| Title | John Philoponus' criticism of Aristotle's theory of aether |
| Type | Monograph |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1988 |
| Publication Place | Berlin – New York |
| Publisher | de Gruyter |
| Series | Peripatoi |
| Volume | 16 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Wildberg, Christian |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| The foremost aim of the contra Aristotelem is the denial of the thesis that the world is eternal. Apart from his rejection of Aristotle's argu-ments for the eternity of motion and time,21 Philoponus' criticism focuses on Aristotle's cosmology, in particular the seminal theory of aether. In books I —V of the original treatise Philoponus cites the arguments put forward in De cáelo 12 — 4 and attempts to refute them systematically.22 Due to the fragmentation of the treatise his objections can no longer be considered within their original context, and quite often the significance of particular points against Aristotle is not im-mediately obvious. In order to do Philoponus' arguments justice, one must analyse Aristotle's theory of aether before one embarks on commeriting on Philoponus' critique. Consequently, the present study con-sists of two major sections. The first part discusses the methodology and arguments of Aristotle's presentation of the theory of aether. Its aim is to understand and evaluate this important episode of ancient science within the framework of Aristotle's general physical theory. The second part deals with Philoponus' objections to the postu-lation of aether. The commentary attempts to evaluate the significance of the fragments of books I —V as a critique of Aristotle and, at the same time, to cast light on their relevance in the context of Philoponus' alternative cosmological theory. The essay concludes with a summary comparison of Aristotle's and Philoponus' cosmological tenets and a discussion of the importance of the contra Aristotelem when viewed as a stage in Philoponus' continuous doctrinal development which culminates in the application of impetus theory to the curvilinear movements of the heavens. [Introduction p. 4-5] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/J9OJ5u7Pb62D7np |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"187","_score":null,"_source":{"id":187,"authors_free":[{"id":243,"entry_id":187,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":360,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wildberg, Christian","free_first_name":"Christian","free_last_name":"Wildberg","norm_person":{"id":360,"first_name":"Christian","last_name":"Wildberg","full_name":"Wildberg, Christian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/139018964","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"John Philoponus' criticism of Aristotle's theory of aether","main_title":{"title":"John Philoponus' criticism of Aristotle's theory of aether"},"abstract":"The foremost aim of the contra Aristotelem is the denial of the thesis that the world is eternal. Apart from his rejection of Aristotle's argu-ments for the eternity of motion and time,21 Philoponus' criticism focuses on Aristotle's cosmology, in particular the seminal theory of aether. In books I \u2014V of the original treatise Philoponus cites the arguments put forward in De c\u00e1elo 12 \u2014 4 and attempts to refute them systematically.22 Due to the fragmentation of the treatise his objections can no longer be considered within their original context, and quite often the significance of particular points against Aristotle is not im-mediately obvious. In order to do Philoponus' arguments justice, one must analyse Aristotle's theory of aether before one embarks on commeriting on Philoponus' critique. Consequently, the present study con-sists of two major sections. The first part discusses the methodology and arguments of Aristotle's presentation of the theory of aether. Its aim is to understand and evaluate this important episode of ancient science within the framework of Aristotle's general physical theory. The second part deals with Philoponus' objections to the postu-lation of aether. The commentary attempts to evaluate the significance of the fragments of books I \u2014V as a critique of Aristotle and, at the same time, to cast light on their relevance in the context of Philoponus' alternative cosmological theory. The essay concludes with a summary comparison of Aristotle's and Philoponus' cosmological tenets and a discussion of the importance of the contra Aristotelem when viewed as a stage in Philoponus' continuous doctrinal development which culminates in the application of impetus theory to the curvilinear movements of the heavens. [Introduction p. 4-5]","btype":1,"date":"1988","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/J9OJ5u7Pb62D7np","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":360,"full_name":"Wildberg, Christian","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":187,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi ","volume":"16","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[1988]}
| Title | Prolegomena to the Study of Philoponus' contra Aristotelem |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1987 |
| Published in | Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science |
| Pages | 197-209 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Wildberg, Christian |
| Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
| Translator(s) |
| Judging from the number and content of his commentaries, Philoponus was a thinker in the Aristotelian tradition. One of his major achievements lies in the fact that as a commentator he accepted and developed the heritage of his teacher Ammonius. For that reason alone it is remarkable that he composed a treatise which attacked vital topics of Aristotle’s philosophy with little compromise. Although it is true that throughout Antiquity many philosophers ventured to criticise the great Aristotle, one may agree that Philoponus did so, as Cesare Cremonini put it in 1616, ‘more sharply than anyone’ (acerrime omnium).' Where does this attack fit into the context of Philoponus’doctrinal development? No doubt his outspoken critique of Aristotle in the de Aetemitate Mundi contra Aristotelem somehow swayed Philoponus to desert the philosophical and join the theological camp. But the story is probably more complex. The general point of dissent was, as the title indicates, the doctrine of the eternity of the world. Being a Christian, Philoponus perhaps possessed a particular motivation for launching his attack - as a feat of praeparatio evangélica. This fact has been sufficiently recognised and appreciated. Less appreciated and studied, however, has been the philosophical side, i.e. the actual argument and structure of the treatise in question. Since it has not survived the content must be reconstructed from a number of substantial fragments found mainly in the commentaries of Philoponus’ adversary Simplicius. An adequate treatment of the double controversy Simplicius v Philoponus v Aristotle would fill a volume on its own and cannot be the subject of this chapter.2 Instead, I will attempt to revise apparently firmly established views about the treatise, in particular its composition and date. This, it is hoped, may lead to a revised view of that treatise and at the same time encourage a more advanced study of Philoponus’ doctrinal development in general. [introduction p. 197-198] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/dbFxqr9z9aZi48i |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"430","_score":null,"_source":{"id":430,"authors_free":[{"id":580,"entry_id":430,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":360,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wildberg, Christian","free_first_name":"Christian","free_last_name":"Wildberg","norm_person":{"id":360,"first_name":"Christian","last_name":"Wildberg","full_name":"Wildberg, Christian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/139018964","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":581,"entry_id":430,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Prolegomena to the Study of Philoponus' contra Aristotelem","main_title":{"title":"Prolegomena to the Study of Philoponus' contra Aristotelem"},"abstract":"Judging from the number and content of his commentaries, Philoponus was a thinker in the Aristotelian tradition. One of his major achievements lies in \r\nthe fact that as a commentator he accepted and developed the heritage of his teacher Ammonius. For that reason alone it is remarkable that he composed a treatise which attacked vital topics of Aristotle\u2019s philosophy with little compromise. Although it is true that throughout Antiquity many philosophers ventured to criticise the great Aristotle, one may agree that Philoponus did so, as Cesare Cremonini put it in 1616, \u2018more sharply than anyone\u2019 (acerrime omnium).' Where does this attack fit into the context of Philoponus\u2019doctrinal development? No doubt his outspoken critique of Aristotle in the de Aetemitate Mundi contra Aristotelem somehow swayed Philoponus to desert the philosophical and join the theological camp. But the story is probably more complex. The general point of dissent was, as the title indicates, the doctrine of the eternity of the world. Being a Christian, Philoponus perhaps possessed a \r\nparticular motivation for launching his attack - as a feat of praeparatio evang\u00e9lica. This fact has been sufficiently recognised and appreciated. Less appreciated and studied, however, has been the philosophical side, i.e. the actual argument and structure of the treatise in question. Since it has not survived the content must be reconstructed from a number of substantial fragments found mainly in the commentaries of Philoponus\u2019 adversary Simplicius. An adequate treatment of the double controversy Simplicius v Philoponus v Aristotle would fill a volume on its own and cannot be the subject of this chapter.2 Instead, I will attempt to revise apparently firmly established views about the treatise, in particular its composition and date. This, it is hoped, may lead to a revised view of that treatise and at the same time encourage a more advanced study of Philoponus\u2019 doctrinal development in general. [introduction p. 197-198]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/dbFxqr9z9aZi48i","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":360,"full_name":"Wildberg, Christian","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":430,"section_of":1383,"pages":"197-209","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1383,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sorabij1987d","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"All the chapters in this book are new, except for the inaugural lecture (Chapter 9), which I apologise for reprinting virtually unrevised and with the original lecture context still apparent. It seemed desirable, however, that so crucial a part ofthe controversy should be represented. The collection originated in a conference on Philoponus held at the Institute of Classical Studies in London in June 1983, which provided an opportunity for interested parties to pool knowledge from the many different disciplines that are relevant to his work. Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 6 are drawn from the conference, while two other conference papers, those of Henry Blumenthal and Richard Sorabji, are being incorporated into books in preparation (see Bibliography). Sorabji's main suggestions, however, are included in Chapter I in the discussion of matter and extension (pp 18 and 23). The remairnng chapters, apart from the inaugural lecture, were solicited or written for the volume, two of them (5 and 12) having been delivered first at a seminar on Ancient Science at the Institute of Classical Studies. [preface, p. ix-x]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/buhMZZl0djmIx9v","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1383,"pubplace":"Ithaca, New York","publisher":"Cornell University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"1","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
| Title | Philoponus: Against Aristotle on the Eternity of the World |
| Type | Monograph |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1987 |
| Publication Place | London |
| Publisher | Duckworth |
| Series | Ancient Commentators on Aristotle |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Philoponos, Johannes |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) | Wildberg, Christian(Wildberg, Christian) . |
| Philoponus' treatise Against Aristotle on the Eternity of the World, an attack on Aristotle's astronomy and theology is concerned mainly with the eternity and divinity of the fifth element, or 'quintessence', of which Aristotle took the stars to be composed. Pagans and Christians were divided on whether the world had a beginning, and on whether a belief that the heavens were divine was a mark of religion. Philoponus claimed on behalf of Christianity that the universe was not eternal. His most spectacular arguments, where wrung paradox out of the pagan belief in an infinite past, have been wrongly credited by historians of science to a period 700 years later. The treatise was to influence Islamic, Jewish, Byzantine and Latin thought, though the fifth element was defended against Philoponus even beyond the time of Copernicus. The influence of the treatise was not easy to trace before the fragments were assembled. Dr. Wildberg has brought them together for the first time and provided a summary which makes coherent sense of the whole. He has also studied a Syriac fragment, which reveals that the treatise originally contained an explicitly theological section on the Christian expectation of a new heaven and a new earth. [Author’s abstract] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/8Iylo91nPxiKHhJ |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"42","_score":null,"_source":{"id":42,"authors_free":[{"id":49,"entry_id":42,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":439,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Philoponos, Johannes","free_first_name":"Johannes","free_last_name":"Philoponos","norm_person":{"id":439,"first_name":"Johannes","last_name":"Philoponos","full_name":"Philoponos, Johannes ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2296,"entry_id":42,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":360,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Wildberg, Christian","free_first_name":"Christian","free_last_name":"Wildberg","norm_person":{"id":360,"first_name":"Christian","last_name":"Wildberg","full_name":"Wildberg, Christian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/139018964","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Philoponus: Against Aristotle on the Eternity of the World","main_title":{"title":"Philoponus: Against Aristotle on the Eternity of the World"},"abstract":"Philoponus' treatise Against Aristotle on the Eternity of the World, an attack on Aristotle's astronomy and theology is concerned mainly with the eternity and divinity of the fifth element, or 'quintessence', of which Aristotle took the stars to be composed. Pagans and Christians were divided on whether the world had a beginning, and on whether a belief that the heavens were divine was a mark of religion. Philoponus claimed on behalf of Christianity that the universe was not eternal. His most spectacular arguments, where wrung paradox out of the pagan belief in an infinite past, have been wrongly credited by historians of science to a period 700 years later. The treatise was to influence Islamic, Jewish, Byzantine and Latin thought, though the fifth element was defended against Philoponus even beyond the time of Copernicus. The influence of the treatise was not easy to trace before the fragments were assembled. Dr. Wildberg has brought them together for the first time and provided a summary which makes coherent sense of the whole. He has also studied a Syriac fragment, which reveals that the treatise originally contained an explicitly theological section on the Christian expectation of a new heaven and a new earth. [Author\u2019s abstract]","btype":1,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/8Iylo91nPxiKHhJ","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":439,"full_name":"Philoponos, Johannes ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":360,"full_name":"Wildberg, Christian","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}}],"book":{"id":42,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
| Title | John Philoponus' criticism of Aristotle's theory of aether |
| Type | Monograph |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1988 |
| Publication Place | Berlin – New York |
| Publisher | de Gruyter |
| Series | Peripatoi |
| Volume | 16 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Wildberg, Christian |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
The foremost aim of the contra Aristotelem is the denial of the thesis that the world is eternal. Apart from his rejection of Aristotle's argu-ments for the eternity of motion and time,21 Philoponus' criticism focuses on Aristotle's cosmology, in particular the seminal theory of aether. In books I —V of the original treatise Philoponus cites the arguments put forward in De cáelo 12 — 4 and attempts to refute them systematically.22 Due to the fragmentation of the treatise his objections can no longer be considered within their original context, and quite often the significance of particular points against Aristotle is not im-mediately obvious. In order to do Philoponus' arguments justice, one must analyse Aristotle's theory of aether before one embarks on commeriting on Philoponus' critique. Consequently, the present study con-sists of two major sections. The first part discusses the methodology and arguments of Aristotle's presentation of the theory of aether. Its aim is to understand and evaluate this important episode of ancient science within the framework of Aristotle's general physical theory. The second part deals with Philoponus' objections to the postu-lation of aether. The commentary attempts to evaluate the significance of the fragments of books I —V as a critique of Aristotle and, at the same time, to cast light on their relevance in the context of Philoponus' alternative cosmological theory. The essay concludes with a summary comparison of Aristotle's and Philoponus' cosmological tenets and a discussion of the importance of the contra Aristotelem when viewed as a stage in Philoponus' continuous doctrinal development which culminates in the application of impetus theory to the curvilinear movements of the heavens. [Introduction p. 4-5] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/J9OJ5u7Pb62D7np |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"187","_score":null,"_source":{"id":187,"authors_free":[{"id":243,"entry_id":187,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":360,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wildberg, Christian","free_first_name":"Christian","free_last_name":"Wildberg","norm_person":{"id":360,"first_name":"Christian","last_name":"Wildberg","full_name":"Wildberg, Christian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/139018964","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"John Philoponus' criticism of Aristotle's theory of aether","main_title":{"title":"John Philoponus' criticism of Aristotle's theory of aether"},"abstract":"The foremost aim of the contra Aristotelem is the denial of the thesis that the world is eternal. Apart from his rejection of Aristotle's argu-ments for the eternity of motion and time,21 Philoponus' criticism focuses on Aristotle's cosmology, in particular the seminal theory of aether. In books I \u2014V of the original treatise Philoponus cites the arguments put forward in De c\u00e1elo 12 \u2014 4 and attempts to refute them systematically.22 Due to the fragmentation of the treatise his objections can no longer be considered within their original context, and quite often the significance of particular points against Aristotle is not im-mediately obvious. In order to do Philoponus' arguments justice, one must analyse Aristotle's theory of aether before one embarks on commeriting on Philoponus' critique. Consequently, the present study con-sists of two major sections. The first part discusses the methodology and arguments of Aristotle's presentation of the theory of aether. Its aim is to understand and evaluate this important episode of ancient science within the framework of Aristotle's general physical theory. The second part deals with Philoponus' objections to the postu-lation of aether. The commentary attempts to evaluate the significance of the fragments of books I \u2014V as a critique of Aristotle and, at the same time, to cast light on their relevance in the context of Philoponus' alternative cosmological theory. The essay concludes with a summary comparison of Aristotle's and Philoponus' cosmological tenets and a discussion of the importance of the contra Aristotelem when viewed as a stage in Philoponus' continuous doctrinal development which culminates in the application of impetus theory to the curvilinear movements of the heavens. [Introduction p. 4-5]","btype":1,"date":"1988","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/J9OJ5u7Pb62D7np","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":360,"full_name":"Wildberg, Christian","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":187,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi ","volume":"16","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["John Philoponus' criticism of Aristotle's theory of aether"]}
| Title | Philoponus: Against Aristotle on the Eternity of the World |
| Type | Monograph |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1987 |
| Publication Place | London |
| Publisher | Duckworth |
| Series | Ancient Commentators on Aristotle |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Philoponos, Johannes |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) | Wildberg, Christian(Wildberg, Christian) |
Philoponus' treatise Against Aristotle on the Eternity of the World, an attack on Aristotle's astronomy and theology is concerned mainly with the eternity and divinity of the fifth element, or 'quintessence', of which Aristotle took the stars to be composed. Pagans and Christians were divided on whether the world had a beginning, and on whether a belief that the heavens were divine was a mark of religion. Philoponus claimed on behalf of Christianity that the universe was not eternal. His most spectacular arguments, where wrung paradox out of the pagan belief in an infinite past, have been wrongly credited by historians of science to a period 700 years later. The treatise was to influence Islamic, Jewish, Byzantine and Latin thought, though the fifth element was defended against Philoponus even beyond the time of Copernicus. The influence of the treatise was not easy to trace before the fragments were assembled. Dr. Wildberg has brought them together for the first time and provided a summary which makes coherent sense of the whole. He has also studied a Syriac fragment, which reveals that the treatise originally contained an explicitly theological section on the Christian expectation of a new heaven and a new earth. [Author’s abstract] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/8Iylo91nPxiKHhJ |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"42","_score":null,"_source":{"id":42,"authors_free":[{"id":49,"entry_id":42,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":439,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Philoponos, Johannes","free_first_name":"Johannes","free_last_name":"Philoponos","norm_person":{"id":439,"first_name":"Johannes","last_name":"Philoponos","full_name":"Philoponos, Johannes ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2296,"entry_id":42,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":360,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Wildberg, Christian","free_first_name":"Christian","free_last_name":"Wildberg","norm_person":{"id":360,"first_name":"Christian","last_name":"Wildberg","full_name":"Wildberg, Christian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/139018964","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Philoponus: Against Aristotle on the Eternity of the World","main_title":{"title":"Philoponus: Against Aristotle on the Eternity of the World"},"abstract":"Philoponus' treatise Against Aristotle on the Eternity of the World, an attack on Aristotle's astronomy and theology is concerned mainly with the eternity and divinity of the fifth element, or 'quintessence', of which Aristotle took the stars to be composed. Pagans and Christians were divided on whether the world had a beginning, and on whether a belief that the heavens were divine was a mark of religion. Philoponus claimed on behalf of Christianity that the universe was not eternal. His most spectacular arguments, where wrung paradox out of the pagan belief in an infinite past, have been wrongly credited by historians of science to a period 700 years later. The treatise was to influence Islamic, Jewish, Byzantine and Latin thought, though the fifth element was defended against Philoponus even beyond the time of Copernicus. The influence of the treatise was not easy to trace before the fragments were assembled. Dr. Wildberg has brought them together for the first time and provided a summary which makes coherent sense of the whole. He has also studied a Syriac fragment, which reveals that the treatise originally contained an explicitly theological section on the Christian expectation of a new heaven and a new earth. [Author\u2019s abstract]","btype":1,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/8Iylo91nPxiKHhJ","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":439,"full_name":"Philoponos, Johannes ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":360,"full_name":"Wildberg, Christian","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}}],"book":{"id":42,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Philoponus: Against Aristotle on the Eternity of the World"]}
| Title | Prolegomena to the Study of Philoponus' contra Aristotelem |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1987 |
| Published in | Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science |
| Pages | 197-209 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Wildberg, Christian |
| Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
| Translator(s) |
Judging from the number and content of his commentaries, Philoponus was a thinker in the Aristotelian tradition. One of his major achievements lies in the fact that as a commentator he accepted and developed the heritage of his teacher Ammonius. For that reason alone it is remarkable that he composed a treatise which attacked vital topics of Aristotle’s philosophy with little compromise. Although it is true that throughout Antiquity many philosophers ventured to criticise the great Aristotle, one may agree that Philoponus did so, as Cesare Cremonini put it in 1616, ‘more sharply than anyone’ (acerrime omnium).' Where does this attack fit into the context of Philoponus’doctrinal development? No doubt his outspoken critique of Aristotle in the de Aetemitate Mundi contra Aristotelem somehow swayed Philoponus to desert the philosophical and join the theological camp. But the story is probably more complex. The general point of dissent was, as the title indicates, the doctrine of the eternity of the world. Being a Christian, Philoponus perhaps possessed a particular motivation for launching his attack - as a feat of praeparatio evangélica. This fact has been sufficiently recognised and appreciated. Less appreciated and studied, however, has been the philosophical side, i.e. the actual argument and structure of the treatise in question. Since it has not survived the content must be reconstructed from a number of substantial fragments found mainly in the commentaries of Philoponus’ adversary Simplicius. An adequate treatment of the double controversy Simplicius v Philoponus v Aristotle would fill a volume on its own and cannot be the subject of this chapter.2 Instead, I will attempt to revise apparently firmly established views about the treatise, in particular its composition and date. This, it is hoped, may lead to a revised view of that treatise and at the same time encourage a more advanced study of Philoponus’ doctrinal development in general. [introduction p. 197-198] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/dbFxqr9z9aZi48i |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"430","_score":null,"_source":{"id":430,"authors_free":[{"id":580,"entry_id":430,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":360,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wildberg, Christian","free_first_name":"Christian","free_last_name":"Wildberg","norm_person":{"id":360,"first_name":"Christian","last_name":"Wildberg","full_name":"Wildberg, Christian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/139018964","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":581,"entry_id":430,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Prolegomena to the Study of Philoponus' contra Aristotelem","main_title":{"title":"Prolegomena to the Study of Philoponus' contra Aristotelem"},"abstract":"Judging from the number and content of his commentaries, Philoponus was a thinker in the Aristotelian tradition. One of his major achievements lies in \r\nthe fact that as a commentator he accepted and developed the heritage of his teacher Ammonius. For that reason alone it is remarkable that he composed a treatise which attacked vital topics of Aristotle\u2019s philosophy with little compromise. Although it is true that throughout Antiquity many philosophers ventured to criticise the great Aristotle, one may agree that Philoponus did so, as Cesare Cremonini put it in 1616, \u2018more sharply than anyone\u2019 (acerrime omnium).' Where does this attack fit into the context of Philoponus\u2019doctrinal development? No doubt his outspoken critique of Aristotle in the de Aetemitate Mundi contra Aristotelem somehow swayed Philoponus to desert the philosophical and join the theological camp. But the story is probably more complex. The general point of dissent was, as the title indicates, the doctrine of the eternity of the world. Being a Christian, Philoponus perhaps possessed a \r\nparticular motivation for launching his attack - as a feat of praeparatio evang\u00e9lica. This fact has been sufficiently recognised and appreciated. Less appreciated and studied, however, has been the philosophical side, i.e. the actual argument and structure of the treatise in question. Since it has not survived the content must be reconstructed from a number of substantial fragments found mainly in the commentaries of Philoponus\u2019 adversary Simplicius. An adequate treatment of the double controversy Simplicius v Philoponus v Aristotle would fill a volume on its own and cannot be the subject of this chapter.2 Instead, I will attempt to revise apparently firmly established views about the treatise, in particular its composition and date. This, it is hoped, may lead to a revised view of that treatise and at the same time encourage a more advanced study of Philoponus\u2019 doctrinal development in general. [introduction p. 197-198]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/dbFxqr9z9aZi48i","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":360,"full_name":"Wildberg, Christian","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":430,"section_of":1383,"pages":"197-209","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1383,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sorabij1987d","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"All the chapters in this book are new, except for the inaugural lecture (Chapter 9), which I apologise for reprinting virtually unrevised and with the original lecture context still apparent. It seemed desirable, however, that so crucial a part ofthe controversy should be represented. The collection originated in a conference on Philoponus held at the Institute of Classical Studies in London in June 1983, which provided an opportunity for interested parties to pool knowledge from the many different disciplines that are relevant to his work. Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 6 are drawn from the conference, while two other conference papers, those of Henry Blumenthal and Richard Sorabji, are being incorporated into books in preparation (see Bibliography). Sorabji's main suggestions, however, are included in Chapter I in the discussion of matter and extension (pp 18 and 23). The remairnng chapters, apart from the inaugural lecture, were solicited or written for the volume, two of them (5 and 12) having been delivered first at a seminar on Ancient Science at the Institute of Classical Studies. [preface, p. ix-x]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/buhMZZl0djmIx9v","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1383,"pubplace":"Ithaca, New York","publisher":"Cornell University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"1","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Prolegomena to the Study of Philoponus' contra Aristotelem"]}