{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1477","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1477,"authors_free":[{"id":2558,"entry_id":1477,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":293,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Praechter, Karl","free_first_name":"Karl","free_last_name":"Praechter","norm_person":{"id":293,"first_name":"Karl","last_name":"Praechter","full_name":"Praechter, Karl","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/116278609","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simpl. in Aristot. de Caelo p. 370, 29 ff. H","main_title":{"title":"Simpl. in Aristot. de Caelo p. 370, 29 ff. H"},"abstract":"","btype":3,"date":"1924","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/zc8efUUHCZuTFnA","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":293,"full_name":"Praechter, Karl","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1477,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Hermes","volume":"59","issue":"1","pages":"118-119"}},"sort":["Simpl. in Aristot. de Caelo p. 370, 29 ff. H"]}

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"733","_score":null,"_source":{"id":733,"authors_free":[{"id":1096,"entry_id":733,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":245,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Leon, Philip","free_first_name":"Philip","free_last_name":"Leon","norm_person":{"id":245,"first_name":"Philip","last_name":"Leon","full_name":"Leon, Philip","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Homoiomeries of Anaxagoras","main_title":{"title":"The Homoiomeries of Anaxagoras"},"abstract":"[Conclusion, p. 141]: Anaxagoras does indeed, as he has been said to do, represent the \r\nculminating point of the enquiry into the one bto-tv. That simple enquiry \r\nfor a simple unity becomes curiously complex, just because of the very \r\nsimplicity and the thorough-going and uncompromising nature of Anaxagoras' \r\nlogical mind. It has with him reached a stage where it must become \r\ntransformed and pass on the one hand into logic in Plato, into the enquiry \r\nabout the nature of predication through Gorgias and Antisthenes, and on the \r\nother hand into metaphysics, the theory of ideas, also in Plato. This central \r\nposition of Anaxagoras is made clear by the passage discussed, according \r\nto which, I think, in considering the 'homoiomeries,' we should look upon \r\nparts as 'homoiomerous' primarily to the whole i~c6otov, and only secondarily \r\nto subordinate wholes. Indeed, it is implied in Anaxagoras' principle that \r\nthere are only two entities which are properly wholes, the 0c0\/cpo and voDv^. To call anything else a whole is more or less arbitrary, a principle not \r\nunworthy of the most thorough-going of modern absolutists. ","btype":3,"date":"1927","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FXHNwY19loMmfLj","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":245,"full_name":"Leon, Philip","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":733,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The Classical Quarterly","volume":"21","issue":"3\/4","pages":"133-141"}},"sort":["The Homoiomeries of Anaxagoras"]}

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"731","_score":null,"_source":{"id":731,"authors_free":[{"id":1094,"entry_id":731,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":456,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Long, Herbert S.","free_first_name":"Herbert S.","free_last_name":"Long","norm_person":{"id":456,"first_name":"Herbert, S.","last_name":"Long","full_name":"Long, Herbert, S.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Unity of Empedocles' Thought","main_title":{"title":"The Unity of Empedocles' Thought"},"abstract":"In this paper I shall first \r\nstate the problem of the unity of Empedocles' thought, then \r\nconsider two difficulties in the way of a solution and the effect \r\nthat not observing them has had, and finally propose and attempt to justify what appears to me to be a reasonable explanation of \r\nthe problem. [p. 142]","btype":3,"date":"1949","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Glli8IC1bpJB9RU","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":456,"full_name":"Long, Herbert, S.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":731,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The American Journal of Philology","volume":"70","issue":"2","pages":"142-158"}},"sort":["The Unity of Empedocles' Thought"]}

{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"746","_score":null,"_source":{"id":746,"authors_free":[{"id":1109,"entry_id":746,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":115,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Fraenkel, Hermann","free_first_name":"Hermann","free_last_name":"Fraenkel","norm_person":{"id":115,"first_name":"Hermann","last_name":"Fraenkel","full_name":"Fraenkel, Hermann","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119051478","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Zeno of Elea's Attacks on Plurality","main_title":{"title":"Zeno of Elea's Attacks on Plurality"},"abstract":"In recent decades students of mathematics, philosophy, and \r\nthe classics have again and again raised their voices 1 to vindicate \r\nthe serious importance of Zeno's paradoxes of motion (Vorsokr.2 29 A 25-28 - Lee,3 nos. 19-36), not even excluding the Stadium. \r\nNo longer can the problem implied in the paradoxes be disposed of by simply pointing out that time and space are equally divisible. The question which is at the bottom of all four of \r\nthem is far more profound. [...] Fur- \r\nthermore, it has been shown that Aristotle, when qriticizing the \r\nparadoxes, was not concerned conscientiously to adjust his objec- tions to that which the historical Zeno had tried to prove, or \r\nrather disprove. [...] If it is \r\nthus established that Zeno's syllogisms must not necessarily be \r\ncondemned as a futile play of dialectics 6 and that Aristotle's \r\ncensure fails to do Zeno justice, a road seems to be open to a \r\nfull rehabilitation and, perhaps, glorification. But one doubt \r\nremains. How adequately did the real Zeno actually deal with \r\nthe problems he had in hand? And how sincere was he about \r\nthem? [pp. 1 f.]","btype":3,"date":"1942","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/thc7ngkOcyyG7Iz","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":115,"full_name":"Fraenkel, Hermann","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":746,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The American Journal of Philology","volume":"63","issue":"1","pages":"1-25"}},"sort":["Zeno of Elea's Attacks on Plurality"]}