| Title | Simplicius, On Aristotle ‘Categories 5-6’ |
| Type | Monograph |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2013 |
| Publication Place | London |
| Publisher | Bloomsbury |
| Series | Ancient Commentators on Aristotle |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Simplicius |
| Editor(s) | Haas, Frans A. J. de , Fleet, Barrie |
| Translator(s) | Haas, Frans A. J. de(de Haas, Frans A. J.) , Fleet, Barrie(Fleet, Barrie) , |
| Chapters 5 and 6 of Aristotle's Categories describe his first two categories, Substance and Quantity. It is usually taken that Plotinus attacked Aristotle's Categories, but that Porphyry and Iamblichus restored it to the curriculum once and for all. Nonetheless, the introduction to this text stresses how much of the defence of Aristotle Porphyry was able to draw out of Plotinus' critical discussion. Simplicius' commentary is our most comprehensive account of the debate on the validity of Aristotle's Categories. One subject discussed by Simplicius in these chapters is where the differentia of a species (eg the rationality of humans) fits into the scheme of categories. Another is why Aristotle elevates the category of Quantity to second place, above the category of Quality. Further, de Haas shows how Simplicius distinguishes different kinds of universal order to solve some of the problems. |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/eW6iLytuM3BoZAe |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"109","_score":null,"_source":{"id":109,"authors_free":[{"id":129,"entry_id":109,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":153,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Haas, Frans A. J. de","free_first_name":"Frans A. J.","free_last_name":"Haas, de","norm_person":{"id":153,"first_name":"Frans A. J.","last_name":"de Haas","full_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/128837020","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":130,"entry_id":109,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":117,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Fleet, Barrie","free_first_name":"Barrie","free_last_name":"Fleet","norm_person":{"id":117,"first_name":"Barrie","last_name":"Fleet","full_name":"Fleet, Barrie","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/172866235","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2258,"entry_id":109,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":153,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Haas, Frans A. J. de","free_first_name":"Frans A. J.","free_last_name":"Haas, de","norm_person":{"id":153,"first_name":"Frans A. J.","last_name":"de Haas","full_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/128837020","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2259,"entry_id":109,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":117,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Fleet, Barrie","free_first_name":"Barrie","free_last_name":"Fleet","norm_person":{"id":117,"first_name":"Barrie","last_name":"Fleet","full_name":"Fleet, Barrie","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/172866235","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2260,"entry_id":109,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":62,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Simplicius ","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":62,"first_name":"Cilicius","last_name":"Simplicius ","full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118642421","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius, On Aristotle \u2018Categories 5-6\u2019","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius, On Aristotle \u2018Categories 5-6\u2019"},"abstract":"Chapters 5 and 6 of Aristotle's Categories describe his first two categories, Substance and Quantity. It is usually taken that Plotinus attacked Aristotle's Categories, but that Porphyry and Iamblichus restored it to the curriculum once and for all. Nonetheless, the introduction to this text stresses how much of the defence of Aristotle Porphyry was able to draw out of Plotinus' critical discussion. Simplicius' commentary is our most comprehensive account of the debate on the validity of Aristotle's Categories. One subject discussed by Simplicius in these chapters is where the differentia of a species (eg the rationality of humans) fits into the scheme of categories. Another is why Aristotle elevates the category of Quantity to second place, above the category of Quality. Further, de Haas shows how Simplicius distinguishes different kinds of universal order to solve some of the problems.","btype":1,"date":"2013","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/eW6iLytuM3BoZAe","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":153,"full_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":117,"full_name":"Fleet, Barrie","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":153,"full_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":117,"full_name":"Fleet, Barrie","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":62,"full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":109,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Bloomsbury","series":"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2013]}
| Title | Modifications of the method of inquiry in Aristotle’s Physics I.1. An essay on the dynamics of the ancient commentary tradition |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2002 |
| Published in | The dynamics of Aristotelian natural philosophy from Antiquity to the seventeenth century |
| Pages | 31-56 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Haas, Frans A. J. de |
| Editor(s) | Leijenhorst, Cees , Lüthy, Christoph , Thijssen, J. M. M. H. |
| Translator(s) |
| In this essay, Frans A.J. de Haas explores the commentary tradition on Aristotle's Physics, focusing on the first chapter, which is considered pivotal for Aristotelian natural philosophy. The chapter sets the stage for Aristotle's principles of science and the method of scientific inquiry. However, the twenty-two lines of the chapter have not lived up to these high expectations, leading to a bewildering variety of interpretations in the commentary tradition. The essay aims to understand the development of the commentary tradition and the factors that influenced the various interpretations. De Haas presents a method of charting a commentator's philosophical environment to explain their modifications of Aristotle's doctrine. He examines the interpretation of Physics 1.1 by Themistius, an influential ancient commentator. De Haas identifies several factors that may explain Themistius' specific interpretation, such as the assumption of a deductive method in physics, the influence of Theophrastus' logical analysis, and Alexander's proposal of the coherence of all sciences. Themistius introduces the topic of universal concepts, which leads to discussions about the priority of universals in Aristotle's writings. The essay concludes that understanding the dynamics of the ancient commentary tradition allows us to recognize the influence of earlier interpretations in later commentators. This realization highlights the importance of carefully considering the original context and intentions of Aristotle's work to avoid misinterpretations in subsequent commentaries. [introduction/conclusion] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/ERKCCFGaH9YKQNL |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"523","_score":null,"_source":{"id":523,"authors_free":[{"id":730,"entry_id":523,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":153,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Haas, Frans A. J. de","free_first_name":"Frans A. J.","free_last_name":"Haas, de","norm_person":{"id":153,"first_name":"Frans A. J.","last_name":"de Haas","full_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/128837020","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":731,"entry_id":523,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":155,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Leijenhorst, Cees","free_first_name":"Cees","free_last_name":"Leijenhorst","norm_person":{"id":155,"first_name":"Leijenhorst","last_name":"Cees","full_name":"Leijenhorst, Cees","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/173195253","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":732,"entry_id":523,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":156,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"L\u00fcthy, Christoph","free_first_name":"Christoph","free_last_name":"L\u00fcthy","norm_person":{"id":156,"first_name":"Christoph","last_name":"L\u00fcthy","full_name":"L\u00fcthy, Christoph","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1057979945","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":733,"entry_id":523,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":157,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Thijssen, J. M. M. H.","free_first_name":"J. M. M. H.","free_last_name":"Thijssen","norm_person":{"id":157,"first_name":"Johannes M. M. H.","last_name":"Thijssen","full_name":"Thijssen, Johannes M. M. H.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1173828508","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Modifications of the method of inquiry in Aristotle\u2019s Physics I.1. An essay on the dynamics of the ancient commentary tradition","main_title":{"title":"Modifications of the method of inquiry in Aristotle\u2019s Physics I.1. An essay on the dynamics of the ancient commentary tradition"},"abstract":"In this essay, Frans A.J. de Haas explores the commentary tradition on Aristotle's Physics, focusing on the first chapter, which is considered pivotal for Aristotelian natural philosophy. The chapter sets the stage for Aristotle's principles of science and the method of scientific inquiry. However, the twenty-two lines of the chapter have not lived up to these high expectations, leading to a bewildering variety of interpretations in the commentary tradition. The essay aims to understand the development of the commentary tradition and the factors that influenced the various interpretations. De Haas presents a method of charting a commentator's philosophical environment to explain their modifications of Aristotle's doctrine. He examines the interpretation of Physics 1.1 by Themistius, an influential ancient commentator. De Haas identifies several factors that may explain Themistius' specific interpretation, such as the assumption of a deductive method in physics, the influence of Theophrastus' logical analysis, and Alexander's proposal of the coherence of all sciences. Themistius introduces the topic of universal concepts, which leads to discussions about the priority of universals in Aristotle's writings. The essay concludes that understanding the dynamics of the ancient commentary tradition allows us to recognize the influence of earlier interpretations in later commentators. This realization highlights the importance of carefully considering the original context and intentions of Aristotle's work to avoid misinterpretations in subsequent commentaries. [introduction\/conclusion]","btype":2,"date":"2002","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ERKCCFGaH9YKQNL","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":153,"full_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":155,"full_name":"Leijenhorst, Cees","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":156,"full_name":"L\u00fcthy, Christoph","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":157,"full_name":"Thijssen, Johannes M. M. H.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":523,"section_of":370,"pages":"31-56","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":370,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"The dynamics of Aristotelian natural philosophy from Antiquity to the seventeenth century","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Leijenhorst_2002","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2002","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2002","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/EZqjexic8BQf4du","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":370,"pubplace":"Leiden \u2013 Boston \u2013 K\u00f6ln","publisher":"Brill","series":"Medieval and early modern science","volume":"5","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2002]}
| Title | Did Plotinus and Porphyry Disagree on Aristotle's "Categories"? |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2001 |
| Journal | Phronesis |
| Volume | 46 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 492-526 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Haas, Frans A. J. de |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| In this paper I propose a reading of Plotinus Enneads VI.1-3 [41-43] On the genera of being which regards this treatise as a coherent whole in which Aristotle's Categories is explored in a way that turns it into a decisive contribution to Plotinus' Platonic ontology. In addition, I claim that Porphyry's Isagoge and commentaries on the Categories start by adopting Plotinus' point of view, including his notion of genus, and proceed by explaining its consequences for a more detailed reading of the Categories. After Plotinus' integration of the Categories into the Platonic frame of thought Porphyry saw the possibilities of exploiting the Peripatetic tradition both as a means to support the Platonic interpretation of the Categories and as a source for solutions to traditional questions. His allegiance to a division of being into ten, and his emphasis on semantics rather than ontology can be explained from this orientation. In the light of our investigation the alleged disagreement between Plotinus and Porphyry on the Categories changes its appearance completely. There are differences, but these can be best explained as confirmation and extension of Plotinus' perspective on the Categories and its role in Platonism. [Author’s abstract] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/uTdcmhuVRdiP9Lq |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"762","_score":null,"_source":{"id":762,"authors_free":[{"id":1127,"entry_id":762,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":153,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Haas, Frans A. J. de","free_first_name":"Frans A. J.","free_last_name":"Haas, de","norm_person":{"id":153,"first_name":"Frans A. J.","last_name":"de Haas","full_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/128837020","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Did Plotinus and Porphyry Disagree on Aristotle's \"Categories\"?","main_title":{"title":"Did Plotinus and Porphyry Disagree on Aristotle's \"Categories\"?"},"abstract":"In this paper I propose a reading of Plotinus Enneads VI.1-3 [41-43] On the genera of being which regards this treatise as a coherent whole in which Aristotle's Categories is explored in a way that turns it into a decisive contribution to Plotinus' Platonic ontology. In addition, I claim that Porphyry's Isagoge and commentaries on the Categories start by adopting Plotinus' point of view, including his notion of genus, and proceed by explaining its consequences for a more detailed reading of the Categories. After Plotinus' integration of the Categories into the Platonic frame of thought Porphyry saw the possibilities of exploiting the Peripatetic tradition both as a means to support the Platonic interpretation of the Categories and as a source for solutions to traditional questions. His allegiance to a division of being into ten, and his emphasis on semantics rather than ontology can be explained from this orientation. In the light of our investigation the alleged disagreement between Plotinus and Porphyry on the Categories changes its appearance completely. There are differences, but these can be best explained as confirmation and extension of Plotinus' perspective on the Categories and its role in Platonism. [Author\u2019s abstract]","btype":3,"date":"2001","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/uTdcmhuVRdiP9Lq","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":153,"full_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":762,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Phronesis","volume":"46","issue":"4","pages":"492-526"}},"sort":[2001]}
| Title | Did Plotinus and Porphyry Disagree on Aristotle's "Categories"? |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2001 |
| Journal | Phronesis |
| Volume | 46 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 492-526 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Haas, Frans A. J. de |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
In this paper I propose a reading of Plotinus Enneads VI.1-3 [41-43] On the genera of being which regards this treatise as a coherent whole in which Aristotle's Categories is explored in a way that turns it into a decisive contribution to Plotinus' Platonic ontology. In addition, I claim that Porphyry's Isagoge and commentaries on the Categories start by adopting Plotinus' point of view, including his notion of genus, and proceed by explaining its consequences for a more detailed reading of the Categories. After Plotinus' integration of the Categories into the Platonic frame of thought Porphyry saw the possibilities of exploiting the Peripatetic tradition both as a means to support the Platonic interpretation of the Categories and as a source for solutions to traditional questions. His allegiance to a division of being into ten, and his emphasis on semantics rather than ontology can be explained from this orientation. In the light of our investigation the alleged disagreement between Plotinus and Porphyry on the Categories changes its appearance completely. There are differences, but these can be best explained as confirmation and extension of Plotinus' perspective on the Categories and its role in Platonism. [Author’s abstract] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/uTdcmhuVRdiP9Lq |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"762","_score":null,"_source":{"id":762,"authors_free":[{"id":1127,"entry_id":762,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":153,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Haas, Frans A. J. de","free_first_name":"Frans A. J.","free_last_name":"Haas, de","norm_person":{"id":153,"first_name":"Frans A. J.","last_name":"de Haas","full_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/128837020","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Did Plotinus and Porphyry Disagree on Aristotle's \"Categories\"?","main_title":{"title":"Did Plotinus and Porphyry Disagree on Aristotle's \"Categories\"?"},"abstract":"In this paper I propose a reading of Plotinus Enneads VI.1-3 [41-43] On the genera of being which regards this treatise as a coherent whole in which Aristotle's Categories is explored in a way that turns it into a decisive contribution to Plotinus' Platonic ontology. In addition, I claim that Porphyry's Isagoge and commentaries on the Categories start by adopting Plotinus' point of view, including his notion of genus, and proceed by explaining its consequences for a more detailed reading of the Categories. After Plotinus' integration of the Categories into the Platonic frame of thought Porphyry saw the possibilities of exploiting the Peripatetic tradition both as a means to support the Platonic interpretation of the Categories and as a source for solutions to traditional questions. His allegiance to a division of being into ten, and his emphasis on semantics rather than ontology can be explained from this orientation. In the light of our investigation the alleged disagreement between Plotinus and Porphyry on the Categories changes its appearance completely. There are differences, but these can be best explained as confirmation and extension of Plotinus' perspective on the Categories and its role in Platonism. [Author\u2019s abstract]","btype":3,"date":"2001","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/uTdcmhuVRdiP9Lq","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":153,"full_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":762,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Phronesis","volume":"46","issue":"4","pages":"492-526"}},"sort":["Did Plotinus and Porphyry Disagree on Aristotle's \"Categories\"?"]}
| Title | Modifications of the method of inquiry in Aristotle’s Physics I.1. An essay on the dynamics of the ancient commentary tradition |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2002 |
| Published in | The dynamics of Aristotelian natural philosophy from Antiquity to the seventeenth century |
| Pages | 31-56 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Haas, Frans A. J. de |
| Editor(s) | Leijenhorst, Cees , Lüthy, Christoph , Thijssen, J. M. M. H. |
| Translator(s) |
In this essay, Frans A.J. de Haas explores the commentary tradition on Aristotle's Physics, focusing on the first chapter, which is considered pivotal for Aristotelian natural philosophy. The chapter sets the stage for Aristotle's principles of science and the method of scientific inquiry. However, the twenty-two lines of the chapter have not lived up to these high expectations, leading to a bewildering variety of interpretations in the commentary tradition. The essay aims to understand the development of the commentary tradition and the factors that influenced the various interpretations. De Haas presents a method of charting a commentator's philosophical environment to explain their modifications of Aristotle's doctrine. He examines the interpretation of Physics 1.1 by Themistius, an influential ancient commentator. De Haas identifies several factors that may explain Themistius' specific interpretation, such as the assumption of a deductive method in physics, the influence of Theophrastus' logical analysis, and Alexander's proposal of the coherence of all sciences. Themistius introduces the topic of universal concepts, which leads to discussions about the priority of universals in Aristotle's writings. The essay concludes that understanding the dynamics of the ancient commentary tradition allows us to recognize the influence of earlier interpretations in later commentators. This realization highlights the importance of carefully considering the original context and intentions of Aristotle's work to avoid misinterpretations in subsequent commentaries. [introduction/conclusion] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/ERKCCFGaH9YKQNL |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"523","_score":null,"_source":{"id":523,"authors_free":[{"id":730,"entry_id":523,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":153,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Haas, Frans A. J. de","free_first_name":"Frans A. J.","free_last_name":"Haas, de","norm_person":{"id":153,"first_name":"Frans A. J.","last_name":"de Haas","full_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/128837020","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":731,"entry_id":523,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":155,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Leijenhorst, Cees","free_first_name":"Cees","free_last_name":"Leijenhorst","norm_person":{"id":155,"first_name":"Leijenhorst","last_name":"Cees","full_name":"Leijenhorst, Cees","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/173195253","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":732,"entry_id":523,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":156,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"L\u00fcthy, Christoph","free_first_name":"Christoph","free_last_name":"L\u00fcthy","norm_person":{"id":156,"first_name":"Christoph","last_name":"L\u00fcthy","full_name":"L\u00fcthy, Christoph","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1057979945","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":733,"entry_id":523,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":157,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Thijssen, J. M. M. H.","free_first_name":"J. M. M. H.","free_last_name":"Thijssen","norm_person":{"id":157,"first_name":"Johannes M. M. H.","last_name":"Thijssen","full_name":"Thijssen, Johannes M. M. H.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1173828508","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Modifications of the method of inquiry in Aristotle\u2019s Physics I.1. An essay on the dynamics of the ancient commentary tradition","main_title":{"title":"Modifications of the method of inquiry in Aristotle\u2019s Physics I.1. An essay on the dynamics of the ancient commentary tradition"},"abstract":"In this essay, Frans A.J. de Haas explores the commentary tradition on Aristotle's Physics, focusing on the first chapter, which is considered pivotal for Aristotelian natural philosophy. The chapter sets the stage for Aristotle's principles of science and the method of scientific inquiry. However, the twenty-two lines of the chapter have not lived up to these high expectations, leading to a bewildering variety of interpretations in the commentary tradition. The essay aims to understand the development of the commentary tradition and the factors that influenced the various interpretations. De Haas presents a method of charting a commentator's philosophical environment to explain their modifications of Aristotle's doctrine. He examines the interpretation of Physics 1.1 by Themistius, an influential ancient commentator. De Haas identifies several factors that may explain Themistius' specific interpretation, such as the assumption of a deductive method in physics, the influence of Theophrastus' logical analysis, and Alexander's proposal of the coherence of all sciences. Themistius introduces the topic of universal concepts, which leads to discussions about the priority of universals in Aristotle's writings. The essay concludes that understanding the dynamics of the ancient commentary tradition allows us to recognize the influence of earlier interpretations in later commentators. This realization highlights the importance of carefully considering the original context and intentions of Aristotle's work to avoid misinterpretations in subsequent commentaries. [introduction\/conclusion]","btype":2,"date":"2002","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ERKCCFGaH9YKQNL","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":153,"full_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":155,"full_name":"Leijenhorst, Cees","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":156,"full_name":"L\u00fcthy, Christoph","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":157,"full_name":"Thijssen, Johannes M. M. H.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":523,"section_of":370,"pages":"31-56","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":370,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"The dynamics of Aristotelian natural philosophy from Antiquity to the seventeenth century","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Leijenhorst_2002","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2002","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2002","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/EZqjexic8BQf4du","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":370,"pubplace":"Leiden \u2013 Boston \u2013 K\u00f6ln","publisher":"Brill","series":"Medieval and early modern science","volume":"5","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Modifications of the method of inquiry in Aristotle\u2019s Physics I.1. An essay on the dynamics of the ancient commentary tradition"]}
| Title | Simplicius, On Aristotle ‘Categories 5-6’ |
| Type | Monograph |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2013 |
| Publication Place | London |
| Publisher | Bloomsbury |
| Series | Ancient Commentators on Aristotle |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | , Simplicius |
| Editor(s) | Haas, Frans A. J. de , Fleet, Barrie |
| Translator(s) | Haas, Frans A. J. de(de Haas, Frans A. J.) , Fleet, Barrie(Fleet, Barrie) , |
Chapters 5 and 6 of Aristotle's Categories describe his first two categories, Substance and Quantity. It is usually taken that Plotinus attacked Aristotle's Categories, but that Porphyry and Iamblichus restored it to the curriculum once and for all. Nonetheless, the introduction to this text stresses how much of the defence of Aristotle Porphyry was able to draw out of Plotinus' critical discussion. Simplicius' commentary is our most comprehensive account of the debate on the validity of Aristotle's Categories. One subject discussed by Simplicius in these chapters is where the differentia of a species (eg the rationality of humans) fits into the scheme of categories. Another is why Aristotle elevates the category of Quantity to second place, above the category of Quality. Further, de Haas shows how Simplicius distinguishes different kinds of universal order to solve some of the problems. |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/eW6iLytuM3BoZAe |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"109","_score":null,"_source":{"id":109,"authors_free":[{"id":129,"entry_id":109,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":153,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Haas, Frans A. J. de","free_first_name":"Frans A. J.","free_last_name":"Haas, de","norm_person":{"id":153,"first_name":"Frans A. J.","last_name":"de Haas","full_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/128837020","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":130,"entry_id":109,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":117,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"},"free_name":"Fleet, Barrie","free_first_name":"Barrie","free_last_name":"Fleet","norm_person":{"id":117,"first_name":"Barrie","last_name":"Fleet","full_name":"Fleet, Barrie","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/172866235","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2258,"entry_id":109,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":153,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Haas, Frans A. J. de","free_first_name":"Frans A. J.","free_last_name":"Haas, de","norm_person":{"id":153,"first_name":"Frans A. J.","last_name":"de Haas","full_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/128837020","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2259,"entry_id":109,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":117,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Fleet, Barrie","free_first_name":"Barrie","free_last_name":"Fleet","norm_person":{"id":117,"first_name":"Barrie","last_name":"Fleet","full_name":"Fleet, Barrie","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/172866235","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2260,"entry_id":109,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":62,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Simplicius ","free_first_name":"","free_last_name":"","norm_person":{"id":62,"first_name":"Cilicius","last_name":"Simplicius ","full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118642421","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius, On Aristotle \u2018Categories 5-6\u2019","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius, On Aristotle \u2018Categories 5-6\u2019"},"abstract":"Chapters 5 and 6 of Aristotle's Categories describe his first two categories, Substance and Quantity. It is usually taken that Plotinus attacked Aristotle's Categories, but that Porphyry and Iamblichus restored it to the curriculum once and for all. Nonetheless, the introduction to this text stresses how much of the defence of Aristotle Porphyry was able to draw out of Plotinus' critical discussion. Simplicius' commentary is our most comprehensive account of the debate on the validity of Aristotle's Categories. One subject discussed by Simplicius in these chapters is where the differentia of a species (eg the rationality of humans) fits into the scheme of categories. Another is why Aristotle elevates the category of Quantity to second place, above the category of Quality. Further, de Haas shows how Simplicius distinguishes different kinds of universal order to solve some of the problems.","btype":1,"date":"2013","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/eW6iLytuM3BoZAe","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":153,"full_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":117,"full_name":"Fleet, Barrie","role":{"id":3,"role_name":"translator"}},{"id":153,"full_name":"de Haas, Frans A. J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":117,"full_name":"Fleet, Barrie","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":62,"full_name":"Simplicius Cilicius","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":109,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Bloomsbury","series":"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Simplicius, On Aristotle \u2018Categories 5-6\u2019"]}