Levels of human thinking in Philoponus, 1985
By: Verbeke, Gérard, Laga, Carl (Ed.), Munitiz, Joseph A. (Ed.), Rompay, Lucas van (Ed.)
Title Levels of human thinking in Philoponus
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 1985
Published in After Chalcedon. Studies in Theology and Church History. Offered to Professor Albert van Roey for his seventieth birthday
Pages 451-470
Categories no categories
Author(s) Verbeke, Gérard
Editor(s) Laga, Carl , Munitiz, Joseph A. , Rompay, Lucas van
Translator(s)
What is finally the meaning of Philoponus’s teaching on the levels of thought? Taking into account the previous considerations, we may conclude that this doctrine is intended to disclose the true nature of philosophical reflection as a direct and immediate intuition of the intelligible world. This disclosure is an internal one: each individual bears within himself, in the hidden abodes of his consciousness, a treasure of philosophical wisdom". In order to contemplate the highest truth, man should not leave himself, on the contrary he should come back and turn to himself, to his true self. Most people live outside them­selves in a permanent forgetfulness of their real nature: they hardly participate in philosophical wisdom, they only possess some common intuitions, which are a kind of trace or vestige of rational truth. They never come to the level of a direct contemplation of the intelligibles. In order to reach the supreme level of thinking man needs a moral preparation, which makes him able to overcome the influence of irrational movements; he also needs an intellectual training by means of discursive reasoning in order to free himself from the impact of senses and imagination. If these requirements are fulfilled, man be­ comes able to contemplate directly true reality in the internal world of his consciousness. [conclusion, p. 469]

{"_index":"sire","_id":"1391","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1391,"authors_free":[{"id":2156,"entry_id":1391,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2160,"entry_id":1391,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":349,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Laga, Carl","free_first_name":"Carl","free_last_name":"Laga","norm_person":{"id":349,"first_name":"Carl","last_name":"Laga","full_name":"Laga, Carl","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119278146","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2161,"entry_id":1391,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":350,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Munitiz, Joseph A.","free_first_name":"Joseph A.","free_last_name":"Munitiz","norm_person":{"id":350,"first_name":"Joseph A.","last_name":"Munitiz","full_name":"Munitiz, Joseph A.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/105468202X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2162,"entry_id":1391,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":351,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Rompay, Lucas van","free_first_name":"Lucas","free_last_name":"Rompay van","norm_person":{"id":351,"first_name":"Lucas","last_name":"Rompay, van","full_name":"Rompay, Lucas van","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1055081453","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Levels of human thinking in Philoponus","main_title":{"title":"Levels of human thinking in Philoponus"},"abstract":"What is finally the meaning of Philoponus\u2019s teaching on the levels of thought? Taking into account the previous considerations, we may \r\nconclude that this doctrine is intended to disclose the true nature of philosophical reflection as a direct and immediate intuition of the \r\nintelligible world. This disclosure is an internal one: each individual bears within himself, in the hidden abodes of his consciousness, a treasure \r\nof philosophical wisdom\". In order to contemplate the highest truth, man should not leave himself, on the contrary he should come back \r\nand turn to himself, to his true self. Most people live outside them\u00adselves in a permanent forgetfulness of their real nature: they hardly \r\nparticipate in philosophical wisdom, they only possess some common intuitions, which are a kind of trace or vestige of rational truth. \r\nThey never come to the level of a direct contemplation of the intelligibles. In order to reach the supreme level of thinking man needs a moral preparation, which makes him able to overcome the influence of irrational movements; he also needs an intellectual training by means \r\nof discursive reasoning in order to free himself from the impact of senses and imagination. If these requirements are fulfilled, man be\u00ad\r\ncomes able to contemplate directly true reality in the internal world of his consciousness. [conclusion, p. 469]","btype":2,"date":"1985","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/PBqIyB5guZfHl6C","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":349,"full_name":"Laga, Carl","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":350,"full_name":"Munitiz, Joseph A.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":351,"full_name":"Rompay, Lucas van","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1391,"section_of":1392,"pages":"451-470","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1392,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"After Chalcedon. Studies in Theology and Church History. Offered to Professor Albert van Roey for his seventieth birthday","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Laga1985","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1985","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"This volume in honour of Prof. P.H.L. Eggermont, Indologist and Classicist, is focused on North and Northwest India, and on the adjacent regions to the west, with special attention to the Hellenistic monarchies, the historical geography of India, the ancient trade routes, and the contacts between India, Greece and Rome. The contributions of this Festschrift provide a bulk of material, especially for those interested in relations between Classical and Oriental philological, historical, archaeological, and geographical sources. Besides, the volume contains a biography and a bibliography of Prof. Eggermont. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ERNutaoLJTpirTN","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1392,"pubplace":"Leuven","publisher":"Itgeverij Peeters Leuven","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1985]}

Ort und Raum nach Aristoteles und Simplikios. Eine philosophische Topologie, 1983
By: Verbeke, Gérard, Irmscher, Johannes (Ed.), Müller, Reimar (Ed.)
Title Ort und Raum nach Aristoteles und Simplikios. Eine philosophische Topologie
Type Book Section
Language German
Date 1983
Published in Aristoteles als Wissenschaftstheoretiker. Eine Aufsatzsammlung
Pages 113-122
Categories no categories
Author(s) Verbeke, Gérard
Editor(s) Irmscher, Johannes , Müller, Reimar
Translator(s)
Der Text diskutiert die aristotelische Perspektive zu Ort und Raum sowie die Interpretationen, die Simplikios in späteren neuplatonischen Kommentaren dazu geliefert hat. Die Studie widmet sich drei Hauptfragen bezüglich des Orts: ob er ein Bestandteil von Körpern ist, ob er ein Zwischenraum zwischen umgebenden Körpern ist und welche Bedeutung der Ort hat und welchen Einfluss er auf die Dinge hat. Die aristotelische Physik strebt nach einer grundlegenden Erklärung der sinnlichen Welt und untersucht die Essenz der Bewegung, die Zusammensetzung physischer Körper, Notwendigkeit, Zufall, Unendlichkeit, Ort und Zeit. Der Artikel vergleicht zudem Physik und Metaphysik und betont, dass beide nach umfassenden Erklärungen der Realität streben. Die Untersuchung beleuchtet das aristotelische Verständnis von Ort und Raum und unterstreicht die Wechselwirkung zwischen Ort und der Struktur physischer Objekte. Es wird erörtert, ob Ort ein räumliches Substrat oder eine Form ist und welche Bedeutung die Lokalisierung und ihr Einfluss auf Körper haben. Spätere neuplatonische Kommentare, insbesondere die von Simplikios, haben Aristoteles' Ideen zu diesen Themen kritisch bewertet und weiterentwickelt. [Introduction]

{"_index":"sire","_id":"451","_score":null,"_source":{"id":451,"authors_free":[{"id":605,"entry_id":451,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":606,"entry_id":451,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":352,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Irmscher, Johannes","free_first_name":"Johannes","free_last_name":"Irmscher","norm_person":{"id":352,"first_name":"Johannes","last_name":"Irmscher","full_name":"Irmscher, Johannes","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119489201","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":607,"entry_id":451,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":353,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"M\u00fcller, Reimar","free_first_name":"Reimar","free_last_name":"M\u00fcller","norm_person":{"id":353,"first_name":"Reimar","last_name":"M\u00fcller","full_name":"M\u00fcller, Reimar","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/106717707","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Ort und Raum nach Aristoteles und Simplikios. Eine philosophische Topologie","main_title":{"title":"Ort und Raum nach Aristoteles und Simplikios. Eine philosophische Topologie"},"abstract":"Der Text diskutiert die aristotelische Perspektive zu Ort und Raum sowie die Interpretationen, die Simplikios in sp\u00e4teren neuplatonischen Kommentaren dazu geliefert hat. Die Studie widmet sich drei Hauptfragen bez\u00fcglich des Orts: ob er ein Bestandteil von K\u00f6rpern ist, ob er ein Zwischenraum zwischen umgebenden K\u00f6rpern ist und welche Bedeutung der Ort hat und welchen Einfluss er auf die Dinge hat. Die aristotelische Physik strebt nach einer grundlegenden Erkl\u00e4rung der sinnlichen Welt und untersucht die Essenz der Bewegung, die Zusammensetzung physischer K\u00f6rper, Notwendigkeit, Zufall, Unendlichkeit, Ort und Zeit. Der Artikel vergleicht zudem Physik und Metaphysik und betont, dass beide nach umfassenden Erkl\u00e4rungen der Realit\u00e4t streben. Die Untersuchung beleuchtet das aristotelische Verst\u00e4ndnis von Ort und Raum und unterstreicht die Wechselwirkung zwischen Ort und der Struktur physischer Objekte. Es wird er\u00f6rtert, ob Ort ein r\u00e4umliches Substrat oder eine Form ist und welche Bedeutung die Lokalisierung und ihr Einfluss auf K\u00f6rper haben. Sp\u00e4tere neuplatonische Kommentare, insbesondere die von Simplikios, haben Aristoteles' Ideen zu diesen Themen kritisch bewertet und weiterentwickelt. [Introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1983","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/gefH5Atxe7LieDs","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":352,"full_name":"Irmscher, Johannes","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":353,"full_name":"M\u00fcller, Reimar","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":451,"section_of":325,"pages":"113-122","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":325,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles als Wissenschaftstheoretiker. Eine Aufsatzsammlung","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Irmscher_M\u00fcller1983","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1983","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1983","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/A1XXLVpd3w2XvXY","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":325,"pubplace":"Berlin","publisher":"Akademie-Verlag","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1983]}

La Physique d’Aristote et les anciens commentateurs grecs, 1981
By: Verbeke, Gérard, Theodōrakopulos, Iōannēs N. (Ed.)
Title La Physique d’Aristote et les anciens commentateurs grecs
Type Book Section
Language French
Date 1981
Published in Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Thessaloniki August 7-14 1978
Categories no categories
Author(s) Verbeke, Gérard
Editor(s) Theodōrakopulos, Iōannēs N.
Translator(s)

{"_index":"sire","_id":"185","_score":null,"_source":{"id":185,"authors_free":[{"id":241,"entry_id":185,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2506,"entry_id":185,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":514,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Theod\u014drakopulos, I\u014dann\u0113s N.","free_first_name":" I\u014dann\u0113s N.","free_last_name":"Theod\u014drakopulos","norm_person":{"id":514,"first_name":" Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","last_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos","full_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos, Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117302619","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"La Physique d\u2019Aristote et les anciens commentateurs grecs","main_title":{"title":"La Physique d\u2019Aristote et les anciens commentateurs grecs"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"1981","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/WCFPRwh1E2k3zgK","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":514,"full_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos, Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":185,"pubplace":"Athen","publisher":"Minist\u00e8re de la culture et des sciences","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":{"id":185,"section_of":1459,"pages":"","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1459,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Thessaloniki August 7-14 1978","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1981","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/O3DQotq4JIjFp7W","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1459,"pubplace":"Athen","publisher":"Athe\u0304na : Ministry of Culture and Sciences","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1981]}

Some Later Neoplatonic Views on Divine Creation and the Eternity of the World, 1981
By: Verbeke, Gérard, O'Meara, Dominic J. (Ed.)
Title Some Later Neoplatonic Views on Divine Creation and the Eternity of the World
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 1981
Published in Neoplatonism and Christian thought
Pages 45-53
Categories no categories
Author(s) Verbeke, Gérard
Editor(s) O'Meara, Dominic J.
Translator(s)
The commentary of Simplicius on Aristotle’s Physics is particularly inter­ esting thanks to the rich information it provides concerning the doctrines of pre­ vious philosophers. His interpretation shows a great erudition, but it is not always faithful to the authentic thought of Aristotle. The first cause of Aristotle is not that of Simplicius and this is not the only case in which Simplicius gave to Aristotelian thought a turn that does not correspond to its original content. A similar distortion may be found in the interpretation of the intricate question of chance and fortune. It is more difficult to formulate a judgment about the commentary of Philoponus: to what extent does it reflect the teaching of Ammonius? In any case, the interpretation is very penetrating, especially in those passages where the author criticizes the doctrine of Aristotle and expresses manifestly his own ideas. Alfarabi takes Philoponus to task for settling a philosophical question with the help of religious doctrines:60 nothing is less true, as W. Wieland has already noticed. Philoponus, rather, uses Aristotelian philosophy in order to refute Aristotle.61 On the other hand he appeals to the concept of creation against the eternity of the world: he very sharply notices, perhaps also under the influence of Ammonius, that creation as an integral causation is not a movement and does not belong to the continuous process of coming-to-be and passing away. Thanks mainly to the concept of creation, the author escapes from the eternity of movement and time. [conclusion p. 52-53]

{"_index":"sire","_id":"450","_score":null,"_source":{"id":450,"authors_free":[{"id":603,"entry_id":450,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":604,"entry_id":450,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":279,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","free_first_name":"Dominic J.","free_last_name":"O'Meara","norm_person":{"id":279,"first_name":"Dominic J.","last_name":"O'Meara","full_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/11180664X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Some Later Neoplatonic Views on Divine Creation and the Eternity of the World","main_title":{"title":"Some Later Neoplatonic Views on Divine Creation and the Eternity of the World"},"abstract":"The commentary of Simplicius on Aristotle\u2019s Physics is particularly inter\u00ad\r\nesting thanks to the rich information it provides concerning the doctrines of pre\u00ad\r\nvious philosophers. His interpretation shows a great erudition, but it is not always \r\nfaithful to the authentic thought of Aristotle. The first cause of Aristotle is not \r\nthat of Simplicius and this is not the only case in which Simplicius gave to \r\nAristotelian thought a turn that does not correspond to its original content. A similar \r\ndistortion may be found in the interpretation of the intricate question of chance \r\nand fortune. It is more difficult to formulate a judgment about the commentary \r\nof Philoponus: to what extent does it reflect the teaching of Ammonius? In any \r\ncase, the interpretation is very penetrating, especially in those passages where \r\nthe author criticizes the doctrine of Aristotle and expresses manifestly his own \r\nideas. Alfarabi takes Philoponus to task for settling a philosophical question with \r\nthe help of religious doctrines:60 nothing is less true, as W. Wieland has already \r\nnoticed. Philoponus, rather, uses Aristotelian philosophy in order to refute \r\nAristotle.61 On the other hand he appeals to the concept of creation against the eternity of the world: he very sharply notices, perhaps also under the influence of \r\nAmmonius, that creation as an integral causation is not a movement and does not \r\nbelong to the continuous process of coming-to-be and passing away. Thanks mainly \r\nto the concept of creation, the author escapes from the eternity of movement \r\nand time. [conclusion p. 52-53]","btype":2,"date":"1981","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/QSUX1JffS4trd4H","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":279,"full_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":450,"section_of":12,"pages":"45-53","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":12,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Neoplatonism and Christian thought","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"O'Meara1982","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1982","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1981","abstract":"In this volume, the relationships between two of the most vital currents in Western thought are examined by a group of nineteen internationally known specialists in a variety of disciplines\u2014classics, patristics, philosophy, theology, history of ideas, literature. The contributing scholars discuss Neoplatonic theories about God, creation, man, and salvation, in relation to the ways in which they were adopted, adapted, or rejected by major Christian thinkers of five periods: Patristic, Later Greek and Byzantine, Medieval, Renaissance, and Modern. [a.a]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/8tb5ZmmacZhgjDn","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":12,"pubplace":"Albany","publisher":"State University of New York Press","series":"Studies in Neoplatonism: Ancient and Modern","volume":"3","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1981]}

Simplicius, 1975
By: Verbeke, Gérard, Gillispie, Charles Coulston (Ed.)
Title Simplicius
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 1975
Published in Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Volume XII: IBN RUSHD - JEAN-SERVAIS STAS
Pages 440-443
Categories no categories
Author(s) Verbeke, Gérard
Editor(s) Gillispie, Charles Coulston
Translator(s)
Simplicius was one of the most famous representatives of Neoplatonism in the sixth century. An outstanding scholar, he was the author of extensive commentaries on Aristotle that contain much valuable information on previous Greek philosophy, including the pre-Socratics. Very little is known of his life. According to Agathias (History, 11,30,3), he was born in Cilicia. He received his first philosophical education in Alexandria at the school of Ammonius Hermiae, the author of a large commentary on the Peri Hermeneias and on some other logical, physical, and metaphysical treatises of Aristotle. These works strongly influenced not only the commentaries of Simplicius but also those written by the philosophers of the Alexandrian School: Asclepius, Philoponus, and Olympiodorus. Simplicius also studied philosophy at Athens in the school of Damascius, the author of Problems and Solutions About the First Principles, known for his doctrine of the Ineffable First Principle. According to Damascius, no name is capable of expressing adequately the nature of that Principle, not even the Plotinian name of "the One." Damascius was the last pagan Neoplatonist in the unbroken succession of the Athenian school, where he was teaching when Justinian closed it in 529. Simplicius, who at that time was a member of Damascius’ circle, left Athens with him and five other philosophers and moved to Persia (531-532). Their exile was only temporary, for they returned to the empire after the treaty of peace between the Byzantines and the Persians (533). According to Agathias (History, 11,31,4), the terms of the treaty would have guaranteed to the philosophers full security in their own environment: they were not to be compelled to accept anything against their personal conviction, and they were never to be prevented from living according to their own philosophical doctrine. There are grounds for supposing that Simplicius settled in Athens after returning from Persia. Presumably, he was not allowed to deliver public lectures and thus could devote all his time to research and writing. Hence his commentaries are not related to any teaching activity; rather, they show the character of written expositions that carefully analyze the Aristotelian text and interpret it in the light of the whole history of Greek philosophy. Simplicius always endeavored to harmonize and reconcile Plato and Aristotle by reducing the differences between them to a question of vocabulary, point of view, or even misunderstanding of some Platonic theories by the Stagirite. Simplicius was not the first to take this approach. According to W. Jaeger, this trend can be traced to Posidonius and to Neoplatonic philosophy in general. The same method was certainly used by Ammonius, who always attempted to reduce the opposition between Plato and Aristotle to different viewpoints. For example, in dealing with Aristotle’s criticism of the theory of Ideas, Ammonius believed this criticism to concern not the authentic doctrine of Plato, but rather the opinion of some philosophers who attributed to the Ideas an independent subsistence, separate from the Intellect of the Demiurge (Asclepius, In Metaphysicorum, 69,24-27; 73,27). Apparently, Simplicius was persuaded that this approach was in agreement with the attitude of the philopatheis and that it uncovered the true meaning of philosophical doctrines. At first glance, he said, some theories seem to be quite contradictory, but a more accurate inquiry shows them to be reconcilable (In de Caelo, 159,3-9). Moreover, in explaining a philosophical text, one should not be biased for or against its author. Hence Simplicius opposed the method of Alexander, who from the beginning is suspicious of Plato in the same way that others are inspired with prejudice against Aristotle (In de Caelo, 297,1-4). Since agreement on an opinion, even a prephilosophical one, has often been considered a criterion of truth, Aristotle and the Stoics frequently used the argument of universal agreement. Therefore, having to cope with the increasing influence of Christianity, late Neoplatonic philosophers wanted to argue against the presumed disaccord between the main representatives of Greek philosophy, Plato and Aristotle, in order to enhance their own doctrine. As a Christian, Philoponus did not have the same motives for harmonizing Plato and Aristotle; he firmly opposed attempts to reconcile them and called this interpretation a kind of mythology. Aristotle, he held, did not argue against those who misunderstood Plato but against the authentic Platonic doctrine. As a commentator, Simplicius did not overestimate his own contributions but was quite aware of his debt to other philosophers, especially to Alexander, Iamblichus, and Porphyry (In Categorias, 3,10-13). He did not hesitate to call his own commentaries a mere introduction to the writings of these famous masters (In Categorias, 3,13-17), nor did he cling fanatically to his own interpretations; he was happy to exchange them for better explanations (In Categorias, 350,8-9). On the other hand, the work of a commentator is far from being a neutral undertaking or a question of mere erudition; it is chiefly an opportunity to become more familiar with the text under consideration and to elucidate some intricate passages (In Enchiridion, Praefatio, 2,24-29; In de Caelo, 102,15; 166,14-16; In Categorias, 3,4-6). Hence Simplicius’ constant concern to obtain reliable documents and to check the historical value of this information, as when he verified the information provided by Alexander about the squaring of the circle according to Hippocrates of Chios (In Physicorum, 60,22-68, 32). Simplicius adhered to the Aristotelian doctrine of the eternity of the world, as a theory that fits perfectly into the Neoplatonic ontology insofar as the eternal movement of the heavens is a necessary link between the pure eternity of the intelligible reality and the temporal character of material beings. With respect to this question, Simplicius strongly opposed Philoponus, who asserted the beginning of the world through divine creation. Philoponus, however, did not argue as a Christian, nor did he base his refutation of the Aristotelian doctrine on arguments drawn from his Christian faith. According to him, God is the principle of whatever exists: if time is infinite, nothing may ever come to be, because an infinite number of conditions of possibility are to be fulfilled before anything could begin to exist—which is clearly impossible. Simplicius’ notion of “infinite” is different; it does not mean an infinity existing at once, but a possibility of transcending any boundary. Consequently, the conception of time exposed by both authors is not the same. Simplicius professed a cyclical conception; Philoponus adhered to a linear view without regular return of the same events. Philoponus also substantiated divine creation in time, without preexisting matter; whereas Simplicius maintained that although heaven, the first and highest corporeal reality, is totally dependent upon God, it has never come to exist; it must be eternal because it springs immediately from God. [introduction p. 440-441]

{"_index":"sire","_id":"1393","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1393,"authors_free":[{"id":2163,"entry_id":1393,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2165,"entry_id":1393,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":354,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Gillispie, Charles Coulston","free_first_name":"Charles Coulston","free_last_name":"Gillispie","norm_person":{"id":354,"first_name":"Charles Coulston","last_name":"Gillispie","full_name":"Gillispie, Charles Coulston","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117710539","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius"},"abstract":"Simplicius was one of the most famous representatives of Neoplatonism in the sixth century. An outstanding scholar, he was the author of extensive commentaries on Aristotle that contain much valuable information on previous Greek philosophy, including the pre-Socratics.\r\n\r\nVery little is known of his life. According to Agathias (History, 11,30,3), he was born in Cilicia. He received his first philosophical education in Alexandria at the school of Ammonius Hermiae, the author of a large commentary on the Peri Hermeneias and on some other logical, physical, and metaphysical treatises of Aristotle. These works strongly influenced not only the commentaries of Simplicius but also those written by the philosophers of the Alexandrian School: Asclepius, Philoponus, and Olympiodorus.\r\n\r\nSimplicius also studied philosophy at Athens in the school of Damascius, the author of Problems and Solutions About the First Principles, known for his doctrine of the Ineffable First Principle. According to Damascius, no name is capable of expressing adequately the nature of that Principle, not even the Plotinian name of \"the One.\" Damascius was the last pagan Neoplatonist in the unbroken succession of the Athenian school, where he was teaching when Justinian closed it in 529. Simplicius, who at that time was a member of Damascius\u2019 circle, left Athens with him and five other philosophers and moved to Persia (531-532). Their exile was only temporary, for they returned to the empire after the treaty of peace between the Byzantines and the Persians (533). According to Agathias (History, 11,31,4), the terms of the treaty would have guaranteed to the philosophers full security in their own environment: they were not to be compelled to accept anything against their personal conviction, and they were never to be prevented from living according to their own philosophical doctrine.\r\n\r\nThere are grounds for supposing that Simplicius settled in Athens after returning from Persia. Presumably, he was not allowed to deliver public lectures and thus could devote all his time to research and writing. Hence his commentaries are not related to any teaching activity; rather, they show the character of written expositions that carefully analyze the Aristotelian text and interpret it in the light of the whole history of Greek philosophy. Simplicius always endeavored to harmonize and reconcile Plato and Aristotle by reducing the differences between them to a question of vocabulary, point of view, or even misunderstanding of some Platonic theories by the Stagirite.\r\n\r\nSimplicius was not the first to take this approach. According to W. Jaeger, this trend can be traced to Posidonius and to Neoplatonic philosophy in general. The same method was certainly used by Ammonius, who always attempted to reduce the opposition between Plato and Aristotle to different viewpoints. For example, in dealing with Aristotle\u2019s criticism of the theory of Ideas, Ammonius believed this criticism to concern not the authentic doctrine of Plato, but rather the opinion of some philosophers who attributed to the Ideas an independent subsistence, separate from the Intellect of the Demiurge (Asclepius, In Metaphysicorum, 69,24-27; 73,27).\r\n\r\nApparently, Simplicius was persuaded that this approach was in agreement with the attitude of the philopatheis and that it uncovered the true meaning of philosophical doctrines. At first glance, he said, some theories seem to be quite contradictory, but a more accurate inquiry shows them to be reconcilable (In de Caelo, 159,3-9). Moreover, in explaining a philosophical text, one should not be biased for or against its author. Hence Simplicius opposed the method of Alexander, who from the beginning is suspicious of Plato in the same way that others are inspired with prejudice against Aristotle (In de Caelo, 297,1-4). Since agreement on an opinion, even a prephilosophical one, has often been considered a criterion of truth, Aristotle and the Stoics frequently used the argument of universal agreement. Therefore, having to cope with the increasing influence of Christianity, late Neoplatonic philosophers wanted to argue against the presumed disaccord between the main representatives of Greek philosophy, Plato and Aristotle, in order to enhance their own doctrine. As a Christian, Philoponus did not have the same motives for harmonizing Plato and Aristotle; he firmly opposed attempts to reconcile them and called this interpretation a kind of mythology. Aristotle, he held, did not argue against those who misunderstood Plato but against the authentic Platonic doctrine.\r\n\r\nAs a commentator, Simplicius did not overestimate his own contributions but was quite aware of his debt to other philosophers, especially to Alexander, Iamblichus, and Porphyry (In Categorias, 3,10-13). He did not hesitate to call his own commentaries a mere introduction to the writings of these famous masters (In Categorias, 3,13-17), nor did he cling fanatically to his own interpretations; he was happy to exchange them for better explanations (In Categorias, 350,8-9). On the other hand, the work of a commentator is far from being a neutral undertaking or a question of mere erudition; it is chiefly an opportunity to become more familiar with the text under consideration and to elucidate some intricate passages (In Enchiridion, Praefatio, 2,24-29; In de Caelo, 102,15; 166,14-16; In Categorias, 3,4-6). Hence Simplicius\u2019 constant concern to obtain reliable documents and to check the historical value of this information, as when he verified the information provided by Alexander about the squaring of the circle according to Hippocrates of Chios (In Physicorum, 60,22-68, 32).\r\n\r\nSimplicius adhered to the Aristotelian doctrine of the eternity of the world, as a theory that fits perfectly into the Neoplatonic ontology insofar as the eternal movement of the heavens is a necessary link between the pure eternity of the intelligible reality and the temporal character of material beings. With respect to this question, Simplicius strongly opposed Philoponus, who asserted the beginning of the world through divine creation. Philoponus, however, did not argue as a Christian, nor did he base his refutation of the Aristotelian doctrine on arguments drawn from his Christian faith. According to him, God is the principle of whatever exists: if time is infinite, nothing may ever come to be, because an infinite number of conditions of possibility are to be fulfilled before anything could begin to exist\u2014which is clearly impossible. Simplicius\u2019 notion of \u201cinfinite\u201d is different; it does not mean an infinity existing at once, but a possibility of transcending any boundary. Consequently, the conception of time exposed by both authors is not the same. Simplicius professed a cyclical conception; Philoponus adhered to a linear view without regular return of the same events. Philoponus also substantiated divine creation in time, without preexisting matter; whereas Simplicius maintained that although heaven, the first and highest corporeal reality, is totally dependent upon God, it has never come to exist; it must be eternal because it springs immediately from God. [introduction p. 440-441]","btype":2,"date":"1975","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/dKqS8TkSYL9fWNO","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":354,"full_name":"Gillispie, Charles Coulston","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1393,"section_of":1394,"pages":"440-443","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1394,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Volume XII: IBN RUSHD - JEAN-SERVAIS STAS","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1975","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Pt8Q1J4Rc3TbiFs","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1394,"pubplace":"New York","publisher":"Charles Scriber\u2019s Sons","series":"","volume":"XII","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1975]}

  • PAGE 1 OF 1
La Physique d’Aristote et les anciens commentateurs grecs, 1981
By: Verbeke, Gérard, Theodōrakopulos, Iōannēs N. (Ed.)
Title La Physique d’Aristote et les anciens commentateurs grecs
Type Book Section
Language French
Date 1981
Published in Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Thessaloniki August 7-14 1978
Categories no categories
Author(s) Verbeke, Gérard
Editor(s) Theodōrakopulos, Iōannēs N.
Translator(s)

{"_index":"sire","_id":"185","_score":null,"_source":{"id":185,"authors_free":[{"id":241,"entry_id":185,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2506,"entry_id":185,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":514,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Theod\u014drakopulos, I\u014dann\u0113s N.","free_first_name":" I\u014dann\u0113s N.","free_last_name":"Theod\u014drakopulos","norm_person":{"id":514,"first_name":" Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","last_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos","full_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos, Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117302619","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"La Physique d\u2019Aristote et les anciens commentateurs grecs","main_title":{"title":"La Physique d\u2019Aristote et les anciens commentateurs grecs"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"1981","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/WCFPRwh1E2k3zgK","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":514,"full_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos, Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":185,"pubplace":"Athen","publisher":"Minist\u00e8re de la culture et des sciences","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":{"id":185,"section_of":1459,"pages":"","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1459,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Thessaloniki August 7-14 1978","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1981","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/O3DQotq4JIjFp7W","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1459,"pubplace":"Athen","publisher":"Athe\u0304na : Ministry of Culture and Sciences","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["La Physique d\u2019Aristote et les anciens commentateurs grecs"]}

Levels of human thinking in Philoponus, 1985
By: Verbeke, Gérard, Laga, Carl (Ed.), Munitiz, Joseph A. (Ed.), Rompay, Lucas van (Ed.)
Title Levels of human thinking in Philoponus
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 1985
Published in After Chalcedon. Studies in Theology and Church History. Offered to Professor Albert van Roey for his seventieth birthday
Pages 451-470
Categories no categories
Author(s) Verbeke, Gérard
Editor(s) Laga, Carl , Munitiz, Joseph A. , Rompay, Lucas van
Translator(s)
What is finally the meaning of Philoponus’s  teaching on  the levels of thought? Taking into account the previous considerations, we may 
conclude that this doctrine  is  intended  to disclose  the true  nature  of philosophical  reflection  as  a  direct  and  immediate  intuition  of  the 
intelligible world.  This disclosure  is an  internal  one:  each  individual bears within himself, in the hidden abodes of his consciousness, a treasure 
of philosophical wisdom". In order to contemplate the highest truth, man should not leave himself,  on  the contrary  he should  come  back 
and turn  to  himself,  to  his  true self.  Most  people live outside  them­selves in a permanent forgetfulness of their  real  nature:  they  hardly 
participate in philosophical wisdom, they only possess some common intuitions,  which  are  a  kind  of  trace  or  vestige  of  rational  truth. 
They never come to the level of a direct contemplation of the intelligibles. In  order  to  reach  the  supreme  level  of thinking  man  needs  a  moral preparation,  which  makes  him  able  to  overcome  the  influence  of irrational movements; he also needs an intellectual training by means 
of discursive  reasoning  in  order  to  free  himself from  the  impact  of senses  and  imagination.  If these  requirements  are  fulfilled,  man  be­
comes  able to  contemplate  directly  true reality  in  the  internal  world of his consciousness. [conclusion, p. 469]

{"_index":"sire","_id":"1391","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1391,"authors_free":[{"id":2156,"entry_id":1391,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2160,"entry_id":1391,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":349,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Laga, Carl","free_first_name":"Carl","free_last_name":"Laga","norm_person":{"id":349,"first_name":"Carl","last_name":"Laga","full_name":"Laga, Carl","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119278146","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2161,"entry_id":1391,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":350,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Munitiz, Joseph A.","free_first_name":"Joseph A.","free_last_name":"Munitiz","norm_person":{"id":350,"first_name":"Joseph A.","last_name":"Munitiz","full_name":"Munitiz, Joseph A.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/105468202X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2162,"entry_id":1391,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":351,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Rompay, Lucas van","free_first_name":"Lucas","free_last_name":"Rompay van","norm_person":{"id":351,"first_name":"Lucas","last_name":"Rompay, van","full_name":"Rompay, Lucas van","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1055081453","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Levels of human thinking in Philoponus","main_title":{"title":"Levels of human thinking in Philoponus"},"abstract":"What is finally the meaning of Philoponus\u2019s teaching on the levels of thought? Taking into account the previous considerations, we may \r\nconclude that this doctrine is intended to disclose the true nature of philosophical reflection as a direct and immediate intuition of the \r\nintelligible world. This disclosure is an internal one: each individual bears within himself, in the hidden abodes of his consciousness, a treasure \r\nof philosophical wisdom\". In order to contemplate the highest truth, man should not leave himself, on the contrary he should come back \r\nand turn to himself, to his true self. Most people live outside them\u00adselves in a permanent forgetfulness of their real nature: they hardly \r\nparticipate in philosophical wisdom, they only possess some common intuitions, which are a kind of trace or vestige of rational truth. \r\nThey never come to the level of a direct contemplation of the intelligibles. In order to reach the supreme level of thinking man needs a moral preparation, which makes him able to overcome the influence of irrational movements; he also needs an intellectual training by means \r\nof discursive reasoning in order to free himself from the impact of senses and imagination. If these requirements are fulfilled, man be\u00ad\r\ncomes able to contemplate directly true reality in the internal world of his consciousness. [conclusion, p. 469]","btype":2,"date":"1985","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/PBqIyB5guZfHl6C","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":349,"full_name":"Laga, Carl","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":350,"full_name":"Munitiz, Joseph A.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":351,"full_name":"Rompay, Lucas van","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1391,"section_of":1392,"pages":"451-470","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1392,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"After Chalcedon. Studies in Theology and Church History. Offered to Professor Albert van Roey for his seventieth birthday","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Laga1985","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1985","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"This volume in honour of Prof. P.H.L. Eggermont, Indologist and Classicist, is focused on North and Northwest India, and on the adjacent regions to the west, with special attention to the Hellenistic monarchies, the historical geography of India, the ancient trade routes, and the contacts between India, Greece and Rome. The contributions of this Festschrift provide a bulk of material, especially for those interested in relations between Classical and Oriental philological, historical, archaeological, and geographical sources. Besides, the volume contains a biography and a bibliography of Prof. Eggermont. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ERNutaoLJTpirTN","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1392,"pubplace":"Leuven","publisher":"Itgeverij Peeters Leuven","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Levels of human thinking in Philoponus"]}

Ort und Raum nach Aristoteles und Simplikios. Eine philosophische Topologie, 1983
By: Verbeke, Gérard, Irmscher, Johannes (Ed.), Müller, Reimar (Ed.)
Title Ort und Raum nach Aristoteles und Simplikios. Eine philosophische Topologie
Type Book Section
Language German
Date 1983
Published in Aristoteles als Wissenschaftstheoretiker. Eine Aufsatzsammlung
Pages 113-122
Categories no categories
Author(s) Verbeke, Gérard
Editor(s) Irmscher, Johannes , Müller, Reimar
Translator(s)
Der Text diskutiert die aristotelische Perspektive zu Ort und Raum sowie die Interpretationen, die Simplikios in späteren neuplatonischen Kommentaren dazu geliefert hat. Die Studie widmet sich drei Hauptfragen bezüglich des Orts: ob er ein Bestandteil von Körpern ist, ob er ein Zwischenraum zwischen umgebenden Körpern ist und welche Bedeutung der Ort hat und welchen Einfluss er auf die Dinge hat. Die aristotelische Physik strebt nach einer grundlegenden Erklärung der sinnlichen Welt und untersucht die Essenz der Bewegung, die Zusammensetzung physischer Körper, Notwendigkeit, Zufall, Unendlichkeit, Ort und Zeit. Der Artikel vergleicht zudem Physik und Metaphysik und betont, dass beide nach umfassenden Erklärungen der Realität streben. Die Untersuchung beleuchtet das aristotelische Verständnis von Ort und Raum und unterstreicht die Wechselwirkung zwischen Ort und der Struktur physischer Objekte. Es wird erörtert, ob Ort ein räumliches Substrat oder eine Form ist und welche Bedeutung die Lokalisierung und ihr Einfluss auf Körper haben. Spätere neuplatonische Kommentare, insbesondere die von Simplikios, haben Aristoteles' Ideen zu diesen Themen kritisch bewertet und weiterentwickelt. [Introduction]

{"_index":"sire","_id":"451","_score":null,"_source":{"id":451,"authors_free":[{"id":605,"entry_id":451,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":606,"entry_id":451,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":352,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Irmscher, Johannes","free_first_name":"Johannes","free_last_name":"Irmscher","norm_person":{"id":352,"first_name":"Johannes","last_name":"Irmscher","full_name":"Irmscher, Johannes","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119489201","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":607,"entry_id":451,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":353,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"M\u00fcller, Reimar","free_first_name":"Reimar","free_last_name":"M\u00fcller","norm_person":{"id":353,"first_name":"Reimar","last_name":"M\u00fcller","full_name":"M\u00fcller, Reimar","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/106717707","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Ort und Raum nach Aristoteles und Simplikios. Eine philosophische Topologie","main_title":{"title":"Ort und Raum nach Aristoteles und Simplikios. Eine philosophische Topologie"},"abstract":"Der Text diskutiert die aristotelische Perspektive zu Ort und Raum sowie die Interpretationen, die Simplikios in sp\u00e4teren neuplatonischen Kommentaren dazu geliefert hat. Die Studie widmet sich drei Hauptfragen bez\u00fcglich des Orts: ob er ein Bestandteil von K\u00f6rpern ist, ob er ein Zwischenraum zwischen umgebenden K\u00f6rpern ist und welche Bedeutung der Ort hat und welchen Einfluss er auf die Dinge hat. Die aristotelische Physik strebt nach einer grundlegenden Erkl\u00e4rung der sinnlichen Welt und untersucht die Essenz der Bewegung, die Zusammensetzung physischer K\u00f6rper, Notwendigkeit, Zufall, Unendlichkeit, Ort und Zeit. Der Artikel vergleicht zudem Physik und Metaphysik und betont, dass beide nach umfassenden Erkl\u00e4rungen der Realit\u00e4t streben. Die Untersuchung beleuchtet das aristotelische Verst\u00e4ndnis von Ort und Raum und unterstreicht die Wechselwirkung zwischen Ort und der Struktur physischer Objekte. Es wird er\u00f6rtert, ob Ort ein r\u00e4umliches Substrat oder eine Form ist und welche Bedeutung die Lokalisierung und ihr Einfluss auf K\u00f6rper haben. Sp\u00e4tere neuplatonische Kommentare, insbesondere die von Simplikios, haben Aristoteles' Ideen zu diesen Themen kritisch bewertet und weiterentwickelt. [Introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1983","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/gefH5Atxe7LieDs","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":352,"full_name":"Irmscher, Johannes","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":353,"full_name":"M\u00fcller, Reimar","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":451,"section_of":325,"pages":"113-122","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":325,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles als Wissenschaftstheoretiker. Eine Aufsatzsammlung","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Irmscher_M\u00fcller1983","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1983","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1983","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/A1XXLVpd3w2XvXY","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":325,"pubplace":"Berlin","publisher":"Akademie-Verlag","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Ort und Raum nach Aristoteles und Simplikios. Eine philosophische Topologie"]}

Simplicius, 1975
By: Verbeke, Gérard, Gillispie, Charles Coulston (Ed.)
Title Simplicius
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 1975
Published in Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Volume XII: IBN RUSHD - JEAN-SERVAIS STAS
Pages 440-443
Categories no categories
Author(s) Verbeke, Gérard
Editor(s) Gillispie, Charles Coulston
Translator(s)
Simplicius was one of the most famous representatives of Neoplatonism in the sixth century. An outstanding scholar, he was the author of extensive commentaries on Aristotle that contain much valuable information on previous Greek philosophy, including the pre-Socratics.

Very little is known of his life. According to Agathias (History, 11,30,3), he was born in Cilicia. He received his first philosophical education in Alexandria at the school of Ammonius Hermiae, the author of a large commentary on the Peri Hermeneias and on some other logical, physical, and metaphysical treatises of Aristotle. These works strongly influenced not only the commentaries of Simplicius but also those written by the philosophers of the Alexandrian School: Asclepius, Philoponus, and Olympiodorus.

Simplicius also studied philosophy at Athens in the school of Damascius, the author of Problems and Solutions About the First Principles, known for his doctrine of the Ineffable First Principle. According to Damascius, no name is capable of expressing adequately the nature of that Principle, not even the Plotinian name of "the One." Damascius was the last pagan Neoplatonist in the unbroken succession of the Athenian school, where he was teaching when Justinian closed it in 529. Simplicius, who at that time was a member of Damascius’ circle, left Athens with him and five other philosophers and moved to Persia (531-532). Their exile was only temporary, for they returned to the empire after the treaty of peace between the Byzantines and the Persians (533). According to Agathias (History, 11,31,4), the terms of the treaty would have guaranteed to the philosophers full security in their own environment: they were not to be compelled to accept anything against their personal conviction, and they were never to be prevented from living according to their own philosophical doctrine.

There are grounds for supposing that Simplicius settled in Athens after returning from Persia. Presumably, he was not allowed to deliver public lectures and thus could devote all his time to research and writing. Hence his commentaries are not related to any teaching activity; rather, they show the character of written expositions that carefully analyze the Aristotelian text and interpret it in the light of the whole history of Greek philosophy. Simplicius always endeavored to harmonize and reconcile Plato and Aristotle by reducing the differences between them to a question of vocabulary, point of view, or even misunderstanding of some Platonic theories by the Stagirite.

Simplicius was not the first to take this approach. According to W. Jaeger, this trend can be traced to Posidonius and to Neoplatonic philosophy in general. The same method was certainly used by Ammonius, who always attempted to reduce the opposition between Plato and Aristotle to different viewpoints. For example, in dealing with Aristotle’s criticism of the theory of Ideas, Ammonius believed this criticism to concern not the authentic doctrine of Plato, but rather the opinion of some philosophers who attributed to the Ideas an independent subsistence, separate from the Intellect of the Demiurge (Asclepius, In Metaphysicorum, 69,24-27; 73,27).

Apparently, Simplicius was persuaded that this approach was in agreement with the attitude of the philopatheis and that it uncovered the true meaning of philosophical doctrines. At first glance, he said, some theories seem to be quite contradictory, but a more accurate inquiry shows them to be reconcilable (In de Caelo, 159,3-9). Moreover, in explaining a philosophical text, one should not be biased for or against its author. Hence Simplicius opposed the method of Alexander, who from the beginning is suspicious of Plato in the same way that others are inspired with prejudice against Aristotle (In de Caelo, 297,1-4). Since agreement on an opinion, even a prephilosophical one, has often been considered a criterion of truth, Aristotle and the Stoics frequently used the argument of universal agreement. Therefore, having to cope with the increasing influence of Christianity, late Neoplatonic philosophers wanted to argue against the presumed disaccord between the main representatives of Greek philosophy, Plato and Aristotle, in order to enhance their own doctrine. As a Christian, Philoponus did not have the same motives for harmonizing Plato and Aristotle; he firmly opposed attempts to reconcile them and called this interpretation a kind of mythology. Aristotle, he held, did not argue against those who misunderstood Plato but against the authentic Platonic doctrine.

As a commentator, Simplicius did not overestimate his own contributions but was quite aware of his debt to other philosophers, especially to Alexander, Iamblichus, and Porphyry (In Categorias, 3,10-13). He did not hesitate to call his own commentaries a mere introduction to the writings of these famous masters (In Categorias, 3,13-17), nor did he cling fanatically to his own interpretations; he was happy to exchange them for better explanations (In Categorias, 350,8-9). On the other hand, the work of a commentator is far from being a neutral undertaking or a question of mere erudition; it is chiefly an opportunity to become more familiar with the text under consideration and to elucidate some intricate passages (In Enchiridion, Praefatio, 2,24-29; In de Caelo, 102,15; 166,14-16; In Categorias, 3,4-6). Hence Simplicius’ constant concern to obtain reliable documents and to check the historical value of this information, as when he verified the information provided by Alexander about the squaring of the circle according to Hippocrates of Chios (In Physicorum, 60,22-68, 32).

Simplicius adhered to the Aristotelian doctrine of the eternity of the world, as a theory that fits perfectly into the Neoplatonic ontology insofar as the eternal movement of the heavens is a necessary link between the pure eternity of the intelligible reality and the temporal character of material beings. With respect to this question, Simplicius strongly opposed Philoponus, who asserted the beginning of the world through divine creation. Philoponus, however, did not argue as a Christian, nor did he base his refutation of the Aristotelian doctrine on arguments drawn from his Christian faith. According to him, God is the principle of whatever exists: if time is infinite, nothing may ever come to be, because an infinite number of conditions of possibility are to be fulfilled before anything could begin to exist—which is clearly impossible. Simplicius’ notion of “infinite” is different; it does not mean an infinity existing at once, but a possibility of transcending any boundary. Consequently, the conception of time exposed by both authors is not the same. Simplicius professed a cyclical conception; Philoponus adhered to a linear view without regular return of the same events. Philoponus also substantiated divine creation in time, without preexisting matter; whereas Simplicius maintained that although heaven, the first and highest corporeal reality, is totally dependent upon God, it has never come to exist; it must be eternal because it springs immediately from God. [introduction p. 440-441]

{"_index":"sire","_id":"1393","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1393,"authors_free":[{"id":2163,"entry_id":1393,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2165,"entry_id":1393,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":354,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Gillispie, Charles Coulston","free_first_name":"Charles Coulston","free_last_name":"Gillispie","norm_person":{"id":354,"first_name":"Charles Coulston","last_name":"Gillispie","full_name":"Gillispie, Charles Coulston","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117710539","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius"},"abstract":"Simplicius was one of the most famous representatives of Neoplatonism in the sixth century. An outstanding scholar, he was the author of extensive commentaries on Aristotle that contain much valuable information on previous Greek philosophy, including the pre-Socratics.\r\n\r\nVery little is known of his life. According to Agathias (History, 11,30,3), he was born in Cilicia. He received his first philosophical education in Alexandria at the school of Ammonius Hermiae, the author of a large commentary on the Peri Hermeneias and on some other logical, physical, and metaphysical treatises of Aristotle. These works strongly influenced not only the commentaries of Simplicius but also those written by the philosophers of the Alexandrian School: Asclepius, Philoponus, and Olympiodorus.\r\n\r\nSimplicius also studied philosophy at Athens in the school of Damascius, the author of Problems and Solutions About the First Principles, known for his doctrine of the Ineffable First Principle. According to Damascius, no name is capable of expressing adequately the nature of that Principle, not even the Plotinian name of \"the One.\" Damascius was the last pagan Neoplatonist in the unbroken succession of the Athenian school, where he was teaching when Justinian closed it in 529. Simplicius, who at that time was a member of Damascius\u2019 circle, left Athens with him and five other philosophers and moved to Persia (531-532). Their exile was only temporary, for they returned to the empire after the treaty of peace between the Byzantines and the Persians (533). According to Agathias (History, 11,31,4), the terms of the treaty would have guaranteed to the philosophers full security in their own environment: they were not to be compelled to accept anything against their personal conviction, and they were never to be prevented from living according to their own philosophical doctrine.\r\n\r\nThere are grounds for supposing that Simplicius settled in Athens after returning from Persia. Presumably, he was not allowed to deliver public lectures and thus could devote all his time to research and writing. Hence his commentaries are not related to any teaching activity; rather, they show the character of written expositions that carefully analyze the Aristotelian text and interpret it in the light of the whole history of Greek philosophy. Simplicius always endeavored to harmonize and reconcile Plato and Aristotle by reducing the differences between them to a question of vocabulary, point of view, or even misunderstanding of some Platonic theories by the Stagirite.\r\n\r\nSimplicius was not the first to take this approach. According to W. Jaeger, this trend can be traced to Posidonius and to Neoplatonic philosophy in general. The same method was certainly used by Ammonius, who always attempted to reduce the opposition between Plato and Aristotle to different viewpoints. For example, in dealing with Aristotle\u2019s criticism of the theory of Ideas, Ammonius believed this criticism to concern not the authentic doctrine of Plato, but rather the opinion of some philosophers who attributed to the Ideas an independent subsistence, separate from the Intellect of the Demiurge (Asclepius, In Metaphysicorum, 69,24-27; 73,27).\r\n\r\nApparently, Simplicius was persuaded that this approach was in agreement with the attitude of the philopatheis and that it uncovered the true meaning of philosophical doctrines. At first glance, he said, some theories seem to be quite contradictory, but a more accurate inquiry shows them to be reconcilable (In de Caelo, 159,3-9). Moreover, in explaining a philosophical text, one should not be biased for or against its author. Hence Simplicius opposed the method of Alexander, who from the beginning is suspicious of Plato in the same way that others are inspired with prejudice against Aristotle (In de Caelo, 297,1-4). Since agreement on an opinion, even a prephilosophical one, has often been considered a criterion of truth, Aristotle and the Stoics frequently used the argument of universal agreement. Therefore, having to cope with the increasing influence of Christianity, late Neoplatonic philosophers wanted to argue against the presumed disaccord between the main representatives of Greek philosophy, Plato and Aristotle, in order to enhance their own doctrine. As a Christian, Philoponus did not have the same motives for harmonizing Plato and Aristotle; he firmly opposed attempts to reconcile them and called this interpretation a kind of mythology. Aristotle, he held, did not argue against those who misunderstood Plato but against the authentic Platonic doctrine.\r\n\r\nAs a commentator, Simplicius did not overestimate his own contributions but was quite aware of his debt to other philosophers, especially to Alexander, Iamblichus, and Porphyry (In Categorias, 3,10-13). He did not hesitate to call his own commentaries a mere introduction to the writings of these famous masters (In Categorias, 3,13-17), nor did he cling fanatically to his own interpretations; he was happy to exchange them for better explanations (In Categorias, 350,8-9). On the other hand, the work of a commentator is far from being a neutral undertaking or a question of mere erudition; it is chiefly an opportunity to become more familiar with the text under consideration and to elucidate some intricate passages (In Enchiridion, Praefatio, 2,24-29; In de Caelo, 102,15; 166,14-16; In Categorias, 3,4-6). Hence Simplicius\u2019 constant concern to obtain reliable documents and to check the historical value of this information, as when he verified the information provided by Alexander about the squaring of the circle according to Hippocrates of Chios (In Physicorum, 60,22-68, 32).\r\n\r\nSimplicius adhered to the Aristotelian doctrine of the eternity of the world, as a theory that fits perfectly into the Neoplatonic ontology insofar as the eternal movement of the heavens is a necessary link between the pure eternity of the intelligible reality and the temporal character of material beings. With respect to this question, Simplicius strongly opposed Philoponus, who asserted the beginning of the world through divine creation. Philoponus, however, did not argue as a Christian, nor did he base his refutation of the Aristotelian doctrine on arguments drawn from his Christian faith. According to him, God is the principle of whatever exists: if time is infinite, nothing may ever come to be, because an infinite number of conditions of possibility are to be fulfilled before anything could begin to exist\u2014which is clearly impossible. Simplicius\u2019 notion of \u201cinfinite\u201d is different; it does not mean an infinity existing at once, but a possibility of transcending any boundary. Consequently, the conception of time exposed by both authors is not the same. Simplicius professed a cyclical conception; Philoponus adhered to a linear view without regular return of the same events. Philoponus also substantiated divine creation in time, without preexisting matter; whereas Simplicius maintained that although heaven, the first and highest corporeal reality, is totally dependent upon God, it has never come to exist; it must be eternal because it springs immediately from God. [introduction p. 440-441]","btype":2,"date":"1975","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/dKqS8TkSYL9fWNO","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":354,"full_name":"Gillispie, Charles Coulston","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1393,"section_of":1394,"pages":"440-443","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1394,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Volume XII: IBN RUSHD - JEAN-SERVAIS STAS","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1975","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Pt8Q1J4Rc3TbiFs","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1394,"pubplace":"New York","publisher":"Charles Scriber\u2019s Sons","series":"","volume":"XII","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Simplicius"]}

Some Later Neoplatonic Views on Divine Creation and the Eternity of the World, 1981
By: Verbeke, Gérard, O'Meara, Dominic J. (Ed.)
Title Some Later Neoplatonic Views on Divine Creation and the Eternity of the World
Type Book Section
Language English
Date 1981
Published in Neoplatonism and Christian thought
Pages 45-53
Categories no categories
Author(s) Verbeke, Gérard
Editor(s) O'Meara, Dominic J.
Translator(s)
The  commentary  of  Simplicius  on  Aristotle’s  Physics  is  particularly  inter­
esting  thanks  to  the  rich  information  it  provides  concerning  the  doctrines  of pre­
vious  philosophers.  His  interpretation  shows  a  great erudition,  but  it  is  not  always 
faithful  to  the  authentic  thought  of  Aristotle.  The  first  cause  of  Aristotle  is  not 
that  of  Simplicius  and  this  is  not  the  only  case  in  which  Simplicius  gave  to 
Aristotelian thought a turn that does not correspond to its original content.  A similar 
distortion  may  be  found  in  the  interpretation  of  the  intricate  question  of  chance 
and  fortune.  It  is  more  difficult  to  formulate  a  judgment  about  the  commentary 
of  Philoponus:  to  what  extent  does  it  reflect  the  teaching  of  Ammonius?  In  any 
case,  the  interpretation  is  very  penetrating,  especially  in  those  passages  where 
the  author  criticizes  the  doctrine  of  Aristotle  and  expresses  manifestly  his  own 
ideas.  Alfarabi  takes  Philoponus  to  task  for  settling  a  philosophical  question  with 
the  help  of  religious  doctrines:60  nothing  is  less  true,  as  W.  Wieland  has  already 
noticed.  Philoponus,  rather,  uses  Aristotelian  philosophy  in  order  to  refute 
Aristotle.61  On  the  other  hand  he  appeals  to  the  concept  of  creation  against  the eternity  of the  world:  he  very  sharply  notices,  perhaps  also  under  the  influence of 
Ammonius,  that  creation  as  an  integral  causation  is  not  a  movement  and  does  not 
belong to the continuous process of coming-to-be and passing away. Thanks mainly 
to  the  concept  of  creation,  the  author  escapes  from  the  eternity  of  movement 
and  time. [conclusion p. 52-53]

{"_index":"sire","_id":"450","_score":null,"_source":{"id":450,"authors_free":[{"id":603,"entry_id":450,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":604,"entry_id":450,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":279,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","free_first_name":"Dominic J.","free_last_name":"O'Meara","norm_person":{"id":279,"first_name":"Dominic J.","last_name":"O'Meara","full_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/11180664X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Some Later Neoplatonic Views on Divine Creation and the Eternity of the World","main_title":{"title":"Some Later Neoplatonic Views on Divine Creation and the Eternity of the World"},"abstract":"The commentary of Simplicius on Aristotle\u2019s Physics is particularly inter\u00ad\r\nesting thanks to the rich information it provides concerning the doctrines of pre\u00ad\r\nvious philosophers. His interpretation shows a great erudition, but it is not always \r\nfaithful to the authentic thought of Aristotle. The first cause of Aristotle is not \r\nthat of Simplicius and this is not the only case in which Simplicius gave to \r\nAristotelian thought a turn that does not correspond to its original content. A similar \r\ndistortion may be found in the interpretation of the intricate question of chance \r\nand fortune. It is more difficult to formulate a judgment about the commentary \r\nof Philoponus: to what extent does it reflect the teaching of Ammonius? In any \r\ncase, the interpretation is very penetrating, especially in those passages where \r\nthe author criticizes the doctrine of Aristotle and expresses manifestly his own \r\nideas. Alfarabi takes Philoponus to task for settling a philosophical question with \r\nthe help of religious doctrines:60 nothing is less true, as W. Wieland has already \r\nnoticed. Philoponus, rather, uses Aristotelian philosophy in order to refute \r\nAristotle.61 On the other hand he appeals to the concept of creation against the eternity of the world: he very sharply notices, perhaps also under the influence of \r\nAmmonius, that creation as an integral causation is not a movement and does not \r\nbelong to the continuous process of coming-to-be and passing away. Thanks mainly \r\nto the concept of creation, the author escapes from the eternity of movement \r\nand time. [conclusion p. 52-53]","btype":2,"date":"1981","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/QSUX1JffS4trd4H","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":279,"full_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":450,"section_of":12,"pages":"45-53","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":12,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Neoplatonism and Christian thought","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"O'Meara1982","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1982","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1981","abstract":"In this volume, the relationships between two of the most vital currents in Western thought are examined by a group of nineteen internationally known specialists in a variety of disciplines\u2014classics, patristics, philosophy, theology, history of ideas, literature. The contributing scholars discuss Neoplatonic theories about God, creation, man, and salvation, in relation to the ways in which they were adopted, adapted, or rejected by major Christian thinkers of five periods: Patristic, Later Greek and Byzantine, Medieval, Renaissance, and Modern. [a.a]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/8tb5ZmmacZhgjDn","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":12,"pubplace":"Albany","publisher":"State University of New York Press","series":"Studies in Neoplatonism: Ancient and Modern","volume":"3","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Some Later Neoplatonic Views on Divine Creation and the Eternity of the World"]}

  • PAGE 1 OF 1