| 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) |
| There is undoubtedly a Platonic motivation in the commentators’ refusal to accept Aristotle’s claim about the connection of thinking with phantasms as universally valid. After all, it is even plausible that Aristotle was himself implicitly reacting against Plato’s view in Republic VI (510 C–511 C) that thinking – νόησις contrary to διάνοια – is without images. However, even if their Platonic perspective is undeniable, the ancient commentators also have, as I hope to show, valuable arguments to restrict Aristotle’s claim to some forms of knowledge. In this contribution I will discuss the views of four commentators of late antiquity: Themistius, Ammonius (as reported by Philoponus), John Philoponus (in his lectures as reported by a student), and Priscian of Lydia (Pseudo-Simplicius). But before I turn to the commentators I have to recall briefly Plotinus, who was himself an intensive reader of the Aristotelian treatise On the Soul, but interpreted it in his own manner. [Introduction, pp. 187 f.] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/SmsiEQFvYEh7kIN |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1170","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_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":"There is undoubtedly a Platonic\r\nmotivation in the commentators\u2019 refusal to accept Aristotle\u2019s claim about the\r\nconnection of thinking with phantasms as universally valid. After all, it is even plausible that Aristotle was himself implicitly reacting against Plato\u2019s view in Republic VI (510 C\u2013511 C) that thinking \u2013 \u03bd\u1f79\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 contrary to\r\n\u03b4\u03b9\u1f71\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1 \u2013 is without images. However, even if their Platonic perspective is undeniable, the ancient commentators also have, as I hope to show, valuable\r\narguments to restrict Aristotle\u2019s claim to some forms of knowledge.\r\nIn this contribution I will discuss the views of four commentators of late antiquity: Themistius, Ammonius (as reported by Philoponus), John Philoponus (in his lectures as reported by a student), and Priscian of Lydia (Pseudo-Simplicius). But before I turn to the commentators I have to recall briefly Plotinus, who was himself an intensive reader of the Aristotelian treatise On the Soul, but interpreted it in his own manner. [Introduction, pp. 187 f.]","btype":2,"date":"2018","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/SmsiEQFvYEh7kIN","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\/T1HDXUI5JWMgcGy","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 | 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) |
There is undoubtedly a Platonic motivation in the commentators’ refusal to accept Aristotle’s claim about the connection of thinking with phantasms as universally valid. After all, it is even plausible that Aristotle was himself implicitly reacting against Plato’s view in Republic VI (510 C–511 C) that thinking – νόησις contrary to διάνοια – is without images. However, even if their Platonic perspective is undeniable, the ancient commentators also have, as I hope to show, valuable arguments to restrict Aristotle’s claim to some forms of knowledge. In this contribution I will discuss the views of four commentators of late antiquity: Themistius, Ammonius (as reported by Philoponus), John Philoponus (in his lectures as reported by a student), and Priscian of Lydia (Pseudo-Simplicius). But before I turn to the commentators I have to recall briefly Plotinus, who was himself an intensive reader of the Aristotelian treatise On the Soul, but interpreted it in his own manner. [Introduction, pp. 187 f.] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/SmsiEQFvYEh7kIN |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1170","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_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":"There is undoubtedly a Platonic\r\nmotivation in the commentators\u2019 refusal to accept Aristotle\u2019s claim about the\r\nconnection of thinking with phantasms as universally valid. After all, it is even plausible that Aristotle was himself implicitly reacting against Plato\u2019s view in Republic VI (510 C\u2013511 C) that thinking \u2013 \u03bd\u1f79\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 contrary to\r\n\u03b4\u03b9\u1f71\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1 \u2013 is without images. However, even if their Platonic perspective is undeniable, the ancient commentators also have, as I hope to show, valuable\r\narguments to restrict Aristotle\u2019s claim to some forms of knowledge.\r\nIn this contribution I will discuss the views of four commentators of late antiquity: Themistius, Ammonius (as reported by Philoponus), John Philoponus (in his lectures as reported by a student), and Priscian of Lydia (Pseudo-Simplicius). But before I turn to the commentators I have to recall briefly Plotinus, who was himself an intensive reader of the Aristotelian treatise On the Soul, but interpreted it in his own manner. [Introduction, pp. 187 f.]","btype":2,"date":"2018","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/SmsiEQFvYEh7kIN","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\/T1HDXUI5JWMgcGy","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"]}