tradition hagiographique, on accentue tellement les exploits du h\u00e9ros principal qu\u2019on a tendance \u00e0 r\u00e9duire l\u2019activit\u00e9 des contemporains \u00e0 celle de \u00ab collaborateurs \u00bb et \u00e0 minimiser leur apport original.\r\n\r\nD\u2019o\u00f9 la tradition que Guillaume de Moerbeke aurait entrepris tout son travail ad instantiam fratris Thomae. L\u2019\u00e9tude de l\u2019histoire des traductions et les remarques critiques du F. Gauthier nous ont oblig\u00e9s \u00e0 limiter nettement la port\u00e9e de ce t\u00e9moignage. Cette \u00e9tude a restitu\u00e9 ainsi \u00e0 Moerbeke son autonomie et son originalit\u00e9 intellectuelle. Mais elle a confirm\u00e9 \u00e9galement qu\u2019il y a eu communication scientifique entre les deux dominicains (ce qui est le noyau solide de la tradition).\r\n\r\nThomas a tr\u00e8s vite compris l\u2019importance du travail de son confr\u00e8re. Il en a profit\u00e9 le premier, et c\u2019est probablement gr\u00e2ce \u00e0 son autorit\u00e9 que des traductions de Moerbeke ont commenc\u00e9 \u00e0 circuler \u00e0 Paris, et \u00e0 partir de l\u00e0 dans la culture latine. [conclusion p. 81-82]","btype":2,"date":"1989","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/3D0JB4FJderQiIl","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":337,"full_name":"Brams, Jozef","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":338,"full_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1388,"section_of":326,"pages":"57-82","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":326,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Guillaume de Moerbeke. Recueil d\u2019\u00e9tudes \u00e0 l\u2019occasion du 700e anniversaire de sa mort (1286)","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Brams1989","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1989","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1989","abstract":"T h e following articles are included in this volume: \"Moerbeke, traducteur et inter-\r\nprete: Un texte et une pensee\" by Gerard Verbeke (pp. 1-21); \"Guillaume de Moer-\r\nbeke et la cour pontificale\" by Agostino Paravicini Bagliani (pp. 23-52); \"Note con-\r\ncernant certaines missions qui auraient ete confiees a Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by\r\nWilly Vanhamel (pp. 53-56); \"Guillaume de Moerbeke et saint Thomas\" by Carlos\r\nSteel (pp. 57-82); \"Pietro d'Abano e l'utilizzazione della traduzione di Guglielmo di\r\nMoerbeke del commento di Simplicio al \/\/ De caelo di Aristotele\" by Graziella Federici\r\nVescovini (pp. 83-106); \"Quelques utilisateurs des textes rares de Moerbeke\r\n(Philopon, Tria opuscula) et particulierement Jacques de Viterbe\" by Louis Jacques\r\nBataillon (pp. 107-12); \"Quelques remarques codicologiques et paleographiques\r\nau sujet du ms. Vaticano Ottob. lat. 1850\" by Robert Wielockx (pp. 113-33);\r\n\"La liste des ceuvres d'Hippocrate dans le Vindobonensis phil. gr. 100: Un\r\nautographe de Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Gudrun Vuillemin-Diem (pp. 135-83);\r\n\"Note concernant la collation d'un deuxieme manuscrit grec de la Physique\r\npar Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Jozef Brams and Gudrun Vuillemin-Diem (pp.\r\n185-92); \"La 'Recensio Matritensis' de la Physique\" by Jozef Brams (pp. 193-220);\r\n\"La Translatio anonyma e la Translatio Guillelmi del De partibus animalium (Analisi del\r\nlibro I)\" by Pietro Rossi (pp. 221-45); \"L'attribution de la Translatio nova du De\r\ngenerations et corruptione a Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Joanna Judycka (pp. 247-51);\r\n\"Iudicialia ad Syrum: Une traduction de Guillaume de Moerbeke du Quadripartitum\r\nde Cl. Ptol\u00a3mee\" by Luc Anthonis (pp. 253-55); \"Methode de traduction et\r\nproblemes de chronologie\" by Fernand Bossier (pp. 257-94); \"L'usage des mots\r\nhybrides greco-latins par Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Louis Jacques Bataillon (pp.\r\n295-99); and \"Biobibliographie de Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Willy Vanhamel\r\n(pp. 301-83).","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/kM52uB2YgiCytgt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":326,"pubplace":"Leuven","publisher":"Leuven University Press","series":"Ancient and Medieval Philosophy de Wulf-Mansion Centre, Series 1","volume":"7","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Guillaume de Moerbeke et Saint Thomas"]}
Title | La triade chaldaïque ἔρως, ἀλήθεια, πίστις: De Proclus à Simplicius |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 2000 |
Published in | Proclus et la théologie platonicienne. Actes du colloque international de Louvain (13 -16 mai 1998). En l'honneur de H.D. Saffrey et L.G. Westerink |
Pages | 459-489 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hoffmann, Philippe |
Editor(s) | Segonds, A. Ph. , Steel, Carlos , Mettraux, A. F. (Coll.) , Luna, Concetta (Coll.) |
Translator(s) |
L'analyse des textes montre que dans l’œuvre de Simplicius s'établit une correspondance ferme entre le prologue de son Commentaire à la Physique et la prière finale du Commentaire au De caelo. Selon l’ordre néoplatonicien de lecture des traités d'Aristote, la Physique précède le De caelo. Ne peut-on, dans ces conditions, et malgré un ordre chronologique de composition inverse, expliquer par une raison de fond - c'est-à-dire par une sorte de continuité intentionnelle entre les deux ouvrages - l’absence d’une prière à la fin du Commentaire à la Physique, en considérant que la prière finale de l'In De caelo couronne à la fois ces deux commentaires, puisque l'un comme l'autre instruisent une polémique contre l'impiété de Jean Philopon, et font remonter l'exégète - et avec lui ses lecteurs - jusqu’à une forme d'union avec le corps céleste et avec le Démiurge, c’est-à-dire jusqu'à une « sympathie » donatrice de félicité? Ainsi se trouve atteint le telos évoqué dans le prologue du Commentaire aux Catégories, tandis qu'un fil thématique précis unit les trois Commentaires de Simplicius sur Aristote. [conclusion, p. 489] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/Z6GulpIldCyTgq3 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"681","_score":null,"_source":{"id":681,"authors_free":[{"id":1009,"entry_id":681,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":138,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe","free_first_name":"Philippe","free_last_name":"Hoffmann","norm_person":{"id":138,"first_name":"Philippe ","last_name":"Hoffmann","full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/189361905","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1010,"entry_id":681,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":196,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Segonds, A. Ph.","free_first_name":"A. Ph. ","free_last_name":"Segonds","norm_person":{"id":196,"first_name":"A. Ph. ","last_name":"Segonds","full_name":"Segonds, A. Ph.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1031742743","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2039,"entry_id":681,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2395,"entry_id":681,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":461,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Mettraux, A. F. (Coll.)","free_first_name":"A. F.","free_last_name":"Mettraux","norm_person":{"id":461,"first_name":"A. F.","last_name":"Mettraux","full_name":"Mettraux, A. F. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2396,"entry_id":681,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":458,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Luna, Concetta (Coll.)","free_first_name":"Concetta","free_last_name":"Luna","norm_person":{"id":458,"first_name":"Concetta","last_name":"Luna","full_name":"Luna, Concetta","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1153489031","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"La triade chalda\u00efque \u1f14\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2: De Proclus \u00e0 Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"La triade chalda\u00efque \u1f14\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2: De Proclus \u00e0 Simplicius"},"abstract":"L'analyse des textes montre que dans l\u2019\u0153uvre de Simplicius s'\u00e9tablit une correspondance ferme entre le prologue de son Commentaire \u00e0 la Physique et la pri\u00e8re finale du Commentaire au \r\nDe caelo. Selon l\u2019ordre n\u00e9oplatonicien de lecture des trait\u00e9s d'Aristote, la Physique pr\u00e9c\u00e8de le De caelo. Ne peut-on, dans ces conditions, et malgr\u00e9 un ordre chronologique de composition in\u00adverse, expliquer par une raison de fond - c'est-\u00e0-dire par une sorte de continuit\u00e9 intentionnelle entre les deux ouvrages - \r\nl\u2019absence d\u2019une pri\u00e8re \u00e0 la fin du Commentaire \u00e0 la Physique, en consid\u00e9rant que la pri\u00e8re finale de l'In De caelo couronne \u00e0 la fois \r\nces deux commentaires, puisque l'un comme l'autre instruisent une pol\u00e9mique contre l'impi\u00e9t\u00e9 de Jean Philopon, et font remonter l'ex\u00e9g\u00e8te - et avec lui ses lecteurs - jusqu\u2019\u00e0 une forme d'union avec le corps c\u00e9leste et avec le D\u00e9miurge, c\u2019est-\u00e0-dire jusqu'\u00e0 une \r\n\u00ab sympathie \u00bb donatrice de f\u00e9licit\u00e9? Ainsi se trouve atteint le telos \u00e9voqu\u00e9 dans le prologue du Commentaire aux Cat\u00e9gories, tandis qu'un fil th\u00e9matique pr\u00e9cis unit les trois Commentaires de Simplicius sur Aristote. [conclusion, p. 489]","btype":2,"date":"2000","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Z6GulpIldCyTgq3","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":138,"full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":196,"full_name":"Segonds, A. Ph.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":461,"full_name":"Mettraux, A. F. ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":458,"full_name":"Luna, Concetta","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":681,"section_of":369,"pages":"459-489","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":369,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Proclus et la th\u00e9ologie platonicienne. Actes du colloque international de Louvain (13 -16 mai 1998). En l'honneur de H.D. Saffrey et L.G. Westerink","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Segonds2000","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2000","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2000","abstract":"In his Platonic Theology, Proclus offers a systematic exposition of the theology of Plato. Integrating within the \u2018scienti-fic\u2019 framework of the Parmenides all the theological doctrines which are scattered throughout the Plato\u2019s dialogues, Proclus develops the Platonic doctrines on the One, the gods and the hierarchical procession of reality.\r\n\r\nThe present volume, which celebrates the completion of the critical edition of Proclus\u2019 Platonic Theology by H.-D. Saffrey and L.G. Westerink (+), contains thirty-one contributions by leading scholars in the field of Neoplatonic studies. They present their views on the organisation and principles of Proclus\u2019 theology, on the hermeneutics of Platonic dialogues, on the antecedents of this theological synthesis, and on its posterity, from Proclus\u2019 immediate successors through the Byzantine, Arabic and Latin Middle Ages.\r\n\r\nThis monumental volume, which is the result of three decades of dedicated scholarly research on the philosophy of Proclus, will stand for many years as an indispensable guide for all those interested in Neoplatonic studies. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/SbKzMkxqkUtsN6U","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":369,"pubplace":"Leuven - Paris","publisher":"Leuven University Press - Paris Les Belles Lettres","series":"Ancient and medieval philosophy, Series 1","volume":"26","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["La triade chalda\u00efque \u1f14\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2: De Proclus \u00e0 Simplicius"]}
Title | Neue Forschungen zum Neuplatonismus (1995-2003). Teil II |
Type | Article |
Language | German |
Date | 2004 |
Journal | Allgemeine Zeitschrift für Philosophie |
Volume | 29 |
Pages | 225-247 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos , Helmig, Christoph |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
Dieser Artikel berichtete über weniger als zehn Jahre Forschung im Bereich des Neuplatonismus. Und doch ist es erfreulich festzustellen, wie viel seit Mitte der 90er Jahre zustande gekommen ist, auch wenn es für die Zukunft noch viel zu tun gibt. Die Aufgabe stellt sich in doppelter Hinsicht: philologisch und philosophisch. In erster Linie ist es notwendig, das so rasant angewachsene Interesse für die neuplatonische Philosophie dahingehend zu nutzen, dass die Editionen und kommentierten Übersetzungen wichtiger Texte weitergeführt werden. Das ist eine intensive, mühevolle und oft undankbare Arbeit, weil so etwas im heutigen „Forschungsklima“ nicht immer in ausreichendem Maße gewürdigt wird. Und dennoch bleibt es eine der drängendsten Aufgaben, und das umso mehr, weil wir befürchten müssen, dass die Kenntnis der alten Sprachen immer weiter zurückgeht. Wie im Mittelalter die antike Philosophie nur überleben und neuen Einfluss gewinnen konnte durch massive Übersetzungsaktivitäten (ins Arabische und Lateinische), so werden in diesem Jahrhundert – ob man es nun bedauert oder nicht – viele neuplatonische Autoren nur noch in Reihen wie „The Ancient Commentators on Aristotle“ oder in anderen Übersetzungen gelesen werden. Darum ist es wichtig, dass die Übersetzungen zuverlässig sind und auf guten Editionen fußen. Es wäre daher wünschenswert, dass gerade auch in Deutschland vermehrt zentrale Texte aus dem späteren Neuplatonismus übersetzt und kommentiert würden. Aber neben dieser Editions- und Übersetzungsarbeit sollte das eigentliche Ziel der Forschung eine philosophische Annäherung sein an diese große Tradition der Geistesgeschichte mit ihren vielfachen kulturellen Verzweigungen im Mittelalter (von Syrien über den Irak und Andalusien bis nach Köln), in der Renaissance und in der Neuzeit. Dabei müssen wir uns aber davor hüten, den Neuplatonismus allzu leicht mit Schwärmerei oder einer Art von Esoterik in Verbindung zu bringen. Er ist und bleibt vor allem eine Philosophie, auch wenn er eine Philosophie ist, die rational die Grenzen der Rationalität einsieht. Gerade in der deutschsprachigen Forschung haben wir schöne Beispiele für ein fruchtbares Zusammengehen von philologischer akribeia und philosophischer Annäherung. Ein Paradigma einer solchen Forschung am Neuplatonismus bleiben für uns die zahlreichen philosophisch anregenden Arbeiten von Werner Beierwaltes. [p. 246-247] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/J1gdFPhAmlKlP6l |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"481","_score":null,"_source":{"id":481,"authors_free":[{"id":651,"entry_id":481,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":652,"entry_id":481,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":146,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Helmig, Christoph","free_first_name":"Christoph","free_last_name":"Helmig","norm_person":{"id":146,"first_name":"Christoph","last_name":"Helmig","full_name":"Helmig, Christoph","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1107028760","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Neue Forschungen zum Neuplatonismus (1995-2003). Teil II","main_title":{"title":"Neue Forschungen zum Neuplatonismus (1995-2003). Teil II"},"abstract":"Dieser Artikel berichtete \u00fcber weniger als zehn Jahre Forschung im Bereich des Neuplatonismus. Und doch ist es erfreulich festzustellen, wie viel seit Mitte der 90er Jahre zustande gekommen ist, auch wenn es f\u00fcr die Zukunft noch viel zu tun gibt. Die Aufgabe stellt sich in doppelter Hinsicht: philologisch und philosophisch.\r\n\r\nIn erster Linie ist es notwendig, das so rasant angewachsene Interesse f\u00fcr die neuplatonische Philosophie dahingehend zu nutzen, dass die Editionen und kommentierten \u00dcbersetzungen wichtiger Texte weitergef\u00fchrt werden. Das ist eine intensive, m\u00fchevolle und oft undankbare Arbeit, weil so etwas im heutigen \u201eForschungsklima\u201c nicht immer in ausreichendem Ma\u00dfe gew\u00fcrdigt wird. Und dennoch bleibt es eine der dr\u00e4ngendsten Aufgaben, und das umso mehr, weil wir bef\u00fcrchten m\u00fcssen, dass die Kenntnis der alten Sprachen immer weiter zur\u00fcckgeht.\r\n\r\nWie im Mittelalter die antike Philosophie nur \u00fcberleben und neuen Einfluss gewinnen konnte durch massive \u00dcbersetzungsaktivit\u00e4ten (ins Arabische und Lateinische), so werden in diesem Jahrhundert \u2013 ob man es nun bedauert oder nicht \u2013 viele neuplatonische Autoren nur noch in Reihen wie \u201eThe Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\u201c oder in anderen \u00dcbersetzungen gelesen werden. Darum ist es wichtig, dass die \u00dcbersetzungen zuverl\u00e4ssig sind und auf guten Editionen fu\u00dfen.\r\n\r\nEs w\u00e4re daher w\u00fcnschenswert, dass gerade auch in Deutschland vermehrt zentrale Texte aus dem sp\u00e4teren Neuplatonismus \u00fcbersetzt und kommentiert w\u00fcrden. Aber neben dieser Editions- und \u00dcbersetzungsarbeit sollte das eigentliche Ziel der Forschung eine philosophische Ann\u00e4herung sein an diese gro\u00dfe Tradition der Geistesgeschichte mit ihren vielfachen kulturellen Verzweigungen im Mittelalter (von Syrien \u00fcber den Irak und Andalusien bis nach K\u00f6ln), in der Renaissance und in der Neuzeit.\r\n\r\nDabei m\u00fcssen wir uns aber davor h\u00fcten, den Neuplatonismus allzu leicht mit Schw\u00e4rmerei oder einer Art von Esoterik in Verbindung zu bringen. Er ist und bleibt vor allem eine Philosophie, auch wenn er eine Philosophie ist, die rational die Grenzen der Rationalit\u00e4t einsieht.\r\n\r\nGerade in der deutschsprachigen Forschung haben wir sch\u00f6ne Beispiele f\u00fcr ein fruchtbares Zusammengehen von philologischer akribeia und philosophischer Ann\u00e4herung. Ein Paradigma einer solchen Forschung am Neuplatonismus bleiben f\u00fcr uns die zahlreichen philosophisch anregenden Arbeiten von Werner Beierwaltes. [p. 246-247]","btype":3,"date":"2004","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/J1gdFPhAmlKlP6l","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":146,"full_name":"Helmig, Christoph","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":481,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Allgemeine Zeitschrift f\u00fcr Philosophie","volume":"29","issue":"","pages":"225-247"}},"sort":["Neue Forschungen zum Neuplatonismus (1995-2003). Teil II"]}
Title | Plato's Timaeus in Simplicius' In De Caelo. A confrontation with Alexander |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 2005 |
Published in | Platons Timaios als Grundtext der Kosmologie in Spätantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance - Plato's Timaeus and the Foundations of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance |
Pages | 195-212 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Guldentops, Guy |
Editor(s) | Steel, Carlos , Leinkauf, Thomas |
Translator(s) |
In this paper, I shall try to shed some light on Simplicius’ use of the Ti maeus in his commentary on De Caelo, and particularly on the difference between his own interpretation and that of Alexander of Aphrodisias. [...] In what follows, I’ll try to detail some differences between Alexander’s and Simplicius' uses and interpretations o f the Timaeus-, in particular, I’ll focus on their arguments concerning the generation of the world, the world soul, and the immobility of the earth. Before looking at some selected pas sages, however, it is necessary to outline Simplicius’ general attitude toward Alexander of Aphrodisias and to sketch their overall interpretations of the theme of De Caelo. [Introduction, pp. 196 f.] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/650gVOAyvHZdk8u |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"526","_score":null,"_source":{"id":526,"authors_free":[{"id":736,"entry_id":526,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":151,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Guldentops, Guy","free_first_name":"Guy","free_last_name":"Guldentops","norm_person":{"id":151,"first_name":"Guy","last_name":"Guldentops","full_name":"Guldentops, Guy","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1031934898","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":737,"entry_id":526,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":738,"entry_id":526,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":152,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","free_first_name":"Thomas","free_last_name":"Leinkauf","norm_person":{"id":152,"first_name":"Thomas","last_name":"Leinkauf","full_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122040309","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Plato's Timaeus in Simplicius' In De Caelo. A confrontation with Alexander","main_title":{"title":"Plato's Timaeus in Simplicius' In De Caelo. A confrontation with Alexander"},"abstract":"In this paper, I shall try to shed some light on Simplicius\u2019 use of the Ti\u00ad\r\nmaeus in his commentary on De Caelo, and particularly on the difference \r\nbetween his own interpretation and that of Alexander of Aphrodisias. [...] In what follows, I\u2019ll try to detail some differences between Alexander\u2019s \r\nand Simplicius' uses and interpretations o f the Timaeus-, in particular, I\u2019ll \r\nfocus on their arguments concerning the generation of the world, the world \r\nsoul, and the immobility of the earth. Before looking at some selected pas\u00ad\r\nsages, however, it is necessary to outline Simplicius\u2019 general attitude toward \r\nAlexander of Aphrodisias and to sketch their overall interpretations of the \r\ntheme of De Caelo. [Introduction, pp. 196 f.]","btype":2,"date":"2005","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/650gVOAyvHZdk8u","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":151,"full_name":"Guldentops, Guy","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":152,"full_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":526,"section_of":321,"pages":"195-212","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":321,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Platons Timaios als Grundtext der Kosmologie in Sp\u00e4tantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance - Plato's Timaeus and the Foundations of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Leinkauf\/Steel2005","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2005","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2005","abstract":"The particular focus of this volume is a study of the influence of Timaeus on the development of Western cosmology in three axial periods of European culture: Late Antiquity, Middle Ages and Renaissance. In each period, the Timaeus was read in a different context and from different perspectives. During the Middle Ages, scholars were mostly interested in reconciling the rational cosmology of the Timaeus with the Christian understanding of creation. In Late Antiquity, the concordance of Plato with Aristotle was considered the most important issue, whereas in early modern times, the confrontation with the new mathematical physics offered possibilities for a fresh assessment of Plato's explanation of the cosmos. The present volume has three sections corresponding to these three periods of interpreting the Timaeus, each sectionis introduced by a synthesis of the main issues at discussion. This 'epochal' approach gives this volume its particular character. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/KnuUmtY75XXXeEK","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":321,"pubplace":"Leuven","publisher":"Leuven University Press","series":"Ancient and Medieval Philosophy de Wulf-Mansion Centre, Series 1","volume":"29","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Plato's Timaeus in Simplicius' In De Caelo. A confrontation with Alexander"]}
Title | Platons Timaios als Grundtext der Kosmologie in Spätantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance - Plato's Timaeus and the Foundations of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance |
Type | Edited Book |
Language | undefined |
Date | 2005 |
Publication Place | Leuven |
Publisher | Leuven University Press |
Series | Ancient and Medieval Philosophy de Wulf-Mansion Centre, Series 1 |
Volume | 29 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | |
Editor(s) | Leinkauf, Thomas , Steel, Carlos |
Translator(s) |
The particular focus of this volume is a study of the influence of Timaeus on the development of Western cosmology in three axial periods of European culture: Late Antiquity, Middle Ages and Renaissance. In each period, the Timaeus was read in a different context and from different perspectives. During the Middle Ages, scholars were mostly interested in reconciling the rational cosmology of the Timaeus with the Christian understanding of creation. In Late Antiquity, the concordance of Plato with Aristotle was considered the most important issue, whereas in early modern times, the confrontation with the new mathematical physics offered possibilities for a fresh assessment of Plato's explanation of the cosmos. The present volume has three sections corresponding to these three periods of interpreting the Timaeus, each sectionis introduced by a synthesis of the main issues at discussion. This 'epochal' approach gives this volume its particular character. [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/KnuUmtY75XXXeEK |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"321","_score":null,"_source":{"id":321,"authors_free":[{"id":406,"entry_id":321,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":152,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","free_first_name":"Thomas","free_last_name":"Leinkauf","norm_person":{"id":152,"first_name":"Thomas","last_name":"Leinkauf","full_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122040309","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":407,"entry_id":321,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Platons Timaios als Grundtext der Kosmologie in Sp\u00e4tantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance - Plato's Timaeus and the Foundations of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance","main_title":{"title":"Platons Timaios als Grundtext der Kosmologie in Sp\u00e4tantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance - Plato's Timaeus and the Foundations of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance"},"abstract":"The particular focus of this volume is a study of the influence of Timaeus on the development of Western cosmology in three axial periods of European culture: Late Antiquity, Middle Ages and Renaissance. In each period, the Timaeus was read in a different context and from different perspectives. During the Middle Ages, scholars were mostly interested in reconciling the rational cosmology of the Timaeus with the Christian understanding of creation. In Late Antiquity, the concordance of Plato with Aristotle was considered the most important issue, whereas in early modern times, the confrontation with the new mathematical physics offered possibilities for a fresh assessment of Plato's explanation of the cosmos. The present volume has three sections corresponding to these three periods of interpreting the Timaeus, each sectionis introduced by a synthesis of the main issues at discussion. This 'epochal' approach gives this volume its particular character. [author's abstract]","btype":4,"date":"2005","language":"","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/KnuUmtY75XXXeEK","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":152,"full_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":321,"pubplace":"Leuven","publisher":"Leuven University Press","series":"Ancient and Medieval Philosophy de Wulf-Mansion Centre, Series 1","volume":"29","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Platons Timaios als Grundtext der Kosmologie in Sp\u00e4tantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance - Plato's Timaeus and the Foundations of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance"]}
Title | Priscian: On Theophrastus on Sense-Perception with 'Simplicius': On Aristotle On the Soul 2.5-12 |
Type | Edited Book |
Language | English |
Date | 1997 |
Publication Place | London |
Publisher | Duckworth |
Series | Ancient commentators on Aristotle |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | , Simplicius , Priscianus |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) | Huby, Pamela M.(Huby, Pamela M.) , Steel, Carlos(Steel, Carlos ) , |
Simplicius and Priscian were two of the seven Neoplatonists who left Athens when the Christian Emperor Justinian closed the paganschool there in A.D. 529. The commentaries ascribed to them on works on sense-perception, one by Aristotle and one by his successor Theophrastus, are translated here in this single volume. Both commentaries give a highly Neoplatonic reading to their Aristotelian subjects and tell us much about late Neoplatonist psychology. This volume is also designed to enable readers to assess a recent major controversy: it has been argued by Carlos Steel and Fernand Bossier that the commentary ascribed to Simplicius is in fact by Priscian, and their article, hitherto only available in Dutch, is here published in revised form and in English for the first time. This book therefore contains all the evidence necessary for readers to judge this intriguing question for themselves. [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/hL1tgg0HzTg3lxb |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"142","_score":null,"_source":{"id":142,"authors_free":[{"id":2498,"entry_id":142,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":200,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Huby, Pamela M.","free_first_name":"Pamela M.","free_last_name":"Huby","norm_person":{"id":200,"first_name":"Pamela M.","last_name":"Huby","full_name":"Huby, Pamela M.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/120868962","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2500,"entry_id":142,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2519,"entry_id":142,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":62,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Simplicius","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":62,"first_name":"Cilicius","last_name":"Simplicius ","full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118642421","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2520,"entry_id":142,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":369,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Priscianus","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":369,"first_name":"","last_name":"","full_name":"Priscianus","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118596624","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Priscian: On Theophrastus on Sense-Perception with 'Simplicius': On Aristotle On the Soul 2.5-12","main_title":{"title":"Priscian: On Theophrastus on Sense-Perception with 'Simplicius': On Aristotle On the Soul 2.5-12"},"abstract":"Simplicius and Priscian were two of the seven Neoplatonists who left Athens when the Christian Emperor Justinian closed the paganschool there in A.D. 529. The commentaries ascribed to them on works on sense-perception, one by Aristotle and one by his successor Theophrastus, are translated here in this single volume. Both commentaries give a highly Neoplatonic reading to their Aristotelian subjects and tell us much about late Neoplatonist psychology.\r\nThis volume is also designed to enable readers to assess a recent major controversy: it has been argued by Carlos Steel and Fernand Bossier that the commentary ascribed to Simplicius is in fact by Priscian, and their article, hitherto only available in Dutch, is here published in revised form and in English for the first time. This book therefore contains all the evidence necessary for readers to judge this intriguing question for themselves. [author's abstract]","btype":4,"date":"1997","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/hL1tgg0HzTg3lxb","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":200,"full_name":"Huby, Pamela M.","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":62,"full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":369,"full_name":"Priscianus","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":142,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"Ancient commentators on Aristotle","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Priscian: On Theophrastus on Sense-Perception with 'Simplicius': On Aristotle On the Soul 2.5-12"]}
Title | Priscianus Lydus en de "In De Anima" van Pseudo(?)-Simplicius |
Type | Article |
Language | Dutch |
Date | 1972 |
Journal | Tijdschrift voor Filosofie |
Volume | 34 |
Issue | 4 |
Pages | 761-822 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Bossier, Fernand , Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
Dans cet article, nous avons essayé d'examiner la valeur de l'attribution traditionnelle du commentaire In De Anima à Simplicius. En comparant ce traité aux grands commentaires de Simplicius (sur les Catégories, la Physique et le De Caelo d'Aristote), nous avons en effet été frappés par les divergences de style et de langue, ainsi que par la différente manière de commenter. Dans la première partie, nous démontrons que l'auteur de In D.A. a également écrit la Metaphrasis in Theophrastum, qui nous a été transmise sous le nom de Priscien le Lydien. 1° Dans In D.A., l'auteur renvoie à une de ses œuvres, qu'il appelle Epitomé de la Physique de Théophraste. En réalité, cette référence se rapporte à un passage de la Metaphrase de Priscien, où la même problématique est exposée dans des termes identiques. 2° Une comparaison détaillée portant sur l'ensemble des deux œuvres nous révèle une telle ressemblance de style et de pensée – il y a même des phrases à peu près identiques – qu'elle ne peut s'expliquer que par l'hypothèse de l'identité de l'auteur. Dans la deuxième partie, nous essayons d'identifier l'auteur de ces deux œuvres qui, pourtant, nous ont été transmises sous deux noms différents. L'étude de la tradition directe et indirecte n'apporte guère de solution, puisque l'attribution des deux textes, l'un à Simplicius, l'autre à Priscien, y paraît très solide. Ce n'est donc que par une critique interne de In D.A., notamment par la confrontation avec les commentaires de Simplicius, dont l'attribution est certaine, que la question pourra être tranchée. 1° Dans In D.A., l'auteur renvoie trois fois à son commentaire sur la Physique. Pourtant, il est bien difficile de retrouver dans le grand commentaire de Simplicius trois passages dont le contenu et surtout le vocabulaire prouvent que l'auteur s'y réfère. 2° Dans In D.A., on ne retrouve pas les traits caractéristiques de la méthode de commentaire de Simplicius, ni l'approche du texte par la documentation historique, ni les longues discussions avec les exégètes antérieurs, ni l'exposé prolixe et bien structuré. D'autre part, aucun des commentaires de Simplicius ne témoigne de la phraséologie tortueuse de notre œuvre, ni de ses formules stéréotypées. 3° La différence doctrinale est encore plus importante. Nulle part chez Simplicius n'apparaît la théorie de l'âme comme epistêmê, qui est si fondamentale dans In D.A. (epistêmê y est un concept-clé). Les rares digressions de In D.A. à propos de questions physiques et logiques ne correspondent pas aux exposés de Simplicius sur les mêmes problèmes. Ainsi, nous avons confronté la doctrine de la physis, de l'âme et de son automotion, et enfin le rapport entre le genre et les différences constitutives et diérétiques. De tout cela se dégage une telle divergence entre In D.A. et les autres commentaires qu'elle ne peut s'expliquer par une évolution chez Simplicius lui-même. In D.A. lui est donc faussement attribué ; et puisque nous avons établi que ce commentaire est du même auteur que la Metaphrase, nous pouvons conclure qu'il a été vraisemblablement écrit par Priscien le Lydien, un philosophe néoplatonicien dont nous savons seulement qu'il a accompagné Damascius et Simplicius en exil en exil en Perse. [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/r917awdAL4tkrdc |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1077","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1077,"authors_free":[{"id":1632,"entry_id":1077,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":12,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Bossier, Fernand","free_first_name":"Fernand","free_last_name":"Bossier","norm_person":{"id":12,"first_name":"Fernand ","last_name":"Bossier","full_name":"Bossier, Fernand ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1017981663","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1633,"entry_id":1077,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Priscianus Lydus en de \"In De Anima\" van Pseudo(?)-Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Priscianus Lydus en de \"In De Anima\" van Pseudo(?)-Simplicius"},"abstract":"Dans cet article, nous avons essay\u00e9 d'examiner la valeur de l'attribution traditionnelle du commentaire In De Anima \u00e0 Simplicius. En comparant ce trait\u00e9 aux grands commentaires de Simplicius (sur les Cat\u00e9gories, la Physique et le De Caelo d'Aristote), nous avons en effet \u00e9t\u00e9 frapp\u00e9s par les divergences de style et de langue, ainsi que par la diff\u00e9rente mani\u00e8re de commenter.\r\n\r\nDans la premi\u00e8re partie, nous d\u00e9montrons que l'auteur de In D.A. a \u00e9galement \u00e9crit la Metaphrasis in Theophrastum, qui nous a \u00e9t\u00e9 transmise sous le nom de Priscien le Lydien.\r\n1\u00b0 Dans In D.A., l'auteur renvoie \u00e0 une de ses \u0153uvres, qu'il appelle Epitom\u00e9 de la Physique de Th\u00e9ophraste. En r\u00e9alit\u00e9, cette r\u00e9f\u00e9rence se rapporte \u00e0 un passage de la Metaphrase de Priscien, o\u00f9 la m\u00eame probl\u00e9matique est expos\u00e9e dans des termes identiques.\r\n2\u00b0 Une comparaison d\u00e9taill\u00e9e portant sur l'ensemble des deux \u0153uvres nous r\u00e9v\u00e8le une telle ressemblance de style et de pens\u00e9e \u2013 il y a m\u00eame des phrases \u00e0 peu pr\u00e8s identiques \u2013 qu'elle ne peut s'expliquer que par l'hypoth\u00e8se de l'identit\u00e9 de l'auteur.\r\n\r\nDans la deuxi\u00e8me partie, nous essayons d'identifier l'auteur de ces deux \u0153uvres qui, pourtant, nous ont \u00e9t\u00e9 transmises sous deux noms diff\u00e9rents. L'\u00e9tude de la tradition directe et indirecte n'apporte gu\u00e8re de solution, puisque l'attribution des deux textes, l'un \u00e0 Simplicius, l'autre \u00e0 Priscien, y para\u00eet tr\u00e8s solide. Ce n'est donc que par une critique interne de In D.A., notamment par la confrontation avec les commentaires de Simplicius, dont l'attribution est certaine, que la question pourra \u00eatre tranch\u00e9e.\r\n1\u00b0 Dans In D.A., l'auteur renvoie trois fois \u00e0 son commentaire sur la Physique. Pourtant, il est bien difficile de retrouver dans le grand commentaire de Simplicius trois passages dont le contenu et surtout le vocabulaire prouvent que l'auteur s'y r\u00e9f\u00e8re.\r\n2\u00b0 Dans In D.A., on ne retrouve pas les traits caract\u00e9ristiques de la m\u00e9thode de commentaire de Simplicius, ni l'approche du texte par la documentation historique, ni les longues discussions avec les ex\u00e9g\u00e8tes ant\u00e9rieurs, ni l'expos\u00e9 prolixe et bien structur\u00e9. D'autre part, aucun des commentaires de Simplicius ne t\u00e9moigne de la phras\u00e9ologie tortueuse de notre \u0153uvre, ni de ses formules st\u00e9r\u00e9otyp\u00e9es.\r\n3\u00b0 La diff\u00e9rence doctrinale est encore plus importante. Nulle part chez Simplicius n'appara\u00eet la th\u00e9orie de l'\u00e2me comme epist\u00eam\u00ea, qui est si fondamentale dans In D.A. (epist\u00eam\u00ea y est un concept-cl\u00e9). Les rares digressions de In D.A. \u00e0 propos de questions physiques et logiques ne correspondent pas aux expos\u00e9s de Simplicius sur les m\u00eames probl\u00e8mes.\r\n\r\nAinsi, nous avons confront\u00e9 la doctrine de la physis, de l'\u00e2me et de son automotion, et enfin le rapport entre le genre et les diff\u00e9rences constitutives et di\u00e9r\u00e9tiques. De tout cela se d\u00e9gage une telle divergence entre In D.A. et les autres commentaires qu'elle ne peut s'expliquer par une \u00e9volution chez Simplicius lui-m\u00eame. In D.A. lui est donc faussement attribu\u00e9 ; et puisque nous avons \u00e9tabli que ce commentaire est du m\u00eame auteur que la Metaphrase, nous pouvons conclure qu'il a \u00e9t\u00e9 vraisemblablement \u00e9crit par Priscien le Lydien, un philosophe n\u00e9oplatonicien dont nous savons seulement qu'il a accompagn\u00e9 Damascius et Simplicius en exil en exil en Perse. [author's abstract]","btype":3,"date":"1972","language":"Dutch","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/r917awdAL4tkrdc","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":12,"full_name":"Bossier, Fernand ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1077,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Tijdschrift voor Filosofie","volume":"34","issue":"4","pages":"761-822"}},"sort":["Priscianus Lydus en de \"In De Anima\" van Pseudo(?)-Simplicius"]}
Title | Proclus et la théologie platonicienne. Actes du colloque international de Louvain (13 -16 mai 1998). En l'honneur de H.D. Saffrey et L.G. Westerink |
Type | Edited Book |
Language | undefined |
Date | 2000 |
Publication Place | Leuven - Paris |
Publisher | Leuven University Press - Paris Les Belles Lettres |
Series | Ancient and medieval philosophy, Series 1 |
Volume | 26 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | |
Editor(s) | Segonds, A. Ph. , Steel, Carlos , Luna, Concetta (Coll.) , Mettraux, A. F. (Coll.) |
Translator(s) |
In his Platonic Theology, Proclus offers a systematic exposition of the theology of Plato. Integrating within the ‘scienti-fic’ framework of the Parmenides all the theological doctrines which are scattered throughout the Plato’s dialogues, Proclus develops the Platonic doctrines on the One, the gods and the hierarchical procession of reality. The present volume, which celebrates the completion of the critical edition of Proclus’ Platonic Theology by H.-D. Saffrey and L.G. Westerink (+), contains thirty-one contributions by leading scholars in the field of Neoplatonic studies. They present their views on the organisation and principles of Proclus’ theology, on the hermeneutics of Platonic dialogues, on the antecedents of this theological synthesis, and on its posterity, from Proclus’ immediate successors through the Byzantine, Arabic and Latin Middle Ages. This monumental volume, which is the result of three decades of dedicated scholarly research on the philosophy of Proclus, will stand for many years as an indispensable guide for all those interested in Neoplatonic studies. [official abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/SbKzMkxqkUtsN6U |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"369","_score":null,"_source":{"id":369,"authors_free":[{"id":486,"entry_id":369,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":196,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Segonds, A. Ph.","free_first_name":"A. Ph.","free_last_name":"Segonds","norm_person":{"id":196,"first_name":"A. Ph. ","last_name":"Segonds","full_name":"Segonds, A. Ph.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1031742743","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2040,"entry_id":369,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2393,"entry_id":369,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":458,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Luna, Concetta (Coll.)","free_first_name":"Concetta","free_last_name":"Luna","norm_person":{"id":458,"first_name":"Concetta","last_name":"Luna","full_name":"Luna, Concetta","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1153489031","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2394,"entry_id":369,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":461,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Mettraux, A. F. (Coll.)","free_first_name":"A. F.","free_last_name":"Mettraux","norm_person":{"id":461,"first_name":"A. F.","last_name":"Mettraux","full_name":"Mettraux, A. F. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Proclus et la th\u00e9ologie platonicienne. Actes du colloque international de Louvain (13 -16 mai 1998). En l'honneur de H.D. Saffrey et L.G. Westerink","main_title":{"title":"Proclus et la th\u00e9ologie platonicienne. Actes du colloque international de Louvain (13 -16 mai 1998). En l'honneur de H.D. Saffrey et L.G. Westerink"},"abstract":"In his Platonic Theology, Proclus offers a systematic exposition of the theology of Plato. Integrating within the \u2018scienti-fic\u2019 framework of the Parmenides all the theological doctrines which are scattered throughout the Plato\u2019s dialogues, Proclus develops the Platonic doctrines on the One, the gods and the hierarchical procession of reality.\r\n\r\nThe present volume, which celebrates the completion of the critical edition of Proclus\u2019 Platonic Theology by H.-D. Saffrey and L.G. Westerink (+), contains thirty-one contributions by leading scholars in the field of Neoplatonic studies. They present their views on the organisation and principles of Proclus\u2019 theology, on the hermeneutics of Platonic dialogues, on the antecedents of this theological synthesis, and on its posterity, from Proclus\u2019 immediate successors through the Byzantine, Arabic and Latin Middle Ages.\r\n\r\nThis monumental volume, which is the result of three decades of dedicated scholarly research on the philosophy of Proclus, will stand for many years as an indispensable guide for all those interested in Neoplatonic studies. [official abstract]","btype":4,"date":"2000","language":"","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/SbKzMkxqkUtsN6U","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":196,"full_name":"Segonds, A. Ph.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":458,"full_name":"Luna, Concetta","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":461,"full_name":"Mettraux, A. F. ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":369,"pubplace":"Leuven - Paris","publisher":"Leuven University Press - Paris Les Belles Lettres","series":"Ancient and medieval philosophy, Series 1","volume":"26","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Proclus et la th\u00e9ologie platonicienne. Actes du colloque international de Louvain (13 -16 mai 1998). En l'honneur de H.D. Saffrey et L.G. Westerink"]}
Title | Proclus' Defence of the Timaeus against Aristotle's Objections. A reconstruction of a lost polemical treatise |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 2005 |
Published in | Platons Timaios als Grundtext der Kosmologie in Spätantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance - Plato's Timaeus and the Foundations of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance |
Pages | 163-193 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | Leinkauf, Thomas , Steel, Carlos |
Translator(s) |
In this paper, we have made a reconstruction of an early treatise of Proclus in which he attempted to refute the objections Aristotle had put forward against Plato’s doctrine in the Timaeus. Simplicius, Philoponus, and Proclus himself have been our sources. Proclus recycles the arguments of his earlier treatise in his great commentary on the Timaeus. Philoponus fully exploits Proclus’ treatise against Proclus himself to refute his views on the eternity of the world. In this question and in many others, Philoponus believes Plato and Aristotle are radically opposed. Proclus does not dissimulate their disagreement, but, to Philoponus' anger, he does not take distance from Aristotle's interpretation of the Timaeus in the discussion about the eternity of the world. Instead of sincerely accepting with Plato that the world is generated and temporal, he defects to the Aristotelian view and thus comes in contradiction with his earlier work, as Philoponus demonstrates. Simplicius also read the early treatise of Proclus, and he quotes large extracts from it in his commentary on the De Caelo. Simplicius, who is a great advocate of the harmony of Plato and Aristotle, is often embarrassed with Proclus’ polemics. Whenever Proclus quotes a text from Aristotle to convince the philosopher that he too is “forced” to admit the truth of the Platonic principles, Simplicius makes of it an argument to demonstrate that Aristotle is fundamentally in agreement with Plato. How different their ultimate goals may have been in this polemic, both ideological opponents, Philoponus and Simplicius, offer us valuable information on a lost work of Proclus, in which he attacked Aristotle with youthful zeal in defense of the Timaeus. The treatise witnesses both his admiration for the Timaeus and his irritation at Aristotle’s unfair treatment. [conclusion p. 193] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/kMYAmCjyTBGx2oh |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"483","_score":null,"_source":{"id":483,"authors_free":[{"id":656,"entry_id":483,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":657,"entry_id":483,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":152,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","free_first_name":"Thomas","free_last_name":"Leinkauf","norm_person":{"id":152,"first_name":"Thomas","last_name":"Leinkauf","full_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122040309","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":658,"entry_id":483,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Proclus' Defence of the Timaeus against Aristotle's Objections. A reconstruction of a lost polemical treatise","main_title":{"title":"Proclus' Defence of the Timaeus against Aristotle's Objections. A reconstruction of a lost polemical treatise"},"abstract":"In this paper, we have made a reconstruction of an early treatise of Proclus in which he attempted to refute the objections Aristotle had put forward against Plato\u2019s doctrine in the Timaeus. Simplicius, Philoponus, and Proclus himself have been our sources. Proclus recycles the arguments of his earlier treatise in his great commentary on the Timaeus. Philoponus fully exploits Proclus\u2019 treatise against Proclus himself to refute his views on the eternity of the world.\r\n\r\nIn this question and in many others, Philoponus believes Plato and Aristotle are radically opposed. Proclus does not dissimulate their disagreement, but, to Philoponus' anger, he does not take distance from Aristotle's interpretation of the Timaeus in the discussion about the eternity of the world. Instead of sincerely accepting with Plato that the world is generated and temporal, he defects to the Aristotelian view and thus comes in contradiction with his earlier work, as Philoponus demonstrates.\r\n\r\nSimplicius also read the early treatise of Proclus, and he quotes large extracts from it in his commentary on the De Caelo. Simplicius, who is a great advocate of the harmony of Plato and Aristotle, is often embarrassed with Proclus\u2019 polemics. Whenever Proclus quotes a text from Aristotle to convince the philosopher that he too is \u201cforced\u201d to admit the truth of the Platonic principles, Simplicius makes of it an argument to demonstrate that Aristotle is fundamentally in agreement with Plato.\r\n\r\nHow different their ultimate goals may have been in this polemic, both ideological opponents, Philoponus and Simplicius, offer us valuable information on a lost work of Proclus, in which he attacked Aristotle with youthful zeal in defense of the Timaeus. The treatise witnesses both his admiration for the Timaeus and his irritation at Aristotle\u2019s unfair treatment. [conclusion p. 193]","btype":2,"date":"2005","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/kMYAmCjyTBGx2oh","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":152,"full_name":"Leinkauf, Thomas","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":483,"section_of":321,"pages":"163-193","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":321,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Platons Timaios als Grundtext der Kosmologie in Sp\u00e4tantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance - Plato's Timaeus and the Foundations of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Leinkauf\/Steel2005","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2005","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2005","abstract":"The particular focus of this volume is a study of the influence of Timaeus on the development of Western cosmology in three axial periods of European culture: Late Antiquity, Middle Ages and Renaissance. In each period, the Timaeus was read in a different context and from different perspectives. During the Middle Ages, scholars were mostly interested in reconciling the rational cosmology of the Timaeus with the Christian understanding of creation. In Late Antiquity, the concordance of Plato with Aristotle was considered the most important issue, whereas in early modern times, the confrontation with the new mathematical physics offered possibilities for a fresh assessment of Plato's explanation of the cosmos. The present volume has three sections corresponding to these three periods of interpreting the Timaeus, each sectionis introduced by a synthesis of the main issues at discussion. This 'epochal' approach gives this volume its particular character. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/KnuUmtY75XXXeEK","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":321,"pubplace":"Leuven","publisher":"Leuven University Press","series":"Ancient and Medieval Philosophy de Wulf-Mansion Centre, Series 1","volume":"29","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Proclus' Defence of the Timaeus against Aristotle's Objections. A reconstruction of a lost polemical treatise"]}
Title | Proclus: On the Existence of Evils |
Type | Monograph |
Language | English |
Date | 2003 |
Publication Place | London |
Publisher | Bloomsbury Academic |
Series | Ancient Commentators on Aristotle |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Opsomer, Jan , Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) | Opsomer, Jan() , Steel, Carlos() |
Proclus’ On the Existence of Evils is not a commentary, but helps to compensate for the dearth of Neoplatonist ethical commentaries. The central question addressed in the work is: how can there be evil in a providential world? Neoplatonists agree that it cannot be caused by higher and worthier beings. Plotinus had said that evil is matter, which, unlike Aristotle, he collapsed into mere privation or lack, thus reducing its reality. He also protected higher causes from responsibility by saying that evil may result from a combination of goods. Proclus objects: evil is real, and not a privation. Rather, it is a parasite feeding off good. Parasites have no proper cause, and higher beings are thus vindicated as being the causes only of the good off which evil feeds. [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/jf422McdNmgpCnP |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1442","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1442,"authors_free":[{"id":2303,"entry_id":1442,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":211,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Opsomer, Jan","free_first_name":"Jan","free_last_name":"Opsomer","norm_person":{"id":211,"first_name":"Jan","last_name":"Opsomer","full_name":"Opsomer, Jan","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1120966310","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2304,"entry_id":1442,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2657,"entry_id":1442,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Opsomer, Jan","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":null},{"id":2658,"entry_id":1442,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Proclus: On the Existence of Evils","main_title":{"title":"Proclus: On the Existence of Evils"},"abstract":"Proclus\u2019 On the Existence of Evils is not a commentary, but helps to compensate for the dearth of Neoplatonist ethical commentaries. The central question addressed in the work is: how can there be evil in a providential world? Neoplatonists agree that it cannot be caused by higher and worthier beings. Plotinus had said that evil is matter, which, unlike Aristotle, he collapsed into mere privation or lack, thus reducing its reality. He also protected higher causes from responsibility by saying that evil may result from a combination of goods. Proclus objects: evil is real, and not a privation. Rather, it is a parasite feeding off good. Parasites have no proper cause, and higher beings are thus vindicated as being the causes only of the good off which evil feeds. [author's abstract]","btype":1,"date":"2003","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/jf422McdNmgpCnP","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":211,"full_name":"Opsomer, Jan","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":1442,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Bloomsbury Academic","series":"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Proclus: On the Existence of Evils"]}
Title | Review of: Ilsetraut Hadot, Le problème du néoplatonisme Alexandrin, Hiéroclès et Simplicius |
Type | Article |
Language | Dutch |
Date | 1980 |
Journal | Tijdschrift voor Filosofie |
Volume | 42 |
Issue | 3 |
Pages | 606-608 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
The whole review: In een historisch overzicht van de antieke wijsbegeerte wordt doorgaans, wanneer over het Neoplatonisme gehandeld wordt, een onderscheid gemaakt tussen de 'school' van Athene en die van Alexandrië. Dit onderscheid gaat terug op de bekende studies van K. Praechter (1910-12). Volgens deze geleerde zou er een opvallend doctrineel verschil bestaan tussen beide richtingen in het latere Neoplatonisme. In Alexandrië zou de invloed van de christelijke omgeving zo groot geweest zijn dat de heidense filosofen zich verplicht zagen bepaalde wijzigingen in de doctrine aan te brengen. Het Neoplatonisme vertoont hier niet de complexe structuur die kenmerkend is voor het Atheense speculatieve denken (cf. de hiërarchie van de goddelijke principes zoals die door Proclus ontwikkeld is); het geeft een eenvoudiger verklaring van de leer waarbij dikwijls teruggegrepen wordt naar het Midden-Platonisme (vóór Plotinus); op sommige gebieden (zoals de scheppingsleer) benadert het christelijke standpunten. Deze originaliteit van het Alexandrijnse Neoplatonisme komt het duidelijkst tot uiting in het œuvre van Hierocles (eerste helft 5de eeuw) en in de commentaar van Simplicius (eerste helft 6de eeuw) op Epictetus. Deze visie van Praechter werd kritiekloos overgenomen in talrijke studies over deze periode. Zo verscheen in 1976 nog een boek over Hierocles (Th. Kobusch, Studien zur Philosophie des Hierokles von Alexandrien, München) waarin de thesis verdedigd wordt dat Hierocles' filosofie „vermittelt“ tussen het Christendom en het „excessieve“ Neoplatonisme zoals het vooral door Proclus uitgewerkt is. „Die Interpretation ergab dass die Hierokleische Philosophie im wesentlichen auf vorneuplatonischer Basis beruht“ (Besluit, p. 193). Het boek van Mme Hadot, die sinds jaren een uitgave voorbereidt van Simplicius' commentaar op Epictetus, komt tot een conclusie die precies het tegenovergestelde beweert. Op grond van een nieuwe lectuur van Hierocles en Simplicius toont zij aan dat de hypothese van Praechter over het latere Neoplatonisme totaal ongegrond is; er bestaat geen enkel doctrineel verschil tussen het Atheense en het Alexandrijnse Neoplatonisme: „l'évolution du néoplatonisme s'est poursuivie d'une manière homogène“. Het is verkeerd Hierocles of Simplicius vanuit het Midden-Platonisme te willen interpreteren: hun uiteenzetting veronderstelt de ontwikkeling van het latere Neoplatonisme, wat kan geïllustreerd worden door talrijke parallelle passages met Iamblichus en Proclus, en zelfs – voor Simplicius – met Damascius. In het eerste deel van dit boek worden de historische gegevens over beide filosofen onderzocht. Het tweede deel onderzoekt in welke mate zij kunnen beschouwd worden als vertegenwoordigers van een originele Alexandrijnse traditie. Achtereenvolgens worden bestudeerd: de theologie van Simplicius in het Epictetus-commentaar, de opvattingen van Hierocles over de ontwikkeling van het Platonisme, over de materie, over de demiurg en de schepping, over de voorzienigheid en het noodlot. In het derde deel volgen enige capita selecta betreffende de commentaar van Simplicius (o.a. zijn leer over de ziel). Uit al deze analyses komt de auteur tot het besluit dat er geen enkele doctrinaire divergentie aan te wijzen is ten opzichte van de Atheense school. Wel geven beide werken – de commentaar van Hierocles op Pythagoras en die van Simplicius op Epictetus – een eenvoudiger en minder complexe versie van het Neoplatonisme. Dit kan echter verklaard worden door het feit dat beide commentaren bedoeld waren als inleidingen en gericht tot beginnelingen in de school. In een appendix gaat de auteur uitvoerig in op een artikel dat ik zelf samen met F. Bossier in dit tijdschrift gepubliceerd heb (1972, 761-822) over de authenticiteit van de De Anima-commentaar die aan Simplicius wordt toegeschreven. Alhoewel zij onze conclusie aanvaardt – het werk is waarschijnlijk door Priscianus Lydus geschreven – toch meent zij dat er geen enkel doctrineel verschil met de authentieke Simplicius kan aangewezen worden. Haar argumenten lijken ons soms erg zwak: het is echter niet mogelijk om hierover in deze recensie polemiek te voeren. Slechts één ding: indien men aanvaardt dat de In de Anima door iemand anders geschreven is dan Simplicius, waarom is het dan zo nodig te beklemtonen dat zijn opvattingen over de ziel in niets van die van Simplicius verschillen? Dit bezwaar geldt ook voor het gehele werk. Terecht wijst de auteur op de continuïteit die er bestond tussen de school van Athene en die van Alexandrië (zoals dit o.m. tot uiting komt in de veelvuldige persoonlijke relaties van docenten en studenten). Het lijkt ons echter overdreven elk doctrineel verschil tussen beide scholen te ontkennen. De ontwikkeling binnen het latere Neoplatonisme was zeker niet zo homogeen als mevrouw Hadot beweert. Reeds ten tijde van Plotinus bestonden er belangrijke controversen over de doctrine, en die discussies werden verder gezet in de latere school. Indien men de originaliteit van de Alexandrijnse school in vraag stelt, dan volstaat het niet Hierocles en één werk van Simplicius te onderzoeken. Men zou er ook de andere filosofen uit de school moeten bij betrekken, voornamelijk Ammonius. Men kan moeilijk betwisten dat het Neoplatonisme dat door Ammonius uiteengezet werd nogal verschillend is van het systeem van Damascius. En is het ook niet opvallend dat Simplicius, die zowel bij Ammonius als Damascius studeerde, dikwijls afstand neemt van de al te speculatieve beschouwingen van Iamblichus en Damascius? Het boek van mevrouw Hadot is, zoals de auteur zelf toegeeft, vooral polemisch van aard: zij weerlegt hypothesen en interpretaties die niet op de teksten gegrond zijn. Door een nauwkeurige analyse van de teksten ontmaskert zij het stereotiepe beeld dat men over het Alexandrijnse Neoplatonisme geeft. Haar studie is zo een waardevolle bijdrage tot beter inzicht in deze laatste ontwikkeling van het antieke denken. [p. 606-608] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/lIWBQQ2Q5dbWMLm |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"484","_score":null,"_source":{"id":484,"authors_free":[{"id":659,"entry_id":484,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Review of: Ilsetraut Hadot, Le probl\u00e8me du n\u00e9oplatonisme Alexandrin, Hi\u00e9rocl\u00e8s et Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Review of: Ilsetraut Hadot, Le probl\u00e8me du n\u00e9oplatonisme Alexandrin, Hi\u00e9rocl\u00e8s et Simplicius"},"abstract":"The whole review: In een historisch overzicht van de antieke wijsbegeerte wordt doorgaans, wanneer over het Neoplatonisme gehandeld wordt, een onderscheid gemaakt tussen de 'school' van Athene en die van Alexandri\u00eb. Dit onderscheid gaat terug op de bekende studies van K. Praechter (1910-12). Volgens deze geleerde zou er een opvallend doctrineel verschil bestaan tussen beide richtingen in het latere Neoplatonisme. In Alexandri\u00eb zou de invloed van de christelijke omgeving zo groot geweest zijn dat de heidense filosofen zich verplicht zagen bepaalde wijzigingen in de doctrine aan te brengen.\r\n\r\nHet Neoplatonisme vertoont hier niet de complexe structuur die kenmerkend is voor het Atheense speculatieve denken (cf. de hi\u00ebrarchie van de goddelijke principes zoals die door Proclus ontwikkeld is); het geeft een eenvoudiger verklaring van de leer waarbij dikwijls teruggegrepen wordt naar het Midden-Platonisme (v\u00f3\u00f3r Plotinus); op sommige gebieden (zoals de scheppingsleer) benadert het christelijke standpunten. Deze originaliteit van het Alexandrijnse Neoplatonisme komt het duidelijkst tot uiting in het \u0153uvre van Hierocles (eerste helft 5de eeuw) en in de commentaar van Simplicius (eerste helft 6de eeuw) op Epictetus.\r\n\r\nDeze visie van Praechter werd kritiekloos overgenomen in talrijke studies over deze periode. Zo verscheen in 1976 nog een boek over Hierocles (Th. Kobusch, Studien zur Philosophie des Hierokles von Alexandrien, M\u00fcnchen) waarin de thesis verdedigd wordt dat Hierocles' filosofie \u201evermittelt\u201c tussen het Christendom en het \u201eexcessieve\u201c Neoplatonisme zoals het vooral door Proclus uitgewerkt is. \u201eDie Interpretation ergab dass die Hierokleische Philosophie im wesentlichen auf vorneuplatonischer Basis beruht\u201c (Besluit, p. 193).\r\n\r\nHet boek van Mme Hadot, die sinds jaren een uitgave voorbereidt van Simplicius' commentaar op Epictetus, komt tot een conclusie die precies het tegenovergestelde beweert. Op grond van een nieuwe lectuur van Hierocles en Simplicius toont zij aan dat de hypothese van Praechter over het latere Neoplatonisme totaal ongegrond is; er bestaat geen enkel doctrineel verschil tussen het Atheense en het Alexandrijnse Neoplatonisme: \u201el'\u00e9volution du n\u00e9oplatonisme s'est poursuivie d'une mani\u00e8re homog\u00e8ne\u201c.\r\n\r\nHet is verkeerd Hierocles of Simplicius vanuit het Midden-Platonisme te willen interpreteren: hun uiteenzetting veronderstelt de ontwikkeling van het latere Neoplatonisme, wat kan ge\u00efllustreerd worden door talrijke parallelle passages met Iamblichus en Proclus, en zelfs \u2013 voor Simplicius \u2013 met Damascius.\r\n\r\nIn het eerste deel van dit boek worden de historische gegevens over beide filosofen onderzocht. Het tweede deel onderzoekt in welke mate zij kunnen beschouwd worden als vertegenwoordigers van een originele Alexandrijnse traditie. Achtereenvolgens worden bestudeerd: de theologie van Simplicius in het Epictetus-commentaar, de opvattingen van Hierocles over de ontwikkeling van het Platonisme, over de materie, over de demiurg en de schepping, over de voorzienigheid en het noodlot. In het derde deel volgen enige capita selecta betreffende de commentaar van Simplicius (o.a. zijn leer over de ziel).\r\n\r\nUit al deze analyses komt de auteur tot het besluit dat er geen enkele doctrinaire divergentie aan te wijzen is ten opzichte van de Atheense school. Wel geven beide werken \u2013 de commentaar van Hierocles op Pythagoras en die van Simplicius op Epictetus \u2013 een eenvoudiger en minder complexe versie van het Neoplatonisme. Dit kan echter verklaard worden door het feit dat beide commentaren bedoeld waren als inleidingen en gericht tot beginnelingen in de school.\r\n\r\nIn een appendix gaat de auteur uitvoerig in op een artikel dat ik zelf samen met F. Bossier in dit tijdschrift gepubliceerd heb (1972, 761-822) over de authenticiteit van de De Anima-commentaar die aan Simplicius wordt toegeschreven. Alhoewel zij onze conclusie aanvaardt \u2013 het werk is waarschijnlijk door Priscianus Lydus geschreven \u2013 toch meent zij dat er geen enkel doctrineel verschil met de authentieke Simplicius kan aangewezen worden.\r\n\r\nHaar argumenten lijken ons soms erg zwak: het is echter niet mogelijk om hierover in deze recensie polemiek te voeren. Slechts \u00e9\u00e9n ding: indien men aanvaardt dat de In de Anima door iemand anders geschreven is dan Simplicius, waarom is het dan zo nodig te beklemtonen dat zijn opvattingen over de ziel in niets van die van Simplicius verschillen?\r\n\r\nDit bezwaar geldt ook voor het gehele werk. Terecht wijst de auteur op de continu\u00efteit die er bestond tussen de school van Athene en die van Alexandri\u00eb (zoals dit o.m. tot uiting komt in de veelvuldige persoonlijke relaties van docenten en studenten). Het lijkt ons echter overdreven elk doctrineel verschil tussen beide scholen te ontkennen.\r\n\r\nDe ontwikkeling binnen het latere Neoplatonisme was zeker niet zo homogeen als mevrouw Hadot beweert. Reeds ten tijde van Plotinus bestonden er belangrijke controversen over de doctrine, en die discussies werden verder gezet in de latere school. Indien men de originaliteit van de Alexandrijnse school in vraag stelt, dan volstaat het niet Hierocles en \u00e9\u00e9n werk van Simplicius te onderzoeken. Men zou er ook de andere filosofen uit de school moeten bij betrekken, voornamelijk Ammonius.\r\n\r\nMen kan moeilijk betwisten dat het Neoplatonisme dat door Ammonius uiteengezet werd nogal verschillend is van het systeem van Damascius. En is het ook niet opvallend dat Simplicius, die zowel bij Ammonius als Damascius studeerde, dikwijls afstand neemt van de al te speculatieve beschouwingen van Iamblichus en Damascius?\r\n\r\nHet boek van mevrouw Hadot is, zoals de auteur zelf toegeeft, vooral polemisch van aard: zij weerlegt hypothesen en interpretaties die niet op de teksten gegrond zijn. Door een nauwkeurige analyse van de teksten ontmaskert zij het stereotiepe beeld dat men over het Alexandrijnse Neoplatonisme geeft. Haar studie is zo een waardevolle bijdrage tot beter inzicht in deze laatste ontwikkeling van het antieke denken. [p. 606-608]","btype":3,"date":"1980","language":"Dutch","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/lIWBQQ2Q5dbWMLm","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":484,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Tijdschrift voor Filosofie","volume":"42","issue":"3","pages":"606-608"}},"sort":["Review of: Ilsetraut Hadot, Le probl\u00e8me du n\u00e9oplatonisme Alexandrin, Hi\u00e9rocl\u00e8s et Simplicius"]}
Title | Simplicius, On Aristotle 'On the Soul 2.5–12' |
Type | Monograph |
Language | English |
Date | 1997 |
Publication Place | London |
Publisher | Duckworth |
Series | Ancient Commentators on Aristotle |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Simplicius |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) | Steel, Carlos(Steel, Carlos ) |
This is the fourth and last volume of the translation in this series of the commentary on Aristotle On the Soul, wrongly attributed to Simplicius. Its real author, most probably Priscian of Lydia, proves in this work to be an original philosopher who deserves to be studied, not only because of his detailed explanation of an often difficult Aristotelian text, but also because of his own psychological doctrines. In chapter six the author discusses the objects of the intellect. In chapters seven to eight he sees Aristotle as moving towards practical intellect, thus preparing the way for discussing what initiates movement in chapters nine to 11. His interpretation offers a brilliant investigation of practical reasoning and of the interaction between desire and cognition from the level of perception to the intellect. In the commentator's view, Aristotle in the last chapters (12-13) investigates the different type of organic bodies corresponding to the different forms of life (vegetative and sensory, from the most basic, touch, to the most complex). [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/RDdJthQ7ArOSLv5 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1446","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1446,"authors_free":[{"id":2315,"entry_id":1446,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":62,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Simplicius","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":62,"first_name":"Cilicius","last_name":"Simplicius ","full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118642421","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2316,"entry_id":1446,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius, On Aristotle 'On the Soul 2.5\u201312'","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius, On Aristotle 'On the Soul 2.5\u201312'"},"abstract":"This is the fourth and last volume of the translation in this series of the commentary on Aristotle On the Soul, wrongly attributed to Simplicius. Its real author, most probably Priscian of Lydia, proves in this work to be an original philosopher who deserves to be studied, not only because of his detailed explanation of an often difficult Aristotelian text, but also because of his own psychological doctrines. In chapter six the author discusses the objects of the intellect. In chapters seven to eight he sees Aristotle as moving towards practical intellect, thus preparing the way for discussing what initiates movement in chapters nine to 11. His interpretation offers a brilliant investigation of practical reasoning and of the interaction between desire and cognition from the level of perception to the intellect. In the commentator's view, Aristotle in the last chapters (12-13) investigates the different type of organic bodies corresponding to the different forms of life (vegetative and sensory, from the most basic, touch, to the most complex). [author's abstract]","btype":1,"date":"1997","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/RDdJthQ7ArOSLv5","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":62,"full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}}],"book":{"id":1446,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Simplicius, On Aristotle 'On the Soul 2.5\u201312'"]}
Title | Surface Reading and Deeper Meaning. On Aristotle reading Plato and Platonists reading Aristotle |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 2013 |
Published in | Argument und literarische Form in antiker Philosophie. Akten des 3. Kongresses der Gesellschaft für antike Philosophie 2010 |
Pages | 469-494 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | Erler, Michael , Heßler, Jan Erik , Blumenfelder, Benedikt (Collaborator) |
Translator(s) |
We are here together to discuss various forms of philosophy in antiquity. There is a surprising variety of literary genres of philosophy so different from the narrow academic format of proceedings, handbooks, and referred journal articles. Already among the works of Aristotle, as the commentators noticed, there is a great variety, and Aristotle always adapted his style to the genre: dialogues, letters, protreptics, documentation works, research discussions, treatises on ethics and politics aiming at a broader public. And if we take the whole literary production of ancient philosophy, the variety is even more impressive. Besides the treatises and commentaries, the summaries and paraphrases, refutations and replies, the handbooks, manuals, and doxographies, there are dialogues and diatribes and orations, letters and catechisms with sentences to be set in practice, epigraphical posters in public city galleries, philosophical poems and political pamphlets, revelations of Hermes Trismegistos, Chaldean oracles, and we must include the manifold Jewish and Christian interpretations of biblical texts, sermons, and theological polemics. They all require other ways of reading and interpreting. The title of this introductory lecture does not mean that I would recommend us to seek for deeper meaning hidden under the many literary forms. It was undoubtedly a very influential hermeneutical model, in particular when combined with the esoteric/exoteric distinction. But in my view, it remains primarily a model for interpreting mythical and sacred texts and, since the secularization of sacred hermeneutics, for reading “challenging literary texts.” It is not a method for the interpretation of philosophical texts, where analysis, insight into the structure of arguments, questioning, and criticism are required. To play with a well-known quote from Thoreau: “In this part of the world (i.e., in philosophy), it is considered a ground for complaint if a man’s writings admit of more than one interpretation.” This refusal of a search for deeper meaning in philosophy, however, does not mean that we should remain just superficial readers, surfing on the text. Let us use all the possibilities we have, including attention to the literary context, to better understand the argument of the author. To avoid the impression that I am finally agreeing with Aristotle against Plato, let me conclude with a remarkable statement of Plato in the Phaedo. It comes from the crucial section of the debate where Socrates starts his critique of Simmias’ argument that the soul is the harmony of the body and will disappear once the substrate is destroyed. All participants are deeply impressed by the harmony argument, and there is an uneasy silence, as they thought it was a fatal blow to Socrates’ belief in immortality, but Socrates is not impressed. He confronts Simmias with a difficult choice: If you stick to the harmony doctrine, you will have to give up the other doctrine you just accepted, because it is incompatible with the harmony thesis, namely that all knowledge is recollection. What will you keep then, Simmias, this new theory or the former you already accepted? Simmias answers without hesitation that he would stand by the anamnesis doctrine. For this other (sc. the doctrine that the soul is like a harmony) came to me without demonstration; it merely seemed probable and attractive, which is the reason why many people hold it. I am conscious that arguments which base their demonstrations on mere probability are deceptive, and if we are not on our guard against them, they deceive us greatly, in geometry and in all other things. When commenting on this passage, Damascius, the last head of the Platonic Academy in Athens, distinguishes between what he calls superficial (ἐπιπόλαιοι) and profound (βαθύτεροι) thinkers, but not in any esoteric sense. Superficial thinkers, he says, “find pleasure in plausible arguments,” based on analogies and comparisons, metaphors. That is why the analogy of the soul with the harmony of the lyre is so attractive. “The more profound thinkers, who scorn the world of senses and its ready-at-hand (πρόχειρον) beliefs, rise above plausibilities and love arguments that are connected by necessity.” In this sense, I would also like to be a ‘profound’ reader ... alas, there arises again a problem. The doctrine that, according to Socrates, is supposedly demonstrated by sound, almost geometrical arguments, and not by analogy, as the rejected harmony thesis, is itself based on analogy and metaphor. For, Aristotle, sitting in this hall, would stand up and say: “What do you mean, Socrates, by that anamnesis? Is it not a metaphor and poetical phrase?” [conclusion p. 490-492] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/3r4OKQesOkyPwb0 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"482","_score":null,"_source":{"id":482,"authors_free":[{"id":653,"entry_id":482,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":654,"entry_id":482,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":164,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Erler, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Erler","norm_person":{"id":164,"first_name":"Michael ","last_name":"Erler","full_name":"Erler, Michael ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122153847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2424,"entry_id":482,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":478,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","free_first_name":"Jan Erik","free_last_name":"He\u00dfler","norm_person":{"id":478,"first_name":"Jan Erik","last_name":"He\u00dfler","full_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1059760533","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2425,"entry_id":482,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":479,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Blumenfelder, Benedikt (Collaborator)","free_first_name":"Benedikt","free_last_name":"Blumenfelder","norm_person":{"id":479,"first_name":"Benedikt","last_name":"Blumenfelder","full_name":"Blumenfelder, Benedikt","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Surface Reading and Deeper Meaning. On Aristotle reading Plato and Platonists reading Aristotle","main_title":{"title":"Surface Reading and Deeper Meaning. On Aristotle reading Plato and Platonists reading Aristotle"},"abstract":"We are here together to discuss various forms of philosophy in antiquity. There is a surprising variety of literary genres of philosophy so different from the narrow academic format of proceedings, handbooks, and referred journal articles. Already among the works of Aristotle, as the commentators noticed, there is a great variety, and Aristotle always adapted his style to the genre: dialogues, letters, protreptics, documentation works, research discussions, treatises on ethics and politics aiming at a broader public.\r\n\r\nAnd if we take the whole literary production of ancient philosophy, the variety is even more impressive. Besides the treatises and commentaries, the summaries and paraphrases, refutations and replies, the handbooks, manuals, and doxographies, there are dialogues and diatribes and orations, letters and catechisms with sentences to be set in practice, epigraphical posters in public city galleries, philosophical poems and political pamphlets, revelations of Hermes Trismegistos, Chaldean oracles, and we must include the manifold Jewish and Christian interpretations of biblical texts, sermons, and theological polemics. They all require other ways of reading and interpreting.\r\n\r\nThe title of this introductory lecture does not mean that I would recommend us to seek for deeper meaning hidden under the many literary forms. It was undoubtedly a very influential hermeneutical model, in particular when combined with the esoteric\/exoteric distinction. But in my view, it remains primarily a model for interpreting mythical and sacred texts and, since the secularization of sacred hermeneutics, for reading \u201cchallenging literary texts.\u201d It is not a method for the interpretation of philosophical texts, where analysis, insight into the structure of arguments, questioning, and criticism are required.\r\n\r\nTo play with a well-known quote from Thoreau: \u201cIn this part of the world (i.e., in philosophy), it is considered a ground for complaint if a man\u2019s writings admit of more than one interpretation.\u201d This refusal of a search for deeper meaning in philosophy, however, does not mean that we should remain just superficial readers, surfing on the text. Let us use all the possibilities we have, including attention to the literary context, to better understand the argument of the author.\r\n\r\nTo avoid the impression that I am finally agreeing with Aristotle against Plato, let me conclude with a remarkable statement of Plato in the Phaedo. It comes from the crucial section of the debate where Socrates starts his critique of Simmias\u2019 argument that the soul is the harmony of the body and will disappear once the substrate is destroyed.\r\n\r\nAll participants are deeply impressed by the harmony argument, and there is an uneasy silence, as they thought it was a fatal blow to Socrates\u2019 belief in immortality, but Socrates is not impressed. He confronts Simmias with a difficult choice: If you stick to the harmony doctrine, you will have to give up the other doctrine you just accepted, because it is incompatible with the harmony thesis, namely that all knowledge is recollection. What will you keep then, Simmias, this new theory or the former you already accepted? Simmias answers without hesitation that he would stand by the anamnesis doctrine.\r\n\r\nFor this other (sc. the doctrine that the soul is like a harmony) came to me without demonstration; it merely seemed probable and attractive, which is the reason why many people hold it. I am conscious that arguments which base their demonstrations on mere probability are deceptive, and if we are not on our guard against them, they deceive us greatly, in geometry and in all other things.\r\n\r\nWhen commenting on this passage, Damascius, the last head of the Platonic Academy in Athens, distinguishes between what he calls superficial (\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9) and profound (\u03b2\u03b1\u03b8\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9) thinkers, but not in any esoteric sense. Superficial thinkers, he says, \u201cfind pleasure in plausible arguments,\u201d based on analogies and comparisons, metaphors. That is why the analogy of the soul with the harmony of the lyre is so attractive. \u201cThe more profound thinkers, who scorn the world of senses and its ready-at-hand (\u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd) beliefs, rise above plausibilities and love arguments that are connected by necessity.\u201d\r\n\r\nIn this sense, I would also like to be a \u2018profound\u2019 reader ... alas, there arises again a problem. The doctrine that, according to Socrates, is supposedly demonstrated by sound, almost geometrical arguments, and not by analogy, as the rejected harmony thesis, is itself based on analogy and metaphor.\r\n\r\nFor, Aristotle, sitting in this hall, would stand up and say: \u201cWhat do you mean, Socrates, by that anamnesis? Is it not a metaphor and poetical phrase?\u201d [conclusion p. 490-492]","btype":2,"date":"2013","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/3r4OKQesOkyPwb0","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":164,"full_name":"Erler, Michael ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":478,"full_name":"He\u00dfler, Jan Erik","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":479,"full_name":"Blumenfelder, Benedikt","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":482,"section_of":322,"pages":"469-494","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":322,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Argument und literarische Form in antiker Philosophie. Akten des 3. Kongresses der Gesellschaft f\u00fcr antike Philosophie 2010","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Erler2013","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2013","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2013","abstract":"In der modernen Universit\u00e4t werden Literatur, Philologie und Philosophie als unterschiedliche Bereiche betrachtet. Damit wird eine im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert zunehmende Entfremdung zwischen der Erforschung antiker Philosophie und Philologie manifest, die den urspr\u00fcnglichen Gegebenheiten in der Antike keineswegs gerecht wird. Denn die Philosophie entwickelt sich in Griechenland und Rom in enger Verbindung mit und oft in einem Spannungsverh\u00e4ltnis zu unterschiedlichen literarischen Genres. Dies hat zur Folge, dass die Autoren und Interpreten infolge der Wahl bestimmter Gattungen als Medium philosophischer Botschaften neben der eigentlichen Argumentation auch Darstellungsformen der jeweiligen Gattungen zu w\u00fcrdigen haben. Dieses oft spannungsvolle Verh\u00e4ltnis von philosophischem Argument und literarischer Form auszuleuchten hatte sich der 3. Kongress der Gesellschaft f\u00fcr antike Philosophie vorgenommen. In Vortr\u00e4gen und Diskussionsrunden von Philosophen und Philologen wurde diese Frage unter verschiedenen Aspekten mit Blick auf antike Philosophen verschiedener Epochen lebendig diskutiert. Dieser Band, der den Gro\u00dfteil dieser Beitr\u00e4ge versammelt, mag einen Eindruck von der Diskussion vermitteln und Philologen, Philosophen und an der Antike Interessierte zu weiteren \u00dcberlegungen anregen. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/0QiKNhBCl16gJMn","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":322,"pubplace":"Berlin","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Surface Reading and Deeper Meaning. On Aristotle reading Plato and Platonists reading Aristotle"]}
Title | The Changing Self: A Study on the Soul in Later Neoplatonism; Iamblichus, Damascius and Priscianus |
Type | Monograph |
Language | English |
Date | 1978 |
Publication Place | Brüssel |
Publisher | Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
The later Neoplatonist writers are not easy to read or sympathize with for several reasons. To begin with, it is necessary to reconstruct their views not with the help of their own writings, but with extracts and summaries in later writers. This is particularly true of Iamblichus. Only fragments of his treatise De Anima may be found in Stobaeus (Ecl. 1, 362, 23–367, 9), and to this somewhat exiguous number may be added what is reported in various places by Proclus, Damascius, and Priscianus, fifth- and sixth-century writers living two centuries after the death of Iamblichus in 326. This makes any attempt at reconstruction particularly uncertain. Iamblichus' views, insofar as we can reconstruct them, are primarily interesting because they represent the first and in many ways most serious challenge to the doctrines of Plotinus. And the challenge itself may be said to have split the later Neoplatonists, with Damascius and Priscianus following Iamblichus and Proclus reverting to the views of Plotinus. The real question at issue, and one dealt with with admirable fairness and clarity by Steel, is the nature of the soul and, more particularly, "Does it fall or not?" Plotinus maintained on many occasions that it remained, at least in its upper and true self, unfallen. This is clear, for example, at Enn. IV.1.12. Iamblichus' critique of this view is instructive and sympathetic. The view of Plotinus fails to explain far too many factors in our moral and empirical lives—the fact of sin, our awareness of unhappiness, and the apparent betrayal of the vision of the soul offered by Plato in the Phaedrus 248a ff. Not that Plotinus was unaware of these drawbacks to his theory. He had anticipated and dealt with some already at Enn. I.1 and III.6. Iamblichus also objected to the Plotinian doctrine that all souls were homogeneous (cf. Enn. IV.7.10.19). To obviate these difficulties, Iamblichus developed a theory about the substantial change of the soul (cf. p. 53 ff.). The evidence for this view comes largely from Priscianus, so it is perhaps unwise to be too uncritical about accepting it as Iamblichus' own, especially when considering the reverence in which he was held by many later writers, who, beginning at least as early as Julian, called him "the divine." The arguments produced in favor of such a view of the mutable substance of the soul all seem to argue from perceived activities to the unperceived cause—a methodological principle that derives from Aristotle and seems to run counter to the method employed by Plotinus. The system of Plotinus, like that of the great systematizer Proclus, is deductive rather than inductive. The central vision around which the Iamblichean picture revolves is of a soul that remains in itself and simultaneously proceeds from itself—a view that is often repeated in Priscianus. Whereas in Plotinus the upper, true soul never sallies forth and only the image of the soul does, here it is the whole soul. This reduced cosmic status of the soul may be the reason why Iamblichus was willing to allow people to approach the divine through theurgy and not simply through the activity of the soul. Two points may be mentioned. One is the relation of Iamblichus to Proclus. It has often been assumed that the former had a great influence on the latter, and this is the view put forward by Professor Dodds in his edition of the Elements of Proclus (cf. Introd., xvi ff.). Just how much influence was there? Again, on p. 157, it is stated that much later pagan psychology was occasioned by the desire to refute either the views or objections of Christians, or both. But there is a considerable question as to the knowledge of and interest in what Christians believed and wrote on the part of educated pagans. It really is an open question whether there is any reference at all to anything Christian in Iamblichus or Plotinus. It would be most interesting if any serious evidence could be found in favor of such a hypothesis. [review by Anthony Meredith p. 290-291 ] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/tntYMFyZHiMovai |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1445","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1445,"authors_free":[{"id":2314,"entry_id":1445,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Changing Self: A Study on the Soul in Later Neoplatonism; Iamblichus, Damascius and Priscianus","main_title":{"title":"The Changing Self: A Study on the Soul in Later Neoplatonism; Iamblichus, Damascius and Priscianus"},"abstract":"The later Neoplatonist writers are not easy to read or sympathize with for several reasons. To begin with, it is necessary to reconstruct their views not with the help of their own writings, but with extracts and summaries in later writers. This is particularly true of Iamblichus. Only fragments of his treatise De Anima may be found in Stobaeus (Ecl. 1, 362, 23\u2013367, 9), and to this somewhat exiguous number may be added what is reported in various places by Proclus, Damascius, and Priscianus, fifth- and sixth-century writers living two centuries after the death of Iamblichus in 326. This makes any attempt at reconstruction particularly uncertain.\r\n\r\nIamblichus' views, insofar as we can reconstruct them, are primarily interesting because they represent the first and in many ways most serious challenge to the doctrines of Plotinus. And the challenge itself may be said to have split the later Neoplatonists, with Damascius and Priscianus following Iamblichus and Proclus reverting to the views of Plotinus.\r\n\r\nThe real question at issue, and one dealt with with admirable fairness and clarity by Steel, is the nature of the soul and, more particularly, \"Does it fall or not?\" Plotinus maintained on many occasions that it remained, at least in its upper and true self, unfallen. This is clear, for example, at Enn. IV.1.12. Iamblichus' critique of this view is instructive and sympathetic. The view of Plotinus fails to explain far too many factors in our moral and empirical lives\u2014the fact of sin, our awareness of unhappiness, and the apparent betrayal of the vision of the soul offered by Plato in the Phaedrus 248a ff.\r\n\r\nNot that Plotinus was unaware of these drawbacks to his theory. He had anticipated and dealt with some already at Enn. I.1 and III.6. Iamblichus also objected to the Plotinian doctrine that all souls were homogeneous (cf. Enn. IV.7.10.19). To obviate these difficulties, Iamblichus developed a theory about the substantial change of the soul (cf. p. 53 ff.). The evidence for this view comes largely from Priscianus, so it is perhaps unwise to be too uncritical about accepting it as Iamblichus' own, especially when considering the reverence in which he was held by many later writers, who, beginning at least as early as Julian, called him \"the divine.\"\r\n\r\nThe arguments produced in favor of such a view of the mutable substance of the soul all seem to argue from perceived activities to the unperceived cause\u2014a methodological principle that derives from Aristotle and seems to run counter to the method employed by Plotinus. The system of Plotinus, like that of the great systematizer Proclus, is deductive rather than inductive.\r\n\r\nThe central vision around which the Iamblichean picture revolves is of a soul that remains in itself and simultaneously proceeds from itself\u2014a view that is often repeated in Priscianus. Whereas in Plotinus the upper, true soul never sallies forth and only the image of the soul does, here it is the whole soul. This reduced cosmic status of the soul may be the reason why Iamblichus was willing to allow people to approach the divine through theurgy and not simply through the activity of the soul.\r\n\r\nTwo points may be mentioned. One is the relation of Iamblichus to Proclus. It has often been assumed that the former had a great influence on the latter, and this is the view put forward by Professor Dodds in his edition of the Elements of Proclus (cf. Introd., xvi ff.). Just how much influence was there?\r\n\r\nAgain, on p. 157, it is stated that much later pagan psychology was occasioned by the desire to refute either the views or objections of Christians, or both. But there is a considerable question as to the knowledge of and interest in what Christians believed and wrote on the part of educated pagans. It really is an open question whether there is any reference at all to anything Christian in Iamblichus or Plotinus. It would be most interesting if any serious evidence could be found in favor of such a hypothesis. [review by Anthony Meredith p. 290-291 ]","btype":1,"date":"1978","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/tntYMFyZHiMovai","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":1445,"pubplace":"Br\u00fcssel","publisher":"Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["The Changing Self: A Study on the Soul in Later Neoplatonism; Iamblichus, Damascius and Priscianus"]}
Title | The Soul never thinks withous a Phantasm: How platonic commentators interpret a controversal aristotelian Thesis |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 2018 |
Published in | Die Kunst der philosophischen Exegese bei den spätanitken Platon- und Aristoteles Kommentatoren. Akten der 15. Tagung der Karl und Gertrud Abel-Stiftung vom 4. bis 6. Oktober 2012 in Trier |
Pages | 185-223 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, C. |
Editor(s) | Strobel, Benedikt |
Translator(s) |
Even Platonists, it seems, have to accept that the intellective soul, when connected to this earthy body, can never be entirely without imagination, not only in (1) practical thought or in (2) understanding sensible objects or in (3) mathematics, but even in its most excellent thought, (4) the contemplation of the intelligible forms. The role of imagination is, however, different in the four cases, as we have seen. Therefore, a good philosophical teacher will not only warn his students of the danger of imaginations, which may distort their thoughts, but also helps them to train and discipline their imagination so that it may be an obedient servant of the intellect. For that reason, he will use images and fantastic stories besides rational arguments. As Proclus explains in his introduction to his commentary of the myth of Er: The souls, which are by essence intellectual and full of incorporeal and intellectual reasons, have put on (ἐνδυσαμέναις) the imaginative intellect and cannot live without it in this place of generation [...] – for these souls, which have become impassible passible and without figures figurative (γενομέναις ἀπαθέσι παθητικαῖς, ἀμορφώτοις μορφωτικαῖς) this teaching through myths [as here in the myth of Er] is appropriate. Myths are particularly needed for those who only live according to imagination and only have practised the passive intellect, as is the case with the vulgar masses, who are incapable of following a purely rational argument. By contrast, some exceptional souls, which have set their mind on pure intellections, will be content with the intellectual light of the truth without needing the imaginary mise-en-scène of myths. But for us, Proclus says, who are ‘both together and have a twofold intellect’, the one which we really are and the one we have put on and projected outwards (i.e. the passive intellect linked to imagination), we find pleasures both in the fictive clothing of the story and in its deeper truth. Whereas the imaginative intellect ‘is stricken by the external and becomes thus ready for the path towards science,’ our true intellect ‘is nourished by what is inside the stories and becomes the contemplator of truth.’ [conclusion p. 211-212] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/iQkklQKce7ANXjV |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1170","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1170,"authors_free":[{"id":1746,"entry_id":1170,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, C.","free_first_name":"C.","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2507,"entry_id":1170,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":326,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Strobel, Benedikt","free_first_name":"Benedikt","free_last_name":"Strobel","norm_person":{"id":326,"first_name":" Benedikt","last_name":"Strobel,","full_name":"Strobel, Benedikt","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/173882056","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Soul never thinks withous a Phantasm: How platonic commentators interpret a controversal aristotelian Thesis","main_title":{"title":"The Soul never thinks withous a Phantasm: How platonic commentators interpret a controversal aristotelian Thesis"},"abstract":"Even Platonists, it seems, have to accept that the intellective soul, when connected to this earthy body, can never be entirely without imagination, not only in (1) practical thought or in (2) understanding sensible objects or in (3) mathematics, but even in its most excellent thought, (4) the contemplation of the intelligible forms. The role of imagination is, however, different in the four cases, as we have seen. Therefore, a good philosophical teacher will not only warn his students of the danger of imaginations, which may distort their thoughts, but also helps them to train and discipline their imagination so that it may be an obedient servant of the intellect. For that reason, he will use images and fantastic stories besides rational arguments. As Proclus explains in his introduction to his commentary of the myth of Er:\r\n\r\nThe souls, which are by essence intellectual and full of incorporeal and intellectual reasons, have put on (\u1f10\u03bd\u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2) the imaginative intellect and cannot live without it in this place of generation [...] \u2013 for these souls, which have become impassible passible and without figures figurative (\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03ce\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03c9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2) this teaching through myths [as here in the myth of Er] is appropriate.\r\n\r\nMyths are particularly needed for those who only live according to imagination and only have practised the passive intellect, as is the case with the vulgar masses, who are incapable of following a purely rational argument. By contrast, some exceptional souls, which have set their mind on pure intellections, will be content with the intellectual light of the truth without needing the imaginary mise-en-sc\u00e8ne of myths. But for us, Proclus says, who are \u2018both together and have a twofold intellect\u2019, the one which we really are and the one we have put on and projected outwards (i.e. the passive intellect linked to imagination), we find pleasures both in the fictive clothing of the story and in its deeper truth. Whereas the imaginative intellect \u2018is stricken by the external and becomes thus ready for the path towards science,\u2019 our true intellect \u2018is nourished by what is inside the stories and becomes the contemplator of truth.\u2019 [conclusion p. 211-212]","btype":2,"date":"2018","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/iQkklQKce7ANXjV","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":326,"full_name":"Strobel, Benedikt","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1170,"section_of":289,"pages":"185-223","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":289,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Die Kunst der philosophischen Exegese bei den sp\u00e4tanitken Platon- und Aristoteles Kommentatoren. Akten der 15. Tagung der Karl und Gertrud Abel-Stiftung vom 4. bis 6. Oktober 2012 in Trier","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Strobel2019","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2018","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2018","abstract":"This volume uses prominent case examples to examine the amalgam of exegetical and philosophical interests that characterize the literature of Neoplatonist commentary in late antiquity. The essays consistently reveal the linguistic difficulties encountered by the commentators due to the complex relationship between Platonic and Aristotelian theory.","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/rOy7sqluVGEXcC1","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":289,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 Boston","publisher":"De Gruyter","series":"Philosophie der Antike","volume":"36","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["The Soul never thinks withous a Phantasm: How platonic commentators interpret a controversal aristotelian Thesis"]}
Title | The Text Tradition of the 'Commentary On the Soul' Attributed to Simplicius |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 2024 |
Published in | Aristoteles-Kommentare und ihre Überlieferung. Wichtige Etappen von der Antike bis in die frühe Neuzeit |
Pages | 225-268 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | Deckers, Daniel , Brockmann, Christian , Valente, Stefano |
Translator(s) |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/r4x9UiKcqVzpdhL |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1575","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1575,"authors_free":[{"id":2748,"entry_id":1575,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2749,"entry_id":1575,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":570,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Deckers, Daniel","free_first_name":"Daniel","free_last_name":"Deckers","norm_person":{"id":570,"first_name":"Daniel","last_name":"Deckers","full_name":"Deckers, Daniel","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"https:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1145076017","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2750,"entry_id":1575,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":473,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Brockmann, Christian","free_first_name":"Christian","free_last_name":"Brockmann","norm_person":{"id":473,"first_name":"Christian","last_name":"Brockmann","full_name":"Brockmann, Christian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/137576218","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2751,"entry_id":1575,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":571,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Valente, Stefano","free_first_name":"Stefano","free_last_name":"Valente","norm_person":{"id":571,"first_name":"Stefano","last_name":"Valente","full_name":"Valente, Stefano","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"https:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1147906939","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Text Tradition of the 'Commentary On the Soul' Attributed to Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"The Text Tradition of the 'Commentary On the Soul' Attributed to Simplicius"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"2024","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/r4x9UiKcqVzpdhL","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":570,"full_name":"Deckers, Daniel","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":473,"full_name":"Brockmann, Christian","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":571,"full_name":"Valente, Stefano","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1575,"section_of":1573,"pages":"225-268","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1573,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aristoteles-Kommentare und ihre \u00dcberlieferung. Wichtige Etappen von der Antike bis in die fr\u00fche Neuzeit","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Brockmann\/Deckers\/Valente2024","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2024","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"Von der Antike und der Sp\u00e4tantike bis ins Mittelalter und in die Neuzeit stellt die Kommentierung der aristotelischen Schriften eine der fundamentalen Formen philosophischer T\u00e4tigkeit dar. In diesem Sammelband werden wesentliche Etappen der griechischen Kommentartradition zu den Schriften des Aristoteles sowie ihre philosophische und kulturgeschichtliche Bedeutung an ausgew\u00e4hlten Beispielen analysiert und interpretiert. Die Autorinnen und Autoren setzen sich dabei sowohl mit den Manuskripten und der \u00dcberlieferung einzelner Schriften als auch mit der Rezeption und Weiterentwicklung der Aristotelischen Philosophie auseinander.\r\n\r\nDer Kernbestand der hier versammelten Beitr\u00e4ge geht auf die dreit\u00e4gige internationale Konferenz \u201eAristoteles-Kommentare und ihre \u00dcberlieferung in Sp\u00e4tantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance\" (26.\u201328.10.2017) zur\u00fcck, die dank der F\u00f6rderung der Karl und Gertrud Abel-Stiftung an der Universit\u00e4t Hamburg am Centre for the Study of Manuscript Cultures stattgefunden hat. [publisher's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ABLmF9W1WrH4QDt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1573,"pubplace":"Berlin\/Boston","publisher":"De Gruyter","series":"Philosophie der Antike","volume":"44","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["The Text Tradition of the 'Commentary On the Soul' Attributed to Simplicius"]}
Title | The Text Tradition of the Commentary On the Soul attributed to Simplicius |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 2024 |
Published in | Aristoteles-Kommentare und ihre Überlieferung. Wichtige Etappen von der Antike bis in die frühe Neuzeit |
Pages | 225-268 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | Christian Brockmann , Daniel Deckers , Stefano Valente |
Translator(s) |
About fifty years ago I published together with Fernand Bossier an article todemonstrate that theCommentary On the Soultraditionally attributed toSimplicius was not his work, but most probably that of a fellow member ofthe Athenian Academy, Priscian of Lydia.1An examination of the text tradi-tion of the commentary did not yield any indications to question the tradi-tional attribution. Nevertheless, arguments based on style, content, self-refer-ences are so convincing that it is now commonly accepted that the author ofthe commentary is not Simplicius.2The Hamburg colloquium offered me theincentive for a new and comprehensive study of the complicated text tradi-tion of this commentary, which enjoyed an extraordinary fortune in the re-ception of Aristotle’s treatiseOn the Soulamong Byzantine and Renaissancescholars.3For practical reasons, I keep using in this contribution the author’sname ‘Simplicius’ as it is known in the tradition but put it between singlequotations marks to distinguish him from the real Simplicius. [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/j1NGkXq4FVGx9hw |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"245","_score":null,"_source":{"id":245,"authors_free":[{"id":314,"entry_id":245,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2775,"entry_id":245,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Christian Brockmann","free_first_name":"Christian","free_last_name":"Brockmann","norm_person":null},{"id":2776,"entry_id":245,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Daniel Deckers ","free_first_name":"Daniel ","free_last_name":"Deckers","norm_person":null},{"id":2777,"entry_id":245,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Stefano Valente","free_first_name":"Stefano","free_last_name":"Valente","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"The Text Tradition of the Commentary On the Soul attributed to Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"The Text Tradition of the Commentary On the Soul attributed to Simplicius"},"abstract":"About fifty years ago I published together with Fernand Bossier an article todemonstrate that theCommentary On the Soultraditionally attributed toSimplicius was not his work, but most probably that of a fellow member ofthe Athenian Academy, Priscian of Lydia.1An examination of the text tradi-tion of the commentary did not yield any indications to question the tradi-tional attribution. Nevertheless, arguments based on style, content, self-refer-ences are so convincing that it is now commonly accepted that the author ofthe commentary is not Simplicius.2The Hamburg colloquium offered me theincentive for a new and comprehensive study of the complicated text tradi-tion of this commentary, which enjoyed an extraordinary fortune in the re-ception of Aristotle\u2019s treatiseOn the Soulamong Byzantine and Renaissancescholars.3For practical reasons, I keep using in this contribution the author\u2019sname \u2018Simplicius\u2019 as it is known in the tradition but put it between singlequotations marks to distinguish him from the real Simplicius. [author's abstract]","btype":2,"date":"2024","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/j1NGkXq4FVGx9hw","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":245,"pubplace":"","publisher":"","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":{"id":245,"section_of":1573,"pages":"225-268","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1573,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aristoteles-Kommentare und ihre \u00dcberlieferung. Wichtige Etappen von der Antike bis in die fr\u00fche Neuzeit","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Brockmann\/Deckers\/Valente2024","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2024","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"Von der Antike und der Sp\u00e4tantike bis ins Mittelalter und in die Neuzeit stellt die Kommentierung der aristotelischen Schriften eine der fundamentalen Formen philosophischer T\u00e4tigkeit dar. In diesem Sammelband werden wesentliche Etappen der griechischen Kommentartradition zu den Schriften des Aristoteles sowie ihre philosophische und kulturgeschichtliche Bedeutung an ausgew\u00e4hlten Beispielen analysiert und interpretiert. Die Autorinnen und Autoren setzen sich dabei sowohl mit den Manuskripten und der \u00dcberlieferung einzelner Schriften als auch mit der Rezeption und Weiterentwicklung der Aristotelischen Philosophie auseinander.\r\n\r\nDer Kernbestand der hier versammelten Beitr\u00e4ge geht auf die dreit\u00e4gige internationale Konferenz \u201eAristoteles-Kommentare und ihre \u00dcberlieferung in Sp\u00e4tantike, Mittelalter und Renaissance\" (26.\u201328.10.2017) zur\u00fcck, die dank der F\u00f6rderung der Karl und Gertrud Abel-Stiftung an der Universit\u00e4t Hamburg am Centre for the Study of Manuscript Cultures stattgefunden hat. [publisher's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ABLmF9W1WrH4QDt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1573,"pubplace":"Berlin\/Boston","publisher":"De Gruyter","series":"Philosophie der Antike","volume":"44","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":{"id":245,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"unpublished","volume":"","issue":"","pages":""}},"sort":["The Text Tradition of the Commentary On the Soul attributed to Simplicius"]}
Title | ‘Simplicius.’ On Aristotle, On the Soul 3.6–13 |
Type | Edited Book |
Language | English |
Date | 2013 |
Publication Place | Bristol - London |
Publisher | Bristol Classical Press |
Series | Ancient Commentators on Aristotle |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | , Simplicius |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) | Steel, Carlos(Steel, Carlos ) , Ritups, Arnis(Ritups, Arnis) , |
This is the fourth and last volume of the translation in this series of the commentary on Aristotle On the Soul, wrongly attributed to Simplicius. Its real author, most probably Priscian of Lydia, proves in this work to be an original philosopher who deserves to be studied, not only because of his detailed explanation of an often difficult Aristotelian text, but also because of his own psychological doctrines. In chapter six the author discusses the objects of the intellect. In chapters seven to eight he sees Aristotle as moving towards practical intellect, thus preparing the way for discussing what initiates movement in chapters nine to 11. His interpretation offers a brilliant investigation of practical reasoning and of the interaction between desire and cognition from the level of perception to the intellect. In the commentator's view, Aristotle in the last chapters (12-13) investigates the different type of organic bodies corresponding to the different forms of life (vegetative and sensory, from the most basic, touch, to the most complex). |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/W0nXXZcYBUmaS3B |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"211","_score":null,"_source":{"id":211,"authors_free":[{"id":269,"entry_id":211,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":270,"entry_id":211,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":73,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Ritups, Arnis","free_first_name":"Arnis","free_last_name":"Ritups","norm_person":{"id":73,"first_name":"Arnis","last_name":"Ritups","full_name":"Ritups, Arnis","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1883,"entry_id":211,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":62,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Simplicius","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":62,"first_name":"Cilicius","last_name":"Simplicius ","full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118642421","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"\u2018Simplicius.\u2019 On Aristotle, On the Soul 3.6\u201313","main_title":{"title":"\u2018Simplicius.\u2019 On Aristotle, On the Soul 3.6\u201313"},"abstract":"This is the fourth and last volume of the translation in this series of the commentary on Aristotle On the Soul, wrongly attributed to Simplicius. Its real author, most probably Priscian of Lydia, proves in this work to be an original philosopher who deserves to be studied, not only because of his detailed explanation of an often difficult Aristotelian text, but also because of his own psychological doctrines. In chapter six the author discusses the objects of the intellect. In chapters seven to eight he sees Aristotle as moving towards practical intellect, thus preparing the way for discussing what initiates movement in chapters nine to 11. His interpretation offers a brilliant investigation of practical reasoning and of the interaction between desire and cognition from the level of perception to the intellect. In the commentator's view, Aristotle in the last chapters (12-13) investigates the different type of organic bodies corresponding to the different forms of life (vegetative and sensory, from the most basic, touch, to the most complex).","btype":4,"date":"2013","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/W0nXXZcYBUmaS3B","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":73,"full_name":"Ritups, Arnis","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":62,"full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":211,"pubplace":"Bristol - London","publisher":"Bristol Classical Press","series":"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["\u2018Simplicius.\u2019 On Aristotle, On the Soul 3.6\u201313"]}