| Title | Neoplatonists on the causes of vegetative life |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2015 |
| Published in | Causation and Creation in Late Antiquity |
| Pages | 171-185 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Wilberding, James |
| Editor(s) | Marmodoro, Anna , Prince, Brian |
| Translator(s) |
| In the Neoplatonism of late antiquity, there was an exciting and revolutionary development in the understanding of the aetiology involved in the generation of living things. Here, it will be argued that this extended all the way to the Neoplatonic understanding of the causes of vegetative life. In a way, this should come as no surprise. Hippocratics, Aristotle, and Galen all viewed the processes involved in the generation of plants as analogous to those in the generation of embryos. In fact, the embryo was commonly held to have the life-status of a plant, with the mother taking on the role of the earth, at least at the earliest stages of its generation. As a result, these thinkers saw the same causal models that govern the generation of embryos at work in the generation of plants. Indeed, Galen even advises those who wish to investigate the formation of embryos to begin by looking into the generation of plants. The above-mentioned analogy is certainly part of the motivation behind Galen’s counsel, but equally important is that plants are simpler, in terms of both their physiology and their psychology, and thus more perspicuous objects of study. This is what gives us "hope to discover among the plants [biological] administration in its pure and unadulterated form." What is surprising is the conception of vegetative generation and life that results for Neoplatonists. As I shall show here, they ultimately concluded that the vegetative souls of individual plants are not self-sufficient. That is to say, the dependence of individual plants on the earth, in terms of both their generation and their preservation, extends beyond mere nutritive needs into the psychological domain of their life activities. In order to see how they arrived at this surprising conclusion, it will be necessary to begin with a brief sketch of Neoplatonic embryological theory, as it can be found across a wide range of core Neoplatonic authors and texts. This theory may be encapsulated into four theses: (i) First, all Neoplatonists are one-seed theorists: there is no female seed. In this, the Neoplatonists were in full agreement with Peripatetic embryology and in opposition to the two-seed theories advanced by the Hippocratics and Galen, though this opposition remains only implicit, as they never even acknowledge the possibility of a female seed. (ii) Second, Neoplatonists universally understand the seed to be a collection of form-principles (logoi) corresponding to individual parts of the father (and by extension of the offspring). Since these form-principles are immaterial, they are wholly present in every part of the seed, allowing the seed to be completely homoiomerous. (iii) Third, these seminal form-principles are in a state of potentiality. (iv) Fourth, they must be led to a state of actuality by an external cause that possesses these same principles in actuality. This cause is generally identified with the nature of the mother, who is additionally responsible for supplying the matter in the form of menses. It is these final two theses that establish the Neoplatonic theory as an exciting new development in ancient embryology. On Aristotle’s one-seed theory, by contrast, the male seed serves as the formal and efficient cause of embryological development, requiring only matter from the female. Aristotle establishes the self-sufficiency of the male seed as an efficient cause by attributing actual motion to it. Even on Galen’s two-seed theory, where one might have expected the female to be granted greater causal efficacy in the embryological process, the male seed remains the sole efficient cause, with the female seed more or less demoted to serving as nourishment for the male seed. What is revolutionary, therefore, in the Neoplatonic account of embryology is its placing the female on equal footing with the male in terms of their causal contributions in embryology. This new conceptualization of the respective contributions of the male and female should be seen as resulting from the application of the Neoplatonic metaphysical framework of procession and reversion to embryology. Within this framework, the creation of an offspring consists of two distinct causal moments. In the first moment, procession, an inchoate offspring is generated that is a likeness of its progenitor but in a state of potentiality. The procession from the One, for example, results in the generation of the Pre-Intellect, which is still only potentially the Intellect. The second moment, reversion, is what accounts for this potentiality being led to a state of activity: by reversion, the Pre-Intellect becomes the genuine Intellect. When this framework is applied to embryology, the theses (iii) and (iv) above follow. The male’s emission of a seed is likened to procession, with the form-principles in the seed still being in a state of potentiality. This potentiality is led to actuality by the mother at conception and throughout the process of gestation. Thus, the male and the female are on a par insofar as each corresponds to one of the two moments of the One’s creative activity. [introduction p. 171-174] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/ElblvTuFCEVCpgN |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"913","_score":null,"_source":{"id":913,"authors_free":[{"id":1346,"entry_id":913,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":257,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wilberding, James","free_first_name":"James","free_last_name":"Wilberding","norm_person":{"id":257,"first_name":"James","last_name":"Wilberding","full_name":"Wilberding, James","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/143517465","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1347,"entry_id":913,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":47,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Marmodoro, Anna","free_first_name":"Anna","free_last_name":"Marmodoro","norm_person":{"id":47,"first_name":"Anna","last_name":"Marmodoro","full_name":"Marmodoro, Anna","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1043592326","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1348,"entry_id":913,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":48,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Prince, Brian","free_first_name":"Brian","free_last_name":"Prince","norm_person":{"id":48,"first_name":"Brian","last_name":"Prince","full_name":"Prince, Brian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Neoplatonists on the causes of vegetative life","main_title":{"title":"Neoplatonists on the causes of vegetative life"},"abstract":"In the Neoplatonism of late antiquity, there was an exciting and revolutionary development in the understanding of the aetiology involved in the generation of living things. Here, it will be argued that this extended all the way to the Neoplatonic understanding of the causes of vegetative life. In a way, this should come as no surprise. Hippocratics, Aristotle, and Galen all viewed the processes involved in the generation of plants as analogous to those in the generation of embryos. In fact, the embryo was commonly held to have the life-status of a plant, with the mother taking on the role of the earth, at least at the earliest stages of its generation. As a result, these thinkers saw the same causal models that govern the generation of embryos at work in the generation of plants. Indeed, Galen even advises those who wish to investigate the formation of embryos to begin by looking into the generation of plants. The above-mentioned analogy is certainly part of the motivation behind Galen\u2019s counsel, but equally important is that plants are simpler, in terms of both their physiology and their psychology, and thus more perspicuous objects of study. This is what gives us \"hope to discover among the plants [biological] administration in its pure and unadulterated form.\"\r\n\r\nWhat is surprising is the conception of vegetative generation and life that results for Neoplatonists. As I shall show here, they ultimately concluded that the vegetative souls of individual plants are not self-sufficient. That is to say, the dependence of individual plants on the earth, in terms of both their generation and their preservation, extends beyond mere nutritive needs into the psychological domain of their life activities. In order to see how they arrived at this surprising conclusion, it will be necessary to begin with a brief sketch of Neoplatonic embryological theory, as it can be found across a wide range of core Neoplatonic authors and texts. This theory may be encapsulated into four theses:\r\n\r\n(i) First, all Neoplatonists are one-seed theorists: there is no female seed. In this, the Neoplatonists were in full agreement with Peripatetic embryology and in opposition to the two-seed theories advanced by the Hippocratics and Galen, though this opposition remains only implicit, as they never even acknowledge the possibility of a female seed.\r\n\r\n(ii) Second, Neoplatonists universally understand the seed to be a collection of form-principles (logoi) corresponding to individual parts of the father (and by extension of the offspring). Since these form-principles are immaterial, they are wholly present in every part of the seed, allowing the seed to be completely homoiomerous.\r\n\r\n(iii) Third, these seminal form-principles are in a state of potentiality.\r\n\r\n(iv) Fourth, they must be led to a state of actuality by an external cause that possesses these same principles in actuality. This cause is generally identified with the nature of the mother, who is additionally responsible for supplying the matter in the form of menses.\r\n\r\nIt is these final two theses that establish the Neoplatonic theory as an exciting new development in ancient embryology. On Aristotle\u2019s one-seed theory, by contrast, the male seed serves as the formal and efficient cause of embryological development, requiring only matter from the female. Aristotle establishes the self-sufficiency of the male seed as an efficient cause by attributing actual motion to it. Even on Galen\u2019s two-seed theory, where one might have expected the female to be granted greater causal efficacy in the embryological process, the male seed remains the sole efficient cause, with the female seed more or less demoted to serving as nourishment for the male seed.\r\n\r\nWhat is revolutionary, therefore, in the Neoplatonic account of embryology is its placing the female on equal footing with the male in terms of their causal contributions in embryology. This new conceptualization of the respective contributions of the male and female should be seen as resulting from the application of the Neoplatonic metaphysical framework of procession and reversion to embryology. Within this framework, the creation of an offspring consists of two distinct causal moments. In the first moment, procession, an inchoate offspring is generated that is a likeness of its progenitor but in a state of potentiality. The procession from the One, for example, results in the generation of the Pre-Intellect, which is still only potentially the Intellect. The second moment, reversion, is what accounts for this potentiality being led to a state of activity: by reversion, the Pre-Intellect becomes the genuine Intellect.\r\n\r\nWhen this framework is applied to embryology, the theses (iii) and (iv) above follow. The male\u2019s emission of a seed is likened to procession, with the form-principles in the seed still being in a state of potentiality. This potentiality is led to actuality by the mother at conception and throughout the process of gestation. Thus, the male and the female are on a par insofar as each corresponds to one of the two moments of the One\u2019s creative activity. [introduction p. 171-174]","btype":2,"date":"2015","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ElblvTuFCEVCpgN","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":257,"full_name":"Wilberding, James","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":47,"full_name":"Marmodoro, Anna","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":48,"full_name":"Prince, Brian","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":913,"section_of":155,"pages":"171-185","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":155,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Causation and Creation in Late Antiquity","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Marmodoro\/Prince2015","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2015","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2015","abstract":"Written by a group of leading scholars, this unique collection of essays investigates the views of both pagan and Christian philosophers on causation and the creation of the cosmos. Structured in two parts, the volume first looks at divine agency and how late antique thinkers, including the Stoics, Plotinus, Porphyry, Simplicius, Philoponus and Gregory of Nyssa, tackled questions such as: is the cosmos eternal? Did it come from nothing or from something pre-existing? How was it caused to come into existence? Is it material or immaterial? The second part looks at questions concerning human agency and responsibility, including the problem of evil and the nature of will, considering thinkers such as Plotinus, Porphyry, Proclus and Augustine. Highlighting some of the most important and interesting aspects of these philosophical debates, the volume will be of great interest to upper-level students and scholars of philosophy, classics, theology and ancient history. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/lpl3CeEXUUAj1hP","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":155,"pubplace":"Cambridge","publisher":"Cambridge University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2015]}
| Title | In defence of geometric atomism: Explaining elemental properties |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2012 |
| Published in | Neoplatonism and the Philosophy of Nature |
| Pages | 147-173 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Opsomer, Jan |
| Editor(s) | Wilberding, James , Horn, Christoph |
| Translator(s) |
| Plato introduces what is nowadays called geometric atomism in his Timaeus—more precisely, in the second part of the physical account where he examines the cosmos under the aspect of what he calls ‘necessity’. This resurfaces again in the final part, which is devoted to what comes about from the cooperation of reason and necessity, where he regularly invokes the triangles and polyhedra in order to explain various biochemical processes of the human body. The introduction of geometric atomism is preceded by the infamously obscure description of the receptacle. This mysterious entity is presented as that in which qualities and shapes appear but also appears to provide the stuff out of which things are made. I will not here enter into the debates about what the receptacle is supposed to be; it suffices to note that the text in some passages may suggest to readers familiar with the later conception of matter that matter is exactly what Plato means. Since this is certainly what Aristotle and, in his wake, all ancient commentators took it to be, we need not for our present purposes consider other readings. Prior to the intervention of the demiurge, the precosmic mass already contained traces of the elements (ichnê, 53b2): it was fiery here, watery there, and so on. Yet it did not have elements with a stable identity. The use of the definite demonstrative pronouns this or that would therefore be inaccurate. So what is fire in the precosmic state is not to be called a this, but rather a such, or that which is always such and such. In order to bring about some stability, the craftsman set out to impart a distinct configuration to the precosmic mass by means of shapes and numbers (dieschêmatisato eidesi te kai arithmois, 53b4-5). Timaeus constructs the elements out of primary triangles. Of all the possible kinds, he selects two basic types: the 30-60-90 scalene triangle—that is, a half-equilateral triangle (Type A)—and the right isosceles triangle—a half-square (Type B). These triangles are combined to form larger shapes, called ‘surfaces’ (epiphaneia) by the commentators. For the sake of convenience, I shall call ‘surfaces’ the composite shapes formed out of the basic triangles; the latter I shall just call ‘triangles’. (One of the surfaces happens to be a triangle too, and it is a matter of dispute among the commentators whether the surfaces are really just two-dimensional planes.) Six triangles of Type A can be put together in such a way that they make up an equilateral triangle; four Type B triangles form a square. These surfaces are then combined into stereometric figures (congruent convex regular polyhedra): from the equilateral triangular surfaces can be formed the tetrahedron (that is, a pyramid), the octahedron, and the icosahedron, consisting of four, eight, and twenty faces, respectively; six squares are combined into a hexahedron (that is, a cube). These polyhedra are then assigned to the traditional four elements (henceforth referred to as EWAFs): The tetrahedron provides the shape of fire. The octahedron that of air. The icosahedron that of water. The hexahedron that of earth. This model of Plato’s geometric atoms can be completed by adding two more levels—one at the bottom and the other at the top. At one end, we might add the mixtures into which EWAFs enter, and at the foundational level, we must add a level even prior to the basic triangles, since Plato acknowledges that there are ‘even higher principles’ that are known only to god and privileged humans (53d6-7). [introduction p. 147-148] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/q3J2ENiGHB1LmYR |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1095","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1095,"authors_free":[{"id":1653,"entry_id":1095,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":211,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Opsomer, Jan","free_first_name":"Jan","free_last_name":"Opsomer","norm_person":{"id":211,"first_name":"Jan","last_name":"Opsomer","full_name":"Opsomer, Jan","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1120966310","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1654,"entry_id":1095,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":257,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wilberding, James","free_first_name":"James","free_last_name":"Wilberding","norm_person":{"id":257,"first_name":"James","last_name":"Wilberding","full_name":"Wilberding, James","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/143517465","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1655,"entry_id":1095,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":256,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Horn, Christoph","free_first_name":"Christoph","free_last_name":"Horn","norm_person":{"id":256,"first_name":"Christoph","last_name":"Horn","full_name":"Horn, Christoph","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115589406","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"In defence of geometric atomism: Explaining elemental properties","main_title":{"title":"In defence of geometric atomism: Explaining elemental properties"},"abstract":"Plato introduces what is nowadays called geometric atomism in his Timaeus\u2014more precisely, in the second part of the physical account where he examines the cosmos under the aspect of what he calls \u2018necessity\u2019. This resurfaces again in the final part, which is devoted to what comes about from the cooperation of reason and necessity, where he regularly invokes the triangles and polyhedra in order to explain various biochemical processes of the human body.\r\n\r\nThe introduction of geometric atomism is preceded by the infamously obscure description of the receptacle. This mysterious entity is presented as that in which qualities and shapes appear but also appears to provide the stuff out of which things are made. I will not here enter into the debates about what the receptacle is supposed to be; it suffices to note that the text in some passages may suggest to readers familiar with the later conception of matter that matter is exactly what Plato means. Since this is certainly what Aristotle and, in his wake, all ancient commentators took it to be, we need not for our present purposes consider other readings.\r\n\r\nPrior to the intervention of the demiurge, the precosmic mass already contained traces of the elements (ichn\u00ea, 53b2): it was fiery here, watery there, and so on. Yet it did not have elements with a stable identity. The use of the definite demonstrative pronouns this or that would therefore be inaccurate. So what is fire in the precosmic state is not to be called a this, but rather a such, or that which is always such and such.\r\n\r\nIn order to bring about some stability, the craftsman set out to impart a distinct configuration to the precosmic mass by means of shapes and numbers (diesch\u00eamatisato eidesi te kai arithmois, 53b4-5). Timaeus constructs the elements out of primary triangles. Of all the possible kinds, he selects two basic types: the 30-60-90 scalene triangle\u2014that is, a half-equilateral triangle (Type A)\u2014and the right isosceles triangle\u2014a half-square (Type B). These triangles are combined to form larger shapes, called \u2018surfaces\u2019 (epiphaneia) by the commentators.\r\n\r\nFor the sake of convenience, I shall call \u2018surfaces\u2019 the composite shapes formed out of the basic triangles; the latter I shall just call \u2018triangles\u2019. (One of the surfaces happens to be a triangle too, and it is a matter of dispute among the commentators whether the surfaces are really just two-dimensional planes.)\r\n\r\nSix triangles of Type A can be put together in such a way that they make up an equilateral triangle; four Type B triangles form a square. These surfaces are then combined into stereometric figures (congruent convex regular polyhedra): from the equilateral triangular surfaces can be formed the tetrahedron (that is, a pyramid), the octahedron, and the icosahedron, consisting of four, eight, and twenty faces, respectively; six squares are combined into a hexahedron (that is, a cube).\r\n\r\nThese polyhedra are then assigned to the traditional four elements (henceforth referred to as EWAFs):\r\n\r\n The tetrahedron provides the shape of fire.\r\n The octahedron that of air.\r\n The icosahedron that of water.\r\n The hexahedron that of earth.\r\n\r\nThis model of Plato\u2019s geometric atoms can be completed by adding two more levels\u2014one at the bottom and the other at the top. At one end, we might add the mixtures into which EWAFs enter, and at the foundational level, we must add a level even prior to the basic triangles, since Plato acknowledges that there are \u2018even higher principles\u2019 that are known only to god and privileged humans (53d6-7). [introduction p. 147-148]","btype":2,"date":"2012","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/q3J2ENiGHB1LmYR","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":211,"full_name":"Opsomer, Jan","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":257,"full_name":"Wilberding, James","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":256,"full_name":"Horn, Christoph","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1095,"section_of":299,"pages":"147-173","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":299,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Neoplatonism and the Philosophy of Nature","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Horn\/Wilberding2012","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2012","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2012","abstract":"Despite Platonism\u2019s unquestioned claim to being one of the most influential movements in the history of philosophy, for a long time the conventional wisdom was that Platonists of late antiquity\u2014or Neoplatonists\u2014were so focused on other-worldly metaphysics that they simply neglected any serious study of the sensible world, which after all is \u2018merely\u2019 an image of the intelligible world, and only recently has this conventional wisdom begun to be dispelled. In fact, precisely because these thinkers did see the sensible world as an image of the intelligible world, they devoted much time and energy to understanding its inner workings. Thus we find Neoplatonists writing on embryology, physiology, meteorology, astronomy, and much else. This volume collects essays by leading international scholars in the field that shed new light on how these thinkers sought to understand and explain nature and natural phenomena. It is thematically divided into two parts, with the first part\u2014\u2018The general metaphysics of Nature\u2019\u2014directed at the explication of central Neoplatonic metaphysical doctrines and their relation to the natural world, and the second part\u2014\u2019Platonic approaches to individual sciences\u2019\u2014showing how these same doctrines play out in individual natural sciences such as elemental physics, geography, and biology. Together these essays show that a serious examination of Neoplatonic natural philosophy has far-reaching consequences for our general understanding of the metaphysics of Platonism, as well as for our evaluation of their place in the history of science. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/eoRoURIG3JhMB6J","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":299,"pubplace":"Oxford","publisher":"Oxford University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2012]}
| Title | Self-motion and reflection: Hermias and Proclus on the harmony of Plato and Aristotle on the soul |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2012 |
| Published in | Neoplatonism and the Philosophy of Nature |
| Pages | 44-67 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Menn, Stephen |
| Editor(s) | Horn, Christoph , Wilberding, James |
| Translator(s) |
| A central puzzle of recent scholarship on late Neoplatonism has been to understand how what Richard Sorabji has called a ‘perfectly crazy position', the thesis of die harmony of Plato and Aristode, nonetheless ‘proved philosophically fruitful' — whereas, for instance, the same philosophers' perfectly crazy thesis of the harmony of Plato and Homer did not. In this chapter, starting from Hermias' commentary on a passage of the Phaedrus which poses a difficulty for harmonization, I hope to shed some light on what the late Neoplatonists were asserting when they asserted the harmony of Plato and Aristotle, in general or on some particular issue (here the immortality of soul); on why they were inclined to make such assertions o f harmony, and what they saw themselves as needing to do in order to defend them: and on why,in the process of defending them, they were led to conceptual clarifications which were in some cases of longstanding benefit to the conceptual stoic of philosophy. I will point to a sur prising case of such a conceptual benefit resulting from Neoplatonic interpretations of this Pimdtus passage and its parallels in the Timaeus. While my central example will be from Hermias, the themes I am interested in ate not peculiar to him, and I will also make use of other late Neoplatonic authors, especially Proclus. Hermias, and Produs, to recall, were both students of Syrianus;at one point in Hermias' commentary 'our companion Proclus' raises an aporia, and ‘the philosopher'— that is, ‘the professor — replies (92,6-10 Couvrcur), which seems to imply that the commentary in general was drawn by Hermias from Syrianus lectures. [Introduction, pp. 44 f.] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/EgP6g0IaubwrLcL |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1164","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1164,"authors_free":[{"id":1742,"entry_id":1164,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":255,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Menn, Stephen","free_first_name":"Stephen","free_last_name":"Menn","norm_person":{"id":255,"first_name":"Stephen","last_name":"Menn","full_name":"Menn, Stephen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/174092768","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2081,"entry_id":1164,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":256,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Horn, Christoph","free_first_name":"Christoph","free_last_name":"Horn","norm_person":{"id":256,"first_name":"Christoph","last_name":"Horn","full_name":"Horn, Christoph","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115589406","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2082,"entry_id":1164,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":257,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wilberding, James","free_first_name":"James","free_last_name":"Wilberding","norm_person":{"id":257,"first_name":"James","last_name":"Wilberding","full_name":"Wilberding, James","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/143517465","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Self-motion and reflection: Hermias and Proclus on the harmony of Plato and Aristotle on the soul","main_title":{"title":"Self-motion and reflection: Hermias and Proclus on the harmony of Plato and Aristotle on the soul"},"abstract":"A central puzzle of recent scholarship on late Neoplatonism has been to understand how what Richard Sorabji has called a \u2018perfectly crazy position', the thesis of die harmony of Plato and Aristode, nonetheless \u2018proved philosophically fruitful' \u2014 \r\nwhereas, for instance, the same philosophers' perfectly crazy thesis of the harmony of Plato and Homer did not. In this chapter, starting from Hermias' commentary on a passage of the Phaedrus which poses a difficulty for harmonization, I hope to shed some light on what the late Neoplatonists were asserting when they asserted the harmony \r\nof Plato and Aristotle, in general or on some particular issue (here the immortality of soul); on why they were inclined to make such assertions o f harmony, and what they saw themselves as needing to do in order to defend them: and on why,in the process of defending them, they were led to conceptual clarifications which were in some cases of longstanding benefit to the conceptual stoic of philosophy. I will point to a sur\u00ad\r\nprising case of such a conceptual benefit resulting from Neoplatonic interpretations of this Pimdtus passage and its parallels in the Timaeus. While my central example will be from Hermias, the themes I am interested in ate not peculiar to him, and I will also \r\nmake use of other late Neoplatonic authors, especially Proclus. Hermias, and Produs, to recall, were both students of Syrianus;at one point in Hermias' commentary 'our companion Proclus' raises an aporia, and \u2018the philosopher'\u2014 that is, \u2018the professor \u2014 replies (92,6-10 Couvrcur), which seems to imply that the commentary in general was drawn by Hermias from Syrianus lectures. [Introduction, pp. 44 f.]","btype":2,"date":"2012","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/EgP6g0IaubwrLcL","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":255,"full_name":"Menn, Stephen","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":256,"full_name":"Horn, Christoph","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":257,"full_name":"Wilberding, James","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1164,"section_of":299,"pages":"44-67","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":299,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Neoplatonism and the Philosophy of Nature","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Horn\/Wilberding2012","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2012","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2012","abstract":"Despite Platonism\u2019s unquestioned claim to being one of the most influential movements in the history of philosophy, for a long time the conventional wisdom was that Platonists of late antiquity\u2014or Neoplatonists\u2014were so focused on other-worldly metaphysics that they simply neglected any serious study of the sensible world, which after all is \u2018merely\u2019 an image of the intelligible world, and only recently has this conventional wisdom begun to be dispelled. In fact, precisely because these thinkers did see the sensible world as an image of the intelligible world, they devoted much time and energy to understanding its inner workings. Thus we find Neoplatonists writing on embryology, physiology, meteorology, astronomy, and much else. This volume collects essays by leading international scholars in the field that shed new light on how these thinkers sought to understand and explain nature and natural phenomena. It is thematically divided into two parts, with the first part\u2014\u2018The general metaphysics of Nature\u2019\u2014directed at the explication of central Neoplatonic metaphysical doctrines and their relation to the natural world, and the second part\u2014\u2019Platonic approaches to individual sciences\u2019\u2014showing how these same doctrines play out in individual natural sciences such as elemental physics, geography, and biology. Together these essays show that a serious examination of Neoplatonic natural philosophy has far-reaching consequences for our general understanding of the metaphysics of Platonism, as well as for our evaluation of their place in the history of science. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/eoRoURIG3JhMB6J","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":299,"pubplace":"Oxford","publisher":"Oxford University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2012]}
| Title | Aristotelian objections and post-Aristotelian responses to Plato's elemental theory |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2012 |
| Published in | Neoplatonism and the Philosophy of Nature |
| Pages | 129-146 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Mueller, Ian |
| Editor(s) | Wilberding, James , Horn, Christoph |
| Translator(s) |
| Aristotle and Plato advanced very different theories of the traditional four elements. Whereas Plato in his Timaeus proposes a geometrical theory of these elements, Aristotle in his On the Heavens (and On Generation and Corruption) offers a qualitative analysis and offers a series of objections to Plato’s theory. These objections provided later Platonists with the opportunity to defend Plato against and possibly harmonize him with Aristotle. This paper explores Simplicius’ responses to Aristotle one by one, paying particular attention to the brand of scientific discourse that he engages in with Proclus, and to how different commitments to harmonization affect their responses to these objections. [Author’s abstract] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/nEraa8dkGyuG6Zy |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"812","_score":null,"_source":{"id":812,"authors_free":[{"id":1202,"entry_id":812,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":270,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mueller, Ian","free_first_name":"Ian","free_last_name":"Mueller","norm_person":{"id":270,"first_name":"Ian","last_name":"Mueller","full_name":"Mueller, Ian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1203,"entry_id":812,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":257,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wilberding, James","free_first_name":"James","free_last_name":"Wilberding","norm_person":{"id":257,"first_name":"James","last_name":"Wilberding","full_name":"Wilberding, James","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/143517465","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1204,"entry_id":812,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":256,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Horn, Christoph","free_first_name":"Cristoph","free_last_name":"Horn","norm_person":{"id":256,"first_name":"Christoph","last_name":"Horn","full_name":"Horn, Christoph","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115589406","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aristotelian objections and post-Aristotelian responses to Plato's elemental theory","main_title":{"title":"Aristotelian objections and post-Aristotelian responses to Plato's elemental theory"},"abstract":"Aristotle and Plato advanced very different theories of the traditional four elements. Whereas Plato in his Timaeus proposes a geometrical theory of these elements, Aristotle in his On the Heavens (and On Generation and Corruption) offers a qualitative analysis and offers a series of objections to Plato\u2019s theory. These objections provided later Platonists with the opportunity to defend Plato against and possibly harmonize him with Aristotle. This paper explores Simplicius\u2019 responses to Aristotle one by one, paying particular attention to the brand of scientific discourse that he engages in with Proclus, and to how different commitments to harmonization affect their responses to these objections. [Author\u2019s abstract]","btype":2,"date":"2012","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/nEraa8dkGyuG6Zy","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":270,"full_name":"Mueller, Ian","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":257,"full_name":"Wilberding, James","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":256,"full_name":"Horn, Christoph","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":812,"section_of":299,"pages":"129-146","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":299,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Neoplatonism and the Philosophy of Nature","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Horn\/Wilberding2012","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2012","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2012","abstract":"Despite Platonism\u2019s unquestioned claim to being one of the most influential movements in the history of philosophy, for a long time the conventional wisdom was that Platonists of late antiquity\u2014or Neoplatonists\u2014were so focused on other-worldly metaphysics that they simply neglected any serious study of the sensible world, which after all is \u2018merely\u2019 an image of the intelligible world, and only recently has this conventional wisdom begun to be dispelled. In fact, precisely because these thinkers did see the sensible world as an image of the intelligible world, they devoted much time and energy to understanding its inner workings. Thus we find Neoplatonists writing on embryology, physiology, meteorology, astronomy, and much else. This volume collects essays by leading international scholars in the field that shed new light on how these thinkers sought to understand and explain nature and natural phenomena. It is thematically divided into two parts, with the first part\u2014\u2018The general metaphysics of Nature\u2019\u2014directed at the explication of central Neoplatonic metaphysical doctrines and their relation to the natural world, and the second part\u2014\u2019Platonic approaches to individual sciences\u2019\u2014showing how these same doctrines play out in individual natural sciences such as elemental physics, geography, and biology. Together these essays show that a serious examination of Neoplatonic natural philosophy has far-reaching consequences for our general understanding of the metaphysics of Platonism, as well as for our evaluation of their place in the history of science. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/eoRoURIG3JhMB6J","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":299,"pubplace":"Oxford","publisher":"Oxford University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2012]}
| Title | Aristotelian objections and post-Aristotelian responses to Plato's elemental theory |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2012 |
| Published in | Neoplatonism and the Philosophy of Nature |
| Pages | 129-146 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Mueller, Ian |
| Editor(s) | Wilberding, James , Horn, Christoph |
| Translator(s) |
Aristotle and Plato advanced very different theories of the traditional four elements. Whereas Plato in his Timaeus proposes a geometrical theory of these elements, Aristotle in his On the Heavens (and On Generation and Corruption) offers a qualitative analysis and offers a series of objections to Plato’s theory. These objections provided later Platonists with the opportunity to defend Plato against and possibly harmonize him with Aristotle. This paper explores Simplicius’ responses to Aristotle one by one, paying particular attention to the brand of scientific discourse that he engages in with Proclus, and to how different commitments to harmonization affect their responses to these objections. [Author’s abstract] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/nEraa8dkGyuG6Zy |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"812","_score":null,"_source":{"id":812,"authors_free":[{"id":1202,"entry_id":812,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":270,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mueller, Ian","free_first_name":"Ian","free_last_name":"Mueller","norm_person":{"id":270,"first_name":"Ian","last_name":"Mueller","full_name":"Mueller, Ian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1203,"entry_id":812,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":257,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wilberding, James","free_first_name":"James","free_last_name":"Wilberding","norm_person":{"id":257,"first_name":"James","last_name":"Wilberding","full_name":"Wilberding, James","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/143517465","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1204,"entry_id":812,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":256,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Horn, Christoph","free_first_name":"Cristoph","free_last_name":"Horn","norm_person":{"id":256,"first_name":"Christoph","last_name":"Horn","full_name":"Horn, Christoph","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115589406","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aristotelian objections and post-Aristotelian responses to Plato's elemental theory","main_title":{"title":"Aristotelian objections and post-Aristotelian responses to Plato's elemental theory"},"abstract":"Aristotle and Plato advanced very different theories of the traditional four elements. Whereas Plato in his Timaeus proposes a geometrical theory of these elements, Aristotle in his On the Heavens (and On Generation and Corruption) offers a qualitative analysis and offers a series of objections to Plato\u2019s theory. These objections provided later Platonists with the opportunity to defend Plato against and possibly harmonize him with Aristotle. This paper explores Simplicius\u2019 responses to Aristotle one by one, paying particular attention to the brand of scientific discourse that he engages in with Proclus, and to how different commitments to harmonization affect their responses to these objections. [Author\u2019s abstract]","btype":2,"date":"2012","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/nEraa8dkGyuG6Zy","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":270,"full_name":"Mueller, Ian","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":257,"full_name":"Wilberding, James","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":256,"full_name":"Horn, Christoph","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":812,"section_of":299,"pages":"129-146","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":299,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Neoplatonism and the Philosophy of Nature","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Horn\/Wilberding2012","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2012","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2012","abstract":"Despite Platonism\u2019s unquestioned claim to being one of the most influential movements in the history of philosophy, for a long time the conventional wisdom was that Platonists of late antiquity\u2014or Neoplatonists\u2014were so focused on other-worldly metaphysics that they simply neglected any serious study of the sensible world, which after all is \u2018merely\u2019 an image of the intelligible world, and only recently has this conventional wisdom begun to be dispelled. In fact, precisely because these thinkers did see the sensible world as an image of the intelligible world, they devoted much time and energy to understanding its inner workings. Thus we find Neoplatonists writing on embryology, physiology, meteorology, astronomy, and much else. This volume collects essays by leading international scholars in the field that shed new light on how these thinkers sought to understand and explain nature and natural phenomena. It is thematically divided into two parts, with the first part\u2014\u2018The general metaphysics of Nature\u2019\u2014directed at the explication of central Neoplatonic metaphysical doctrines and their relation to the natural world, and the second part\u2014\u2019Platonic approaches to individual sciences\u2019\u2014showing how these same doctrines play out in individual natural sciences such as elemental physics, geography, and biology. Together these essays show that a serious examination of Neoplatonic natural philosophy has far-reaching consequences for our general understanding of the metaphysics of Platonism, as well as for our evaluation of their place in the history of science. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/eoRoURIG3JhMB6J","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":299,"pubplace":"Oxford","publisher":"Oxford University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Aristotelian objections and post-Aristotelian responses to Plato's elemental theory"]}
| Title | In defence of geometric atomism: Explaining elemental properties |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2012 |
| Published in | Neoplatonism and the Philosophy of Nature |
| Pages | 147-173 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Opsomer, Jan |
| Editor(s) | Wilberding, James , Horn, Christoph |
| Translator(s) |
Plato introduces what is nowadays called geometric atomism in his Timaeus—more precisely, in the second part of the physical account where he examines the cosmos under the aspect of what he calls ‘necessity’. This resurfaces again in the final part, which is devoted to what comes about from the cooperation of reason and necessity, where he regularly invokes the triangles and polyhedra in order to explain various biochemical processes of the human body.
The introduction of geometric atomism is preceded by the infamously obscure description of the receptacle. This mysterious entity is presented as that in which qualities and shapes appear but also appears to provide the stuff out of which things are made. I will not here enter into the debates about what the receptacle is supposed to be; it suffices to note that the text in some passages may suggest to readers familiar with the later conception of matter that matter is exactly what Plato means. Since this is certainly what Aristotle and, in his wake, all ancient commentators took it to be, we need not for our present purposes consider other readings.
Prior to the intervention of the demiurge, the precosmic mass already contained traces of the elements (ichnê, 53b2): it was fiery here, watery there, and so on. Yet it did not have elements with a stable identity. The use of the definite demonstrative pronouns this or that would therefore be inaccurate. So what is fire in the precosmic state is not to be called a this, but rather a such, or that which is always such and such.
In order to bring about some stability, the craftsman set out to impart a distinct configuration to the precosmic mass by means of shapes and numbers (dieschêmatisato eidesi te kai arithmois, 53b4-5). Timaeus constructs the elements out of primary triangles. Of all the possible kinds, he selects two basic types: the 30-60-90 scalene triangle—that is, a half-equilateral triangle (Type A)—and the right isosceles triangle—a half-square (Type B). These triangles are combined to form larger shapes, called ‘surfaces’ (epiphaneia) by the commentators.
For the sake of convenience, I shall call ‘surfaces’ the composite shapes formed out of the basic triangles; the latter I shall just call ‘triangles’. (One of the surfaces happens to be a triangle too, and it is a matter of dispute among the commentators whether the surfaces are really just two-dimensional planes.)
Six triangles of Type A can be put together in such a way that they make up an equilateral triangle; four Type B triangles form a square. These surfaces are then combined into stereometric figures (congruent convex regular polyhedra): from the equilateral triangular surfaces can be formed the tetrahedron (that is, a pyramid), the octahedron, and the icosahedron, consisting of four, eight, and twenty faces, respectively; six squares are combined into a hexahedron (that is, a cube).
These polyhedra are then assigned to the traditional four elements (henceforth referred to as EWAFs):
The tetrahedron provides the shape of fire.
The octahedron that of air.
The icosahedron that of water.
The hexahedron that of earth.
This model of Plato’s geometric atoms can be completed by adding two more levels—one at the bottom and the other at the top. At one end, we might add the mixtures into which EWAFs enter, and at the foundational level, we must add a level even prior to the basic triangles, since Plato acknowledges that there are ‘even higher principles’ that are known only to god and privileged humans (53d6-7). [introduction p. 147-148] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/q3J2ENiGHB1LmYR |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1095","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1095,"authors_free":[{"id":1653,"entry_id":1095,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":211,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Opsomer, Jan","free_first_name":"Jan","free_last_name":"Opsomer","norm_person":{"id":211,"first_name":"Jan","last_name":"Opsomer","full_name":"Opsomer, Jan","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1120966310","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1654,"entry_id":1095,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":257,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wilberding, James","free_first_name":"James","free_last_name":"Wilberding","norm_person":{"id":257,"first_name":"James","last_name":"Wilberding","full_name":"Wilberding, James","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/143517465","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1655,"entry_id":1095,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":256,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Horn, Christoph","free_first_name":"Christoph","free_last_name":"Horn","norm_person":{"id":256,"first_name":"Christoph","last_name":"Horn","full_name":"Horn, Christoph","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115589406","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"In defence of geometric atomism: Explaining elemental properties","main_title":{"title":"In defence of geometric atomism: Explaining elemental properties"},"abstract":"Plato introduces what is nowadays called geometric atomism in his Timaeus\u2014more precisely, in the second part of the physical account where he examines the cosmos under the aspect of what he calls \u2018necessity\u2019. This resurfaces again in the final part, which is devoted to what comes about from the cooperation of reason and necessity, where he regularly invokes the triangles and polyhedra in order to explain various biochemical processes of the human body.\r\n\r\nThe introduction of geometric atomism is preceded by the infamously obscure description of the receptacle. This mysterious entity is presented as that in which qualities and shapes appear but also appears to provide the stuff out of which things are made. I will not here enter into the debates about what the receptacle is supposed to be; it suffices to note that the text in some passages may suggest to readers familiar with the later conception of matter that matter is exactly what Plato means. Since this is certainly what Aristotle and, in his wake, all ancient commentators took it to be, we need not for our present purposes consider other readings.\r\n\r\nPrior to the intervention of the demiurge, the precosmic mass already contained traces of the elements (ichn\u00ea, 53b2): it was fiery here, watery there, and so on. Yet it did not have elements with a stable identity. The use of the definite demonstrative pronouns this or that would therefore be inaccurate. So what is fire in the precosmic state is not to be called a this, but rather a such, or that which is always such and such.\r\n\r\nIn order to bring about some stability, the craftsman set out to impart a distinct configuration to the precosmic mass by means of shapes and numbers (diesch\u00eamatisato eidesi te kai arithmois, 53b4-5). Timaeus constructs the elements out of primary triangles. Of all the possible kinds, he selects two basic types: the 30-60-90 scalene triangle\u2014that is, a half-equilateral triangle (Type A)\u2014and the right isosceles triangle\u2014a half-square (Type B). These triangles are combined to form larger shapes, called \u2018surfaces\u2019 (epiphaneia) by the commentators.\r\n\r\nFor the sake of convenience, I shall call \u2018surfaces\u2019 the composite shapes formed out of the basic triangles; the latter I shall just call \u2018triangles\u2019. (One of the surfaces happens to be a triangle too, and it is a matter of dispute among the commentators whether the surfaces are really just two-dimensional planes.)\r\n\r\nSix triangles of Type A can be put together in such a way that they make up an equilateral triangle; four Type B triangles form a square. These surfaces are then combined into stereometric figures (congruent convex regular polyhedra): from the equilateral triangular surfaces can be formed the tetrahedron (that is, a pyramid), the octahedron, and the icosahedron, consisting of four, eight, and twenty faces, respectively; six squares are combined into a hexahedron (that is, a cube).\r\n\r\nThese polyhedra are then assigned to the traditional four elements (henceforth referred to as EWAFs):\r\n\r\n The tetrahedron provides the shape of fire.\r\n The octahedron that of air.\r\n The icosahedron that of water.\r\n The hexahedron that of earth.\r\n\r\nThis model of Plato\u2019s geometric atoms can be completed by adding two more levels\u2014one at the bottom and the other at the top. At one end, we might add the mixtures into which EWAFs enter, and at the foundational level, we must add a level even prior to the basic triangles, since Plato acknowledges that there are \u2018even higher principles\u2019 that are known only to god and privileged humans (53d6-7). [introduction p. 147-148]","btype":2,"date":"2012","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/q3J2ENiGHB1LmYR","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":211,"full_name":"Opsomer, Jan","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":257,"full_name":"Wilberding, James","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":256,"full_name":"Horn, Christoph","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1095,"section_of":299,"pages":"147-173","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":299,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Neoplatonism and the Philosophy of Nature","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Horn\/Wilberding2012","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2012","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2012","abstract":"Despite Platonism\u2019s unquestioned claim to being one of the most influential movements in the history of philosophy, for a long time the conventional wisdom was that Platonists of late antiquity\u2014or Neoplatonists\u2014were so focused on other-worldly metaphysics that they simply neglected any serious study of the sensible world, which after all is \u2018merely\u2019 an image of the intelligible world, and only recently has this conventional wisdom begun to be dispelled. In fact, precisely because these thinkers did see the sensible world as an image of the intelligible world, they devoted much time and energy to understanding its inner workings. Thus we find Neoplatonists writing on embryology, physiology, meteorology, astronomy, and much else. This volume collects essays by leading international scholars in the field that shed new light on how these thinkers sought to understand and explain nature and natural phenomena. It is thematically divided into two parts, with the first part\u2014\u2018The general metaphysics of Nature\u2019\u2014directed at the explication of central Neoplatonic metaphysical doctrines and their relation to the natural world, and the second part\u2014\u2019Platonic approaches to individual sciences\u2019\u2014showing how these same doctrines play out in individual natural sciences such as elemental physics, geography, and biology. Together these essays show that a serious examination of Neoplatonic natural philosophy has far-reaching consequences for our general understanding of the metaphysics of Platonism, as well as for our evaluation of their place in the history of science. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/eoRoURIG3JhMB6J","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":299,"pubplace":"Oxford","publisher":"Oxford University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["In defence of geometric atomism: Explaining elemental properties"]}
| Title | Neoplatonists on the causes of vegetative life |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2015 |
| Published in | Causation and Creation in Late Antiquity |
| Pages | 171-185 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Wilberding, James |
| Editor(s) | Marmodoro, Anna , Prince, Brian |
| Translator(s) |
In the Neoplatonism of late antiquity, there was an exciting and revolutionary development in the understanding of the aetiology involved in the generation of living things. Here, it will be argued that this extended all the way to the Neoplatonic understanding of the causes of vegetative life. In a way, this should come as no surprise. Hippocratics, Aristotle, and Galen all viewed the processes involved in the generation of plants as analogous to those in the generation of embryos. In fact, the embryo was commonly held to have the life-status of a plant, with the mother taking on the role of the earth, at least at the earliest stages of its generation. As a result, these thinkers saw the same causal models that govern the generation of embryos at work in the generation of plants. Indeed, Galen even advises those who wish to investigate the formation of embryos to begin by looking into the generation of plants. The above-mentioned analogy is certainly part of the motivation behind Galen’s counsel, but equally important is that plants are simpler, in terms of both their physiology and their psychology, and thus more perspicuous objects of study. This is what gives us "hope to discover among the plants [biological] administration in its pure and unadulterated form." What is surprising is the conception of vegetative generation and life that results for Neoplatonists. As I shall show here, they ultimately concluded that the vegetative souls of individual plants are not self-sufficient. That is to say, the dependence of individual plants on the earth, in terms of both their generation and their preservation, extends beyond mere nutritive needs into the psychological domain of their life activities. In order to see how they arrived at this surprising conclusion, it will be necessary to begin with a brief sketch of Neoplatonic embryological theory, as it can be found across a wide range of core Neoplatonic authors and texts. This theory may be encapsulated into four theses: (i) First, all Neoplatonists are one-seed theorists: there is no female seed. In this, the Neoplatonists were in full agreement with Peripatetic embryology and in opposition to the two-seed theories advanced by the Hippocratics and Galen, though this opposition remains only implicit, as they never even acknowledge the possibility of a female seed. (ii) Second, Neoplatonists universally understand the seed to be a collection of form-principles (logoi) corresponding to individual parts of the father (and by extension of the offspring). Since these form-principles are immaterial, they are wholly present in every part of the seed, allowing the seed to be completely homoiomerous. (iii) Third, these seminal form-principles are in a state of potentiality. (iv) Fourth, they must be led to a state of actuality by an external cause that possesses these same principles in actuality. This cause is generally identified with the nature of the mother, who is additionally responsible for supplying the matter in the form of menses. It is these final two theses that establish the Neoplatonic theory as an exciting new development in ancient embryology. On Aristotle’s one-seed theory, by contrast, the male seed serves as the formal and efficient cause of embryological development, requiring only matter from the female. Aristotle establishes the self-sufficiency of the male seed as an efficient cause by attributing actual motion to it. Even on Galen’s two-seed theory, where one might have expected the female to be granted greater causal efficacy in the embryological process, the male seed remains the sole efficient cause, with the female seed more or less demoted to serving as nourishment for the male seed. What is revolutionary, therefore, in the Neoplatonic account of embryology is its placing the female on equal footing with the male in terms of their causal contributions in embryology. This new conceptualization of the respective contributions of the male and female should be seen as resulting from the application of the Neoplatonic metaphysical framework of procession and reversion to embryology. Within this framework, the creation of an offspring consists of two distinct causal moments. In the first moment, procession, an inchoate offspring is generated that is a likeness of its progenitor but in a state of potentiality. The procession from the One, for example, results in the generation of the Pre-Intellect, which is still only potentially the Intellect. The second moment, reversion, is what accounts for this potentiality being led to a state of activity: by reversion, the Pre-Intellect becomes the genuine Intellect. When this framework is applied to embryology, the theses (iii) and (iv) above follow. The male’s emission of a seed is likened to procession, with the form-principles in the seed still being in a state of potentiality. This potentiality is led to actuality by the mother at conception and throughout the process of gestation. Thus, the male and the female are on a par insofar as each corresponds to one of the two moments of the One’s creative activity. [introduction p. 171-174] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/ElblvTuFCEVCpgN |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"913","_score":null,"_source":{"id":913,"authors_free":[{"id":1346,"entry_id":913,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":257,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wilberding, James","free_first_name":"James","free_last_name":"Wilberding","norm_person":{"id":257,"first_name":"James","last_name":"Wilberding","full_name":"Wilberding, James","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/143517465","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1347,"entry_id":913,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":47,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Marmodoro, Anna","free_first_name":"Anna","free_last_name":"Marmodoro","norm_person":{"id":47,"first_name":"Anna","last_name":"Marmodoro","full_name":"Marmodoro, Anna","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1043592326","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1348,"entry_id":913,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":48,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Prince, Brian","free_first_name":"Brian","free_last_name":"Prince","norm_person":{"id":48,"first_name":"Brian","last_name":"Prince","full_name":"Prince, Brian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Neoplatonists on the causes of vegetative life","main_title":{"title":"Neoplatonists on the causes of vegetative life"},"abstract":"In the Neoplatonism of late antiquity, there was an exciting and revolutionary development in the understanding of the aetiology involved in the generation of living things. Here, it will be argued that this extended all the way to the Neoplatonic understanding of the causes of vegetative life. In a way, this should come as no surprise. Hippocratics, Aristotle, and Galen all viewed the processes involved in the generation of plants as analogous to those in the generation of embryos. In fact, the embryo was commonly held to have the life-status of a plant, with the mother taking on the role of the earth, at least at the earliest stages of its generation. As a result, these thinkers saw the same causal models that govern the generation of embryos at work in the generation of plants. Indeed, Galen even advises those who wish to investigate the formation of embryos to begin by looking into the generation of plants. The above-mentioned analogy is certainly part of the motivation behind Galen\u2019s counsel, but equally important is that plants are simpler, in terms of both their physiology and their psychology, and thus more perspicuous objects of study. This is what gives us \"hope to discover among the plants [biological] administration in its pure and unadulterated form.\"\r\n\r\nWhat is surprising is the conception of vegetative generation and life that results for Neoplatonists. As I shall show here, they ultimately concluded that the vegetative souls of individual plants are not self-sufficient. That is to say, the dependence of individual plants on the earth, in terms of both their generation and their preservation, extends beyond mere nutritive needs into the psychological domain of their life activities. In order to see how they arrived at this surprising conclusion, it will be necessary to begin with a brief sketch of Neoplatonic embryological theory, as it can be found across a wide range of core Neoplatonic authors and texts. This theory may be encapsulated into four theses:\r\n\r\n(i) First, all Neoplatonists are one-seed theorists: there is no female seed. In this, the Neoplatonists were in full agreement with Peripatetic embryology and in opposition to the two-seed theories advanced by the Hippocratics and Galen, though this opposition remains only implicit, as they never even acknowledge the possibility of a female seed.\r\n\r\n(ii) Second, Neoplatonists universally understand the seed to be a collection of form-principles (logoi) corresponding to individual parts of the father (and by extension of the offspring). Since these form-principles are immaterial, they are wholly present in every part of the seed, allowing the seed to be completely homoiomerous.\r\n\r\n(iii) Third, these seminal form-principles are in a state of potentiality.\r\n\r\n(iv) Fourth, they must be led to a state of actuality by an external cause that possesses these same principles in actuality. This cause is generally identified with the nature of the mother, who is additionally responsible for supplying the matter in the form of menses.\r\n\r\nIt is these final two theses that establish the Neoplatonic theory as an exciting new development in ancient embryology. On Aristotle\u2019s one-seed theory, by contrast, the male seed serves as the formal and efficient cause of embryological development, requiring only matter from the female. Aristotle establishes the self-sufficiency of the male seed as an efficient cause by attributing actual motion to it. Even on Galen\u2019s two-seed theory, where one might have expected the female to be granted greater causal efficacy in the embryological process, the male seed remains the sole efficient cause, with the female seed more or less demoted to serving as nourishment for the male seed.\r\n\r\nWhat is revolutionary, therefore, in the Neoplatonic account of embryology is its placing the female on equal footing with the male in terms of their causal contributions in embryology. This new conceptualization of the respective contributions of the male and female should be seen as resulting from the application of the Neoplatonic metaphysical framework of procession and reversion to embryology. Within this framework, the creation of an offspring consists of two distinct causal moments. In the first moment, procession, an inchoate offspring is generated that is a likeness of its progenitor but in a state of potentiality. The procession from the One, for example, results in the generation of the Pre-Intellect, which is still only potentially the Intellect. The second moment, reversion, is what accounts for this potentiality being led to a state of activity: by reversion, the Pre-Intellect becomes the genuine Intellect.\r\n\r\nWhen this framework is applied to embryology, the theses (iii) and (iv) above follow. The male\u2019s emission of a seed is likened to procession, with the form-principles in the seed still being in a state of potentiality. This potentiality is led to actuality by the mother at conception and throughout the process of gestation. Thus, the male and the female are on a par insofar as each corresponds to one of the two moments of the One\u2019s creative activity. [introduction p. 171-174]","btype":2,"date":"2015","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ElblvTuFCEVCpgN","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":257,"full_name":"Wilberding, James","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":47,"full_name":"Marmodoro, Anna","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":48,"full_name":"Prince, Brian","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":913,"section_of":155,"pages":"171-185","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":155,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Causation and Creation in Late Antiquity","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Marmodoro\/Prince2015","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2015","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2015","abstract":"Written by a group of leading scholars, this unique collection of essays investigates the views of both pagan and Christian philosophers on causation and the creation of the cosmos. Structured in two parts, the volume first looks at divine agency and how late antique thinkers, including the Stoics, Plotinus, Porphyry, Simplicius, Philoponus and Gregory of Nyssa, tackled questions such as: is the cosmos eternal? Did it come from nothing or from something pre-existing? How was it caused to come into existence? Is it material or immaterial? The second part looks at questions concerning human agency and responsibility, including the problem of evil and the nature of will, considering thinkers such as Plotinus, Porphyry, Proclus and Augustine. Highlighting some of the most important and interesting aspects of these philosophical debates, the volume will be of great interest to upper-level students and scholars of philosophy, classics, theology and ancient history. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/lpl3CeEXUUAj1hP","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":155,"pubplace":"Cambridge","publisher":"Cambridge University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Neoplatonists on the causes of vegetative life"]}
| Title | Self-motion and reflection: Hermias and Proclus on the harmony of Plato and Aristotle on the soul |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2012 |
| Published in | Neoplatonism and the Philosophy of Nature |
| Pages | 44-67 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Menn, Stephen |
| Editor(s) | Horn, Christoph , Wilberding, James |
| Translator(s) |
A central puzzle of recent scholarship on late Neoplatonism has been to understand how what Richard Sorabji has called a ‘perfectly crazy position', the thesis of die harmony of Plato and Aristode, nonetheless ‘proved philosophically fruitful' — whereas, for instance, the same philosophers' perfectly crazy thesis of the harmony of Plato and Homer did not. In this chapter, starting from Hermias' commentary on a passage of the Phaedrus which poses a difficulty for harmonization, I hope to shed some light on what the late Neoplatonists were asserting when they asserted the harmony of Plato and Aristotle, in general or on some particular issue (here the immortality of soul); on why they were inclined to make such assertions o f harmony, and what they saw themselves as needing to do in order to defend them: and on why,in the process of defending them, they were led to conceptual clarifications which were in some cases of longstanding benefit to the conceptual stoic of philosophy. I will point to a sur prising case of such a conceptual benefit resulting from Neoplatonic interpretations of this Pimdtus passage and its parallels in the Timaeus. While my central example will be from Hermias, the themes I am interested in ate not peculiar to him, and I will also make use of other late Neoplatonic authors, especially Proclus. Hermias, and Produs, to recall, were both students of Syrianus;at one point in Hermias' commentary 'our companion Proclus' raises an aporia, and ‘the philosopher'— that is, ‘the professor — replies (92,6-10 Couvrcur), which seems to imply that the commentary in general was drawn by Hermias from Syrianus lectures. [Introduction, pp. 44 f.] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/EgP6g0IaubwrLcL |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1164","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1164,"authors_free":[{"id":1742,"entry_id":1164,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":255,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Menn, Stephen","free_first_name":"Stephen","free_last_name":"Menn","norm_person":{"id":255,"first_name":"Stephen","last_name":"Menn","full_name":"Menn, Stephen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/174092768","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2081,"entry_id":1164,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":256,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Horn, Christoph","free_first_name":"Christoph","free_last_name":"Horn","norm_person":{"id":256,"first_name":"Christoph","last_name":"Horn","full_name":"Horn, Christoph","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115589406","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2082,"entry_id":1164,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":257,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wilberding, James","free_first_name":"James","free_last_name":"Wilberding","norm_person":{"id":257,"first_name":"James","last_name":"Wilberding","full_name":"Wilberding, James","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/143517465","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Self-motion and reflection: Hermias and Proclus on the harmony of Plato and Aristotle on the soul","main_title":{"title":"Self-motion and reflection: Hermias and Proclus on the harmony of Plato and Aristotle on the soul"},"abstract":"A central puzzle of recent scholarship on late Neoplatonism has been to understand how what Richard Sorabji has called a \u2018perfectly crazy position', the thesis of die harmony of Plato and Aristode, nonetheless \u2018proved philosophically fruitful' \u2014 \r\nwhereas, for instance, the same philosophers' perfectly crazy thesis of the harmony of Plato and Homer did not. In this chapter, starting from Hermias' commentary on a passage of the Phaedrus which poses a difficulty for harmonization, I hope to shed some light on what the late Neoplatonists were asserting when they asserted the harmony \r\nof Plato and Aristotle, in general or on some particular issue (here the immortality of soul); on why they were inclined to make such assertions o f harmony, and what they saw themselves as needing to do in order to defend them: and on why,in the process of defending them, they were led to conceptual clarifications which were in some cases of longstanding benefit to the conceptual stoic of philosophy. I will point to a sur\u00ad\r\nprising case of such a conceptual benefit resulting from Neoplatonic interpretations of this Pimdtus passage and its parallels in the Timaeus. While my central example will be from Hermias, the themes I am interested in ate not peculiar to him, and I will also \r\nmake use of other late Neoplatonic authors, especially Proclus. Hermias, and Produs, to recall, were both students of Syrianus;at one point in Hermias' commentary 'our companion Proclus' raises an aporia, and \u2018the philosopher'\u2014 that is, \u2018the professor \u2014 replies (92,6-10 Couvrcur), which seems to imply that the commentary in general was drawn by Hermias from Syrianus lectures. [Introduction, pp. 44 f.]","btype":2,"date":"2012","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/EgP6g0IaubwrLcL","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":255,"full_name":"Menn, Stephen","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":256,"full_name":"Horn, Christoph","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":257,"full_name":"Wilberding, James","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1164,"section_of":299,"pages":"44-67","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":299,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Neoplatonism and the Philosophy of Nature","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Horn\/Wilberding2012","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2012","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2012","abstract":"Despite Platonism\u2019s unquestioned claim to being one of the most influential movements in the history of philosophy, for a long time the conventional wisdom was that Platonists of late antiquity\u2014or Neoplatonists\u2014were so focused on other-worldly metaphysics that they simply neglected any serious study of the sensible world, which after all is \u2018merely\u2019 an image of the intelligible world, and only recently has this conventional wisdom begun to be dispelled. In fact, precisely because these thinkers did see the sensible world as an image of the intelligible world, they devoted much time and energy to understanding its inner workings. Thus we find Neoplatonists writing on embryology, physiology, meteorology, astronomy, and much else. This volume collects essays by leading international scholars in the field that shed new light on how these thinkers sought to understand and explain nature and natural phenomena. It is thematically divided into two parts, with the first part\u2014\u2018The general metaphysics of Nature\u2019\u2014directed at the explication of central Neoplatonic metaphysical doctrines and their relation to the natural world, and the second part\u2014\u2019Platonic approaches to individual sciences\u2019\u2014showing how these same doctrines play out in individual natural sciences such as elemental physics, geography, and biology. Together these essays show that a serious examination of Neoplatonic natural philosophy has far-reaching consequences for our general understanding of the metaphysics of Platonism, as well as for our evaluation of their place in the history of science. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/eoRoURIG3JhMB6J","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":299,"pubplace":"Oxford","publisher":"Oxford University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Self-motion and reflection: Hermias and Proclus on the harmony of Plato and Aristotle on the soul"]}