| Title | Die Widerlegung des Manichäismus im Epiktetkommentar des Simplikios |
| Type | Article |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1969 |
| Journal | Archiv fur Geschichte der Philosophie |
| Volume | 51 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 31-57 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Die Widerlegung des Manichäismus im Kommentar des Simplikios zu Epiktet von Ilsetraut Hadot ist eine Studie über die Existenz und den Ursprung des Bösen, ein Thema, das im Encheiridion des Epiktet seinen Platz findet. Hadot zeigt, dass Simplikios mit Epiktet in der Ablehnung des ontologischen Charakters des Bösen übereinstimmt, da die Natur des Bösen keinen Platz in der Welt hat, und er verwendet auch stoische Argumente, die auch im Neuplatonismus und im Christentum verwendet werden, um das Thema zu behandeln. Simplikios argumentiert gegen das manichäische System mit einem polemischen Ton, der den polemischen Werken anderer Autoren gegen die Manichäer ähnelt. Simplikios hält die gründliche Widerlegung des manichäischen Systems für notwendig, insbesondere seit dem Wiederaufleben der Manichäer im byzantinischen Reich. Simplikios' Kommentar soll als Anleitung zur Selbstvervollkommnung dienen, und aus diesem Grund bietet er nicht nur eine umfassende Diskussion über den Ursprung des Bösen, sondern widmet auch einen beträchtlichen Teil seines Werks der gründlichen Widerlegung des manichäischen Systems. Simplikios stützt sich bei seiner Argumentation auf das philosophische System von Proklos und erwähnt die Manichäer nur im zweiten Teil seiner Erörterung, in dem er die Hypothese widerlegt, dass das Böse als Prinzip neben dem Guten angesehen werden kann. [introduction/conclusion] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/HFw9upuC8f3LCzo |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1131","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1131,"authors_free":[{"id":1706,"entry_id":1131,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","free_first_name":"Ilsetraut","free_last_name":"Hadot","norm_person":{"id":4,"first_name":"Ilsetraut","last_name":"Hadot","full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/107415011","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Die Widerlegung des Manich\u00e4ismus im Epiktetkommentar des Simplikios","main_title":{"title":"Die Widerlegung des Manich\u00e4ismus im Epiktetkommentar des Simplikios"},"abstract":"Die Widerlegung des Manich\u00e4ismus im Kommentar des Simplikios zu Epiktet von Ilsetraut Hadot ist eine Studie \u00fcber die Existenz und den Ursprung des B\u00f6sen, ein Thema, das im Encheiridion des Epiktet seinen Platz findet. Hadot zeigt, dass Simplikios mit Epiktet in der Ablehnung des ontologischen Charakters des B\u00f6sen \u00fcbereinstimmt, da die Natur des B\u00f6sen keinen Platz in der Welt hat, und er verwendet auch stoische Argumente, die auch im Neuplatonismus und im Christentum verwendet werden, um das Thema zu behandeln. Simplikios argumentiert gegen das manich\u00e4ische System mit einem polemischen Ton, der den polemischen Werken anderer Autoren gegen die Manich\u00e4er \u00e4hnelt. Simplikios h\u00e4lt die gr\u00fcndliche Widerlegung des manich\u00e4ischen Systems f\u00fcr notwendig, insbesondere seit dem Wiederaufleben der Manich\u00e4er im byzantinischen Reich. Simplikios' Kommentar soll als Anleitung zur Selbstvervollkommnung dienen, und aus diesem Grund bietet er nicht nur eine umfassende Diskussion \u00fcber den Ursprung des B\u00f6sen, sondern widmet auch einen betr\u00e4chtlichen Teil seines Werks der gr\u00fcndlichen Widerlegung des manich\u00e4ischen Systems. Simplikios st\u00fctzt sich bei seiner Argumentation auf das philosophische System von Proklos und erw\u00e4hnt die Manich\u00e4er nur im zweiten Teil seiner Er\u00f6rterung, in dem er die Hypothese widerlegt, dass das B\u00f6se als Prinzip neben dem Guten angesehen werden kann. [introduction\/conclusion]","btype":3,"date":"1969","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/HFw9upuC8f3LCzo","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1131,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Archiv fur Geschichte der Philosophie","volume":"51","issue":"1","pages":"31-57"}},"sort":[1969]}
| Title | The Renaissance discovery of classical antiquity |
| Type | Monograph |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1969 |
| Publication Place | Oxford – New York |
| Publisher | Blackwell |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Weiss, Roberto |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| The author traces the rise of a new attitude to classical antiquity, an attitude which became noticeable in the late 13th century but which came fully of age in the first half of the 15th century with humanists such as Poggio and Flavio Biodon. The book covers the period 1300 to 1527. [offical abstract] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/hWocUhaP31pptJ7 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"191","_score":null,"_source":{"id":191,"authors_free":[{"id":247,"entry_id":191,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":533,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Weiss, Roberto","free_first_name":"Roberto","free_last_name":"Weiss","norm_person":{"id":533,"first_name":"Roberto","last_name":"Weiss","full_name":"Weiss, Roberto","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/129054968","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Renaissance discovery of classical antiquity","main_title":{"title":"The Renaissance discovery of classical antiquity"},"abstract":"The author traces the rise of a new attitude to classical antiquity, an attitude which became noticeable in the late 13th century but which came fully of age in the first half of the 15th century with humanists such as Poggio and Flavio Biodon. The book covers the period 1300 to 1527. [offical abstract]","btype":1,"date":"1969","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/hWocUhaP31pptJ7","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":533,"full_name":"Weiss, Roberto","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":191,"pubplace":"Oxford \u2013 \tNew York","publisher":"Blackwell","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[1969]}
| Title | The Last Days of the Academy at Athens |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1969 |
| Published in | Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society, Vol. 195 |
| Pages | 7-29 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Cameron, Alan |
| Editor(s) | Kenney, Edward J. , Dawe, Roger D. |
| Translator(s) |
| Even those who know nothing else o f Justinian know that he closed the Academy at Athens in a . d . 529—the very year that St Benedict had founded the monastery o f Monte Cassino.1 For those who like schematic boundaries between the ancient and medieval worlds, between the pagan past and the Christian future, here is a truly symbolic date.The romantic sequel is hardly less familiar:2 the seven out-of-work Platonists who left Athens for Persia, which under its new King Chosroes they had heard closely resembled the ideal state their master had written of. On their arrival, alas, they discovered that Chosroes, while amiable enough and genuinely interested in philo sophy, was far from being the philosopher-king they had dreamed of. And his subjects were no less corrupt than the Romans. The disillusioned philosophers confessed their disappointment to the king, who not only graciously consented to their immediate return, but even went so far as to make Justinian write into the peace treaty they were just then concluding (September 532) a safe conduct home for all seven and a guarantee that they would be allowed to live out their lives in Roman territory in peace as pagans.This much is well known. But some details are unclear, others unexplored. Several misconceptions prevail. A number of relevant texts have never been properly exploited, some not even considered. What was Justinian’s motive? Did he give the last push to a tottering edifice, or destroy a thriving intellectual centre? Indeed, did he actually succeed in destroying anything at all? What did the philosophers do on their return? [Introduction, p. 7] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/2HtMFQkF0nDlTKI |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1046","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1046,"authors_free":[{"id":1591,"entry_id":1046,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":20,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Cameron, Alan ","free_first_name":"Alan","free_last_name":"Cameron","norm_person":{"id":20,"first_name":"Alan","last_name":"Cameron","full_name":"Cameron, Alan ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/143568914","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2332,"entry_id":1046,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":21,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Kenney, Edward J.","free_first_name":"Edward J.","free_last_name":"Kenney","norm_person":{"id":21,"first_name":"Edward J. ","last_name":"Kenney","full_name":"Kenney, Edward J. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/121559602","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2333,"entry_id":1046,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":22,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Dawe, Roger D. ","free_first_name":"Roger D. ","free_last_name":"Dawe","norm_person":{"id":22,"first_name":"Roger D. ","last_name":"Dawe","full_name":"Dawe, Roger D. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/131727796","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Last Days of the Academy at Athens","main_title":{"title":"The Last Days of the Academy at Athens"},"abstract":"Even those who know nothing else o f Justinian know that he closed the Academy at \r\nAthens in a . d . 529\u2014the very year that St Benedict had founded the monastery o f \r\nMonte Cassino.1 For those who like schematic boundaries between the ancient and \r\nmedieval worlds, between the pagan past and the Christian future, here is a truly \r\nsymbolic date.The romantic sequel is hardly less familiar:2 the seven out-of-work Platonists who \r\nleft Athens for Persia, which under its new King Chosroes they had heard closely \r\nresembled the ideal state their master had written of. On their arrival, alas, they \r\ndiscovered that Chosroes, while amiable enough and genuinely interested in philo\u00ad\r\nsophy, was far from being the philosopher-king they had dreamed of. And his subjects \r\nwere no less corrupt than the Romans. The disillusioned philosophers confessed their \r\ndisappointment to the king, who not only graciously consented to their immediate \r\nreturn, but even went so far as to make Justinian write into the peace treaty they were \r\njust then concluding (September 532) a safe conduct home for all seven and a guarantee \r\nthat they would be allowed to live out their lives in Roman territory in peace as pagans.This much is well known. But some details are unclear, others unexplored. Several \r\nmisconceptions prevail. A number of relevant texts have never been properly exploited, \r\nsome not even considered. What was Justinian\u2019s motive? Did he give the last push to \r\na tottering edifice, or destroy a thriving intellectual centre? Indeed, did he actually \r\nsucceed in destroying anything at all? What did the philosophers do on their return? [Introduction, p. 7]","btype":2,"date":"1969","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/2HtMFQkF0nDlTKI","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":20,"full_name":"Cameron, Alan ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":21,"full_name":"Kenney, Edward J. ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":22,"full_name":"Dawe, Roger D. ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1046,"section_of":277,"pages":"7-29","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":277,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society, Vol. 195","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Kenney\/Dawe1969","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1969","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1969","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/WojKRcXNYJ8OQJP","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":277,"pubplace":"Cambridge","publisher":"","series":"","volume":"195","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1969]}
| Title | Das Corollarium de Tempore des Simplikios und die Aporien des Aristoteles zur Zeit |
| Type | Monograph |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1969 |
| Publication Place | Meisenheim am Glan |
| Publisher | Anton Hain |
| Series | Monographien zur Naturphilosophie |
| Volume | 8 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Meyer, Hubert |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Review: In recent years, there has been a renewed interest in the period of Greek philosophy after Aristotle. Since ancient Greek thought exhibits unbroken continuity, the commentaries on Aristotle from late antiquity retain an authenticity and value for the study of Aristotle himself, which have not always been sufficiently recognized. This extensive and learned work is a study of time as presented by Simplicius in his commentary on Aristotle's Physics and in the Doubts and Solutions of Simplicius' teacher, Damascius. It sheds new light not only on the Neoplatonic philosophy of time but also on the notorious "difficulties" of Aristotle regarding time. The work presents a significant amount of philosophical argument, often complex and subtle. Therefore, some oversimplification is necessary. Damascius and Simplicius utilize materials from two different philosophies of time: Aristotle's and Plotinus'. Aristotle's view is that time is the number of motion according to before and after, based on the phenomenon of regular and endless physical motion. Although number, in Aristotle, is a mathematical abstraction, time, being a number, is not merely ideal or mathematical but is actually verified in the physical world. Soul or mind is needed to make the before-and-after of physical motion actually numbered. The "matter" of time, the endless motion of nature (especially the heavens), is real, not merely ideal or mathematical. The form of time is determined by the real relation of before and after, making time a real category, one of the modes of being. Time is the way of being whose being consists in becoming. The other philosophy of time influencing Damascius and Simplicius is the more "idealist" Neoplatonic one, which bases time on the soul. According to Plotinus, the number of motion is an applied number. Eternity is the life of mind (nous), and time is the life of the world-soul. Numbers exist in the realm of mind or being or ideal forms, the second hypostasis of Plotinus. When mind descends into body, constituting soul or the third hypostasis, the life of mind or eternity becomes an activity of soul or time. Time is a psychic measuring, corresponding to Augustine's definition of time as a disrensio animae. Simplicius, like other ancient and medieval commentators, aims not only at a scholarly reconstruction of Aristotle's "difficulties" but at a real solution to the philosophical problem of time. The commentator's new and original philosophy emerges during the exposition of Aristotle's text. Simplicius' thesis is that the reality of time is the present moment, or now, or point of time, which is endlessly repeated. However, this cannot be a correct commentary on Aristotle, for whom time is solidly based on real physical motion. Simplicius' view of time is more abstract since he overlooks the reality of motion. The central part of Meyer's book examines in detail the philosophy of time in the Greek text of the Corollarium. Simplicius' view is that time is in becoming, not in being or eternity. Time's being is in becoming, and the only being in becoming is the "now," which makes time the "now." Simplicius contrasts this with his more Platonic teacher, Damascius, for whom eternity, to aei, or the realm of being, contains a form of time, a supra-temporal whole-time, or time-number, or mathematical "time," the unenfolded structure of number, which, in turn, contains time or continual becoming. Simplicius replies in a more Aristotelian fashion, arguing that Damascius' region of the "always" or "ever" of time, or time as a whole, is entirely unnecessary. Time flows infinitely, an always-becoming, but this infinity of time is not an actual whole. Time flows into infinity, but there is no actual infinite or eternal whole, as personified by Damascius' Demiourgos. Simplicius' interpretation is part of the wider movement of thought in later antiquity when time as the number of motion is forgotten and replaced by a more abstract definition. The interest in these thinkers, Damascius and Simplicius, lies in their providing us with variants or subspecies of the two great masters, Plato and Aristotle. Meyer's learned work makes these obscure texts widely accessible, and his interpretations of the rich material are cautious and sound. The presentation is not [iir die Menge; and, it is sometimes not very clear just what Greek distinctions are being noted by certain G e r m a n distinctions. There are misprints in French, G e r m a n, and Greek. The work is a fine contribution to scholarship. PAUL J. W. MILLER |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/j5J79Ih6776sfuN |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"66","_score":null,"_source":{"id":66,"authors_free":[{"id":74,"entry_id":66,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":441,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Meyer, Hubert\u00a0","free_first_name":"Hubert","free_last_name":"Meyer","norm_person":{"id":441,"first_name":"Hubert","last_name":"Meyer","full_name":"Meyer, Hubert\u00a0","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Das Corollarium de Tempore des Simplikios und die Aporien des Aristoteles zur Zeit","main_title":{"title":"Das Corollarium de Tempore des Simplikios und die Aporien des Aristoteles zur Zeit"},"abstract":"Review: In recent years, there has been a renewed interest in the period of Greek philosophy after Aristotle. Since ancient Greek thought exhibits unbroken continuity, the commentaries on Aristotle from late antiquity retain an authenticity and value for the study of Aristotle himself, which have not always been sufficiently recognized. This extensive and learned work is a study of time as presented by Simplicius in his commentary on Aristotle's Physics and in the Doubts and Solutions of Simplicius' teacher, Damascius. It sheds new light not only on the Neoplatonic philosophy of time but also on the notorious \"difficulties\" of Aristotle regarding time.\r\nThe work presents a significant amount of philosophical argument, often complex and subtle. Therefore, some oversimplification is necessary. Damascius and Simplicius utilize materials from two different philosophies of time: Aristotle's and Plotinus'. Aristotle's view is that time is the number of motion according to before and after, based on the phenomenon of regular and endless physical motion. Although number, in Aristotle, is a mathematical abstraction, time, being a number, is not merely ideal or mathematical but is actually verified in the physical world. Soul or mind is needed to make the before-and-after of physical motion actually numbered. The \"matter\" of time, the endless motion of nature (especially the heavens), is real, not merely ideal or mathematical. The form of time is determined by the real relation of before and after, making time a real category, one of the modes of being. Time is the way of being whose being consists in becoming.\r\nThe other philosophy of time influencing Damascius and Simplicius is the more \"idealist\" Neoplatonic one, which bases time on the soul. According to Plotinus, the number of motion is an applied number. Eternity is the life of mind (nous), and time is the life of the world-soul. Numbers exist in the realm of mind or being or ideal forms, the second hypostasis of Plotinus. When mind descends into body, constituting soul or the third hypostasis, the life of mind or eternity becomes an activity of soul or time. Time is a psychic measuring, corresponding to Augustine's definition of time as a disrensio animae.\r\nSimplicius, like other ancient and medieval commentators, aims not only at a scholarly reconstruction of Aristotle's \"difficulties\" but at a real solution to the philosophical problem of time. The commentator's new and original philosophy emerges during the exposition of Aristotle's text. Simplicius' thesis is that the reality of time is the present moment, or now, or point of time, which is endlessly repeated. However, this cannot be a correct commentary on Aristotle, for whom time is solidly based on real physical motion. Simplicius' view of time is more abstract since he overlooks the reality of motion.\r\nThe central part of Meyer's book examines in detail the philosophy of time in the Greek text of the Corollarium. Simplicius' view is that time is in becoming, not in being or eternity. Time's being is in becoming, and the only being in becoming is the \"now,\" which makes time the \"now.\" Simplicius contrasts this with his more Platonic teacher, Damascius, for whom eternity, to aei, or the realm of being, contains a form of time, a supra-temporal whole-time, or time-number, or mathematical \"time,\" the unenfolded structure of number, which, in turn, contains time or continual becoming.\r\nSimplicius replies in a more Aristotelian fashion, arguing that Damascius' region of the \"always\" or \"ever\" of time, or time as a whole, is entirely unnecessary. Time flows infinitely, an always-becoming, but this infinity of time is not an actual whole. Time flows into infinity, but there is no actual infinite or eternal whole, as personified by Damascius' Demiourgos.\r\nSimplicius' interpretation is part of the wider movement of thought in later antiquity when time as the number of motion is forgotten and replaced by a more abstract definition.\r\nThe interest in these thinkers, Damascius and Simplicius, lies in their providing us with variants or subspecies of the two great masters, Plato and Aristotle. Meyer's learned work makes these obscure texts widely accessible, and his interpretations of the rich material are cautious and sound. The presentation is not [iir die Menge; and, it is sometimes not very clear just what Greek distinctions are being noted by certain G e r m a n distinctions. There are misprints in French, G e r m a n, and Greek. The work is a fine contribution to scholarship.\r\nPAUL J. W. MILLER\r\n","btype":1,"date":"1969","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/j5J79Ih6776sfuN","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":441,"full_name":"Meyer, Hubert\u00a0","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":66,"pubplace":"Meisenheim am Glan","publisher":"Anton Hain","series":"Monographien zur Naturphilosophie","volume":"8","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[1969]}
| Title | War Platons Vorlesung "das Gute" einmalig? |
| Type | Article |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1968 |
| Journal | Hermes |
| Volume | 96 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 705-709 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Merlan, Philip |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Die Frage wurde kürzlich von K räm er auf Grund einer Sprachanalyse der nunmehr doch wohl jedem an griechischer Philosophie Interessierten wohl- bekannten Aristoxenos-Stelle verneint1. Im folgenden wird versucht werden zu beweisen, daß die Frage zu bejahen ist. [p. 705] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/kEzwxu6HwXlp903 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"976","_score":null,"_source":{"id":976,"authors_free":[{"id":1475,"entry_id":976,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":258,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Merlan, Philip","free_first_name":"Philip","free_last_name":"Merlan","norm_person":{"id":258,"first_name":"Philip","last_name":"Merlan","full_name":"Merlan, Philip","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/128860502","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"War Platons Vorlesung \"das Gute\" einmalig?","main_title":{"title":"War Platons Vorlesung \"das Gute\" einmalig?"},"abstract":"Die Frage wurde k\u00fcrzlich von K r\u00e4m er auf Grund einer Sprachanalyse der \r\nnunmehr doch wohl jedem an griechischer Philosophie Interessierten wohl- \r\nbekannten Aristoxenos-Stelle verneint1. Im folgenden wird versucht werden \r\nzu beweisen, da\u00df die Frage zu bejahen ist. [p. 705]","btype":3,"date":"1968","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/kEzwxu6HwXlp903","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":258,"full_name":"Merlan, Philip","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":976,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Hermes","volume":"96","issue":"5","pages":"705-709"}},"sort":[1968]}
| Title | Parmenides, Fragment 10 |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1968 |
| Journal | Hermes |
| Volume | 96 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 629-631 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Bicknell, Peter J. |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| This text is a critical analysis of the location of two fragments of the work of the ancient Greek philosopher Parmenides. The author of the text suggests that the two fragments, VS 28 B 10 (Clement, Strom. 5, I38) and VS 28 B 11 (Simplicius, de Caelo 559, 20), are incorrectly placed together in Parmenides' Way of Seeming. The author argues that there is no evidence to suggest that the two fragments were meant to be together, and that they do not fit into the context of Parmenides' work. The author also suggests that VS 28 B 10 may not be Parmenidean at all, and discusses its possible attribution to Empedocles. The text concludes by considering the language and style of the two fragments, and their relationship to Parmenides' other works. [summary of the whole text] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/2uPg3j4nE0Tu1v1 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1124","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1124,"authors_free":[{"id":1700,"entry_id":1124,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":399,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Bicknell, Peter J.","free_first_name":"Peter J.","free_last_name":"Bicknell","norm_person":{"id":399,"first_name":"Peter J.","last_name":"Bicknell","full_name":"Bicknell, Peter J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1162157143","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Parmenides, Fragment 10","main_title":{"title":"Parmenides, Fragment 10"},"abstract":"This text is a critical analysis of the location of two fragments of the work of the ancient Greek philosopher Parmenides. The author of the text suggests that the two fragments, VS 28 B 10 (Clement, Strom. 5, I38) and VS 28 B 11 (Simplicius, de Caelo 559, 20), are incorrectly placed together in Parmenides' Way of Seeming. The author argues that there is no evidence to suggest that the two fragments were meant to be together, and that they do not fit into the context of Parmenides' work. The author also suggests that VS 28 B 10 may not be Parmenidean at all, and discusses its possible attribution to Empedocles. The text concludes by considering the language and style of the two fragments, and their relationship to Parmenides' other works. [summary of the whole text]","btype":3,"date":"1968","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/2uPg3j4nE0Tu1v1","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":399,"full_name":"Bicknell, Peter J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1124,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Hermes","volume":"96","issue":"4","pages":"629-631"}},"sort":[1968]}
| Title | The Manuscript Tradition of Simplicius' Commentary on Aristotle's Physics i-iv |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1968 |
| Journal | The Classical Quarterly |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 70-75 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Coxon, Allan D. |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| The critical text of the first four books of Simplicius’ commentary on the Physics, which was published by Diels in Berlin in 1882 and serves as the foundation for the text of many fragments of the Presocratics, was based on collations by Vitelli of three manuscripts (DEF) and of a fragment of Book I in a copy made by the scribe of E, which Diels refers to as Ea. Besides these, Diels lists a considerable number of later manuscripts, which I have examined and found justifiably ignored in his critical apparatus. The total number of manuscripts listed by Diels of some part of Books I-VIII is 44; a further 25 not mentioned by Diels are listed in A. Wartelle’s "Inventaire des manuscrits grecs d’Aristote et de ses commentateurs" (Belles Lettres, 1963). I shall argue that Diels seriously underrated both the value of F and the probability of contamination between his manuscripts, and consequently, his text of some fragments of the Presocratics rests on a false foundation. However, it should be said at the outset that Diels’s understanding of Presocratic thought prevented him from going far wrong in the readings he adopted and printed. [Introduction, p. 70] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/HfdVbtSYTkutnV9 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1283","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1283,"authors_free":[{"id":1872,"entry_id":1283,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":57,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Coxon, Allan D.","free_first_name":"Allan D. ","free_last_name":"Coxon","norm_person":{"id":57,"first_name":"Allan D.","last_name":"Coxon","full_name":"Coxon, Allan D.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1053041829","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Manuscript Tradition of Simplicius' Commentary on Aristotle's Physics i-iv","main_title":{"title":"The Manuscript Tradition of Simplicius' Commentary on Aristotle's Physics i-iv"},"abstract":"The critical text of the first four books of Simplicius\u2019 commentary on the Physics, which was published by Diels in Berlin in 1882 and serves as the foundation for the text of many fragments of the Presocratics, was based on collations by Vitelli of three manuscripts (DEF) and of a fragment of Book I in a copy made by the scribe of E, which Diels refers to as Ea. Besides these, Diels lists a considerable number of later manuscripts, which I have examined and found justifiably ignored in his critical apparatus. The total number of manuscripts listed by Diels of some part of Books I-VIII is 44; a further 25 not mentioned by Diels are listed in A. Wartelle\u2019s \"Inventaire des manuscrits grecs d\u2019Aristote et de ses commentateurs\" (Belles Lettres, 1963). I shall argue that Diels seriously underrated both the value of F and the probability of contamination between his manuscripts, and consequently, his text of some fragments of the Presocratics rests on a false foundation. However, it should be said at the outset that Diels\u2019s understanding of Presocratic thought prevented him from going far wrong in the readings he adopted and printed. [Introduction, p. 70]","btype":3,"date":"1968","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/HfdVbtSYTkutnV9","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":57,"full_name":"Coxon, Allan D.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1283,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The Classical Quarterly","volume":"18","issue":"1","pages":"70-75 "}},"sort":[1968]}
| Title | Simplicius |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1967 |
| Published in | The Encyclopedia of Philosophy |
| Pages | 448-449 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Lloyd, Antony C. |
| Editor(s) | Edwards, Paul |
| Translator(s) |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/mtfUR3mKMF1elWE |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"393","_score":null,"_source":{"id":393,"authors_free":[{"id":516,"entry_id":393,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":465,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Lloyd, Antony C.","free_first_name":"Antony C.","free_last_name":"Lloyd","norm_person":{"id":465,"first_name":"Antony C.","last_name":"Lloyd, Antony C.","full_name":"Lloyd, Antony C.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1052318118","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":517,"entry_id":393,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":237,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Edwards, Paul","free_first_name":"Paul","free_last_name":"Edwards","norm_person":{"id":237,"first_name":"Paul","last_name":"Edwards","full_name":"Edwards, Paul","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"1967","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/mtfUR3mKMF1elWE","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":465,"full_name":"Lloyd, Antony C.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":237,"full_name":"Edwards, Paul","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":393,"section_of":1371,"pages":"448-449","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1371,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"The Encyclopedia of Philosophy","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1967","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/9TYFlO2oFqfGwvz","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1371,"pubplace":"London, New York","publisher":"Crowell-Collier Publishing Company","series":"","volume":"7","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1967]}
| Title | Aristote, «De la prière» |
| Type | Article |
| Language | French |
| Date | 1967 |
| Journal | Revue Philosophique de la France et de l'Étranger |
| Volume | 157 |
| Pages | 59-70 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Pépin, Jean |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Au nombre des Aristotelis fragmenta figure un bref témoignage de Simplicius, selon lequel Aristote, sur la fin de son livre Περ ευχής, aurait dit que Dieu est ou bien intellect, ou bien quelque chose au-delà de l'intellect, ὃτι ό θεός ή νους εστίν ή καΐ έπέκεινά τι του νου. Simplicius est le seul auteur à rapporter cette surprenante doxographie, et même à évoquer le contenu de cet écrit aristotélicien. Son témoignage étant ainsi l'unique point de départ, on doit avant tout l'examiner de très près, en lui adjoignant les quelques lignes qui le précèdent. Cette investigation permettra peut-être d'en évaluer les chances d'authenticité. Il restera alors à s'interroger sur le sens exact de la doctrine ainsi rapportée à Aristote. [Introduction, p. 59] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/SE4b7Gg647e99Gx |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1089","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1089,"authors_free":[{"id":1647,"entry_id":1089,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":227,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"P\u00e9pin, Jean","free_first_name":"Jean","free_last_name":"P\u00e9pin","norm_person":{"id":227,"first_name":"Jean","last_name":"P\u00e9pin","full_name":"P\u00e9pin, Jean","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119165147","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aristote, \u00abDe la pri\u00e8re\u00bb","main_title":{"title":"Aristote, \u00abDe la pri\u00e8re\u00bb"},"abstract":"Au nombre des Aristotelis fragmenta figure un bref t\u00e9moignage de Simplicius, selon lequel Aristote, sur la fin de son livre \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03b5\u03c5\u03c7\u03ae\u03c2, aurait dit que Dieu est ou bien intellect, ou bien quelque chose au-del\u00e0 de l'intellect, \u1f43\u03c4\u03b9 \u03cc \u03b8\u03b5\u03cc\u03c2 \u03ae \u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03bd \u03ae \u03ba\u03b1\u0390 \u03ad\u03c0\u03ad\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03ac \u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bd\u03bf\u03c5. Simplicius est le seul auteur \u00e0 rapporter cette surprenante doxographie, et m\u00eame \u00e0 \u00e9voquer le contenu de cet \u00e9crit aristot\u00e9licien. Son t\u00e9moignage \u00e9tant ainsi l'unique point de d\u00e9part, on doit avant tout l'examiner de tr\u00e8s pr\u00e8s, en lui adjoignant les quelques lignes qui le pr\u00e9c\u00e8dent. Cette investigation permettra peut-\u00eatre d'en \u00e9valuer les chances d'authenticit\u00e9. Il restera alors \u00e0 s'interroger sur le sens exact de la doctrine ainsi rapport\u00e9e \u00e0 Aristote. [Introduction, p. 59]","btype":3,"date":"1967","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/SE4b7Gg647e99Gx","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":227,"full_name":"P\u00e9pin, Jean","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1089,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Revue Philosophique de la France et de l'\u00c9tranger","volume":"157","issue":"","pages":"59-70"}},"sort":[1967]}
| Title | Empedocles' Cosmic Cycle |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1967 |
| Journal | The Classical Quarterly |
| Volume | 17 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 29-40 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | O'Brien, Denis |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Hitherto reconstructions of Empedocles’ cosmic cycle have usually been offered as part of a larger work, a complete history of Presocratic thought, or a complete study of Empedocles. Consequently there has perhaps been a lack of thoroughness in collecting and sifting evidence that relates exclusively to the main features of the cosmic cycle. There is in fact probably more evidence for Empedocles’ main views than for those of any other Presocratic except Parmenides in his Way of Truth. From a close examination of the fragments and of the secondary sources, principally Aristotle, Plutarch, and Simplicius, there can be formed a reasonably complete picture of the main temporal and spatial features of Empedocles’ cosmic cycle. [Introduction, p. 29] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/V0ZiYaivjBF7p8f |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"865","_score":null,"_source":{"id":865,"authors_free":[{"id":1269,"entry_id":865,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":144,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"O'Brien, Denis","free_first_name":"Denis","free_last_name":"O'Brien","norm_person":{"id":144,"first_name":"Denis","last_name":"O'Brien","full_name":"O'Brien, Denis","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/134134079","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Empedocles' Cosmic Cycle","main_title":{"title":"Empedocles' Cosmic Cycle"},"abstract":"Hitherto reconstructions of Empedocles\u2019 cosmic cycle have usually been offered as part of a larger work, a complete history of Presocratic thought, or \r\na complete study of Empedocles. Consequently there has perhaps been a lack of thoroughness in collecting and sifting evidence that relates exclusively to the main features of the cosmic cycle. There is in fact probably more evidence \r\nfor Empedocles\u2019 main views than for those of any other Presocratic except Parmenides in his Way of Truth. From a close examination of the fragments \r\nand of the secondary sources, principally Aristotle, Plutarch, and Simplicius, there can be formed a reasonably complete picture of the main temporal and spatial features of Empedocles\u2019 cosmic cycle. [Introduction, p. 29]","btype":3,"date":"1967","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/V0ZiYaivjBF7p8f","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":144,"full_name":"O'Brien, Denis","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":865,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The Classical Quarterly","volume":"17","issue":"1","pages":"29-40"}},"sort":[1967]}
| Title | Aristote, «De la prière» |
| Type | Article |
| Language | French |
| Date | 1967 |
| Journal | Revue Philosophique de la France et de l'Étranger |
| Volume | 157 |
| Pages | 59-70 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Pépin, Jean |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
Au nombre des Aristotelis fragmenta figure un bref témoignage de Simplicius, selon lequel Aristote, sur la fin de son livre Περ ευχής, aurait dit que Dieu est ou bien intellect, ou bien quelque chose au-delà de l'intellect, ὃτι ό θεός ή νους εστίν ή καΐ έπέκεινά τι του νου. Simplicius est le seul auteur à rapporter cette surprenante doxographie, et même à évoquer le contenu de cet écrit aristotélicien. Son témoignage étant ainsi l'unique point de départ, on doit avant tout l'examiner de très près, en lui adjoignant les quelques lignes qui le précèdent. Cette investigation permettra peut-être d'en évaluer les chances d'authenticité. Il restera alors à s'interroger sur le sens exact de la doctrine ainsi rapportée à Aristote. [Introduction, p. 59] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/SE4b7Gg647e99Gx |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1089","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1089,"authors_free":[{"id":1647,"entry_id":1089,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":227,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"P\u00e9pin, Jean","free_first_name":"Jean","free_last_name":"P\u00e9pin","norm_person":{"id":227,"first_name":"Jean","last_name":"P\u00e9pin","full_name":"P\u00e9pin, Jean","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119165147","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aristote, \u00abDe la pri\u00e8re\u00bb","main_title":{"title":"Aristote, \u00abDe la pri\u00e8re\u00bb"},"abstract":"Au nombre des Aristotelis fragmenta figure un bref t\u00e9moignage de Simplicius, selon lequel Aristote, sur la fin de son livre \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03b5\u03c5\u03c7\u03ae\u03c2, aurait dit que Dieu est ou bien intellect, ou bien quelque chose au-del\u00e0 de l'intellect, \u1f43\u03c4\u03b9 \u03cc \u03b8\u03b5\u03cc\u03c2 \u03ae \u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03bd \u03ae \u03ba\u03b1\u0390 \u03ad\u03c0\u03ad\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03ac \u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bd\u03bf\u03c5. Simplicius est le seul auteur \u00e0 rapporter cette surprenante doxographie, et m\u00eame \u00e0 \u00e9voquer le contenu de cet \u00e9crit aristot\u00e9licien. Son t\u00e9moignage \u00e9tant ainsi l'unique point de d\u00e9part, on doit avant tout l'examiner de tr\u00e8s pr\u00e8s, en lui adjoignant les quelques lignes qui le pr\u00e9c\u00e8dent. Cette investigation permettra peut-\u00eatre d'en \u00e9valuer les chances d'authenticit\u00e9. Il restera alors \u00e0 s'interroger sur le sens exact de la doctrine ainsi rapport\u00e9e \u00e0 Aristote. [Introduction, p. 59]","btype":3,"date":"1967","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/SE4b7Gg647e99Gx","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":227,"full_name":"P\u00e9pin, Jean","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1089,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Revue Philosophique de la France et de l'\u00c9tranger","volume":"157","issue":"","pages":"59-70"}},"sort":["Aristote, \u00abDe la pri\u00e8re\u00bb"]}
| Title | Boethius and Andronicus of Rhodes |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1957 |
| Journal | Vigiliae Christianae |
| Volume | 11 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 179-185 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Shiel, James |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
G. Pfligersdorffer has recently described the attitude of the an- cient editor, Andronicus of Rhodes, towards the final notes in Aristotle's Categories on opposites, simultaneity, priority, motion and possession-what the medievals called the postpraedicamenta. [...] The text I have proposed will still support Pfligersdorffer's argument (a) noted above-but none of the others. [p. 179, p. 185] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/EaxVeTjyAtZsVgR |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"853","_score":null,"_source":{"id":853,"authors_free":[{"id":1257,"entry_id":853,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":315,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Shiel, James","free_first_name":"James","free_last_name":"Shiel","norm_person":{"id":315,"first_name":"James","last_name":"Shiel","full_name":"Shiel, James","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/131572202","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Boethius and Andronicus of Rhodes","main_title":{"title":"Boethius and Andronicus of Rhodes"},"abstract":"G. Pfligersdorffer has recently described the attitude of the an- \r\ncient editor, Andronicus of Rhodes, towards the final notes in \r\nAristotle's Categories on opposites, simultaneity, priority, motion \r\nand possession-what the medievals called the postpraedicamenta. [...] The text I have proposed will still support Pfligersdorffer's \r\nargument (a) noted above-but none of the others. [p. 179, p. 185]","btype":3,"date":"1957","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/EaxVeTjyAtZsVgR","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":315,"full_name":"Shiel, James","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":853,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Vigiliae Christianae","volume":"11","issue":"3","pages":"179-185"}},"sort":["Boethius and Andronicus of Rhodes"]}
| Title | Das Corollarium de Tempore des Simplikios und die Aporien des Aristoteles zur Zeit |
| Type | Monograph |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1969 |
| Publication Place | Meisenheim am Glan |
| Publisher | Anton Hain |
| Series | Monographien zur Naturphilosophie |
| Volume | 8 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Meyer, Hubert |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
Review: In recent years, there has been a renewed interest in the period of Greek philosophy after Aristotle. Since ancient Greek thought exhibits unbroken continuity, the commentaries on Aristotle from late antiquity retain an authenticity and value for the study of Aristotle himself, which have not always been sufficiently recognized. This extensive and learned work is a study of time as presented by Simplicius in his commentary on Aristotle's Physics and in the Doubts and Solutions of Simplicius' teacher, Damascius. It sheds new light not only on the Neoplatonic philosophy of time but also on the notorious "difficulties" of Aristotle regarding time. The work presents a significant amount of philosophical argument, often complex and subtle. Therefore, some oversimplification is necessary. Damascius and Simplicius utilize materials from two different philosophies of time: Aristotle's and Plotinus'. Aristotle's view is that time is the number of motion according to before and after, based on the phenomenon of regular and endless physical motion. Although number, in Aristotle, is a mathematical abstraction, time, being a number, is not merely ideal or mathematical but is actually verified in the physical world. Soul or mind is needed to make the before-and-after of physical motion actually numbered. The "matter" of time, the endless motion of nature (especially the heavens), is real, not merely ideal or mathematical. The form of time is determined by the real relation of before and after, making time a real category, one of the modes of being. Time is the way of being whose being consists in becoming. The other philosophy of time influencing Damascius and Simplicius is the more "idealist" Neoplatonic one, which bases time on the soul. According to Plotinus, the number of motion is an applied number. Eternity is the life of mind (nous), and time is the life of the world-soul. Numbers exist in the realm of mind or being or ideal forms, the second hypostasis of Plotinus. When mind descends into body, constituting soul or the third hypostasis, the life of mind or eternity becomes an activity of soul or time. Time is a psychic measuring, corresponding to Augustine's definition of time as a disrensio animae. Simplicius, like other ancient and medieval commentators, aims not only at a scholarly reconstruction of Aristotle's "difficulties" but at a real solution to the philosophical problem of time. The commentator's new and original philosophy emerges during the exposition of Aristotle's text. Simplicius' thesis is that the reality of time is the present moment, or now, or point of time, which is endlessly repeated. However, this cannot be a correct commentary on Aristotle, for whom time is solidly based on real physical motion. Simplicius' view of time is more abstract since he overlooks the reality of motion. The central part of Meyer's book examines in detail the philosophy of time in the Greek text of the Corollarium. Simplicius' view is that time is in becoming, not in being or eternity. Time's being is in becoming, and the only being in becoming is the "now," which makes time the "now." Simplicius contrasts this with his more Platonic teacher, Damascius, for whom eternity, to aei, or the realm of being, contains a form of time, a supra-temporal whole-time, or time-number, or mathematical "time," the unenfolded structure of number, which, in turn, contains time or continual becoming. Simplicius replies in a more Aristotelian fashion, arguing that Damascius' region of the "always" or "ever" of time, or time as a whole, is entirely unnecessary. Time flows infinitely, an always-becoming, but this infinity of time is not an actual whole. Time flows into infinity, but there is no actual infinite or eternal whole, as personified by Damascius' Demiourgos. Simplicius' interpretation is part of the wider movement of thought in later antiquity when time as the number of motion is forgotten and replaced by a more abstract definition. The interest in these thinkers, Damascius and Simplicius, lies in their providing us with variants or subspecies of the two great masters, Plato and Aristotle. Meyer's learned work makes these obscure texts widely accessible, and his interpretations of the rich material are cautious and sound. The presentation is not [iir die Menge; and, it is sometimes not very clear just what Greek distinctions are being noted by certain G e r m a n distinctions. There are misprints in French, G e r m a n, and Greek. The work is a fine contribution to scholarship. PAUL J. W. MILLER |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/j5J79Ih6776sfuN |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"66","_score":null,"_source":{"id":66,"authors_free":[{"id":74,"entry_id":66,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":441,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Meyer, Hubert\u00a0","free_first_name":"Hubert","free_last_name":"Meyer","norm_person":{"id":441,"first_name":"Hubert","last_name":"Meyer","full_name":"Meyer, Hubert\u00a0","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Das Corollarium de Tempore des Simplikios und die Aporien des Aristoteles zur Zeit","main_title":{"title":"Das Corollarium de Tempore des Simplikios und die Aporien des Aristoteles zur Zeit"},"abstract":"Review: In recent years, there has been a renewed interest in the period of Greek philosophy after Aristotle. Since ancient Greek thought exhibits unbroken continuity, the commentaries on Aristotle from late antiquity retain an authenticity and value for the study of Aristotle himself, which have not always been sufficiently recognized. This extensive and learned work is a study of time as presented by Simplicius in his commentary on Aristotle's Physics and in the Doubts and Solutions of Simplicius' teacher, Damascius. It sheds new light not only on the Neoplatonic philosophy of time but also on the notorious \"difficulties\" of Aristotle regarding time.\r\nThe work presents a significant amount of philosophical argument, often complex and subtle. Therefore, some oversimplification is necessary. Damascius and Simplicius utilize materials from two different philosophies of time: Aristotle's and Plotinus'. Aristotle's view is that time is the number of motion according to before and after, based on the phenomenon of regular and endless physical motion. Although number, in Aristotle, is a mathematical abstraction, time, being a number, is not merely ideal or mathematical but is actually verified in the physical world. Soul or mind is needed to make the before-and-after of physical motion actually numbered. The \"matter\" of time, the endless motion of nature (especially the heavens), is real, not merely ideal or mathematical. The form of time is determined by the real relation of before and after, making time a real category, one of the modes of being. Time is the way of being whose being consists in becoming.\r\nThe other philosophy of time influencing Damascius and Simplicius is the more \"idealist\" Neoplatonic one, which bases time on the soul. According to Plotinus, the number of motion is an applied number. Eternity is the life of mind (nous), and time is the life of the world-soul. Numbers exist in the realm of mind or being or ideal forms, the second hypostasis of Plotinus. When mind descends into body, constituting soul or the third hypostasis, the life of mind or eternity becomes an activity of soul or time. Time is a psychic measuring, corresponding to Augustine's definition of time as a disrensio animae.\r\nSimplicius, like other ancient and medieval commentators, aims not only at a scholarly reconstruction of Aristotle's \"difficulties\" but at a real solution to the philosophical problem of time. The commentator's new and original philosophy emerges during the exposition of Aristotle's text. Simplicius' thesis is that the reality of time is the present moment, or now, or point of time, which is endlessly repeated. However, this cannot be a correct commentary on Aristotle, for whom time is solidly based on real physical motion. Simplicius' view of time is more abstract since he overlooks the reality of motion.\r\nThe central part of Meyer's book examines in detail the philosophy of time in the Greek text of the Corollarium. Simplicius' view is that time is in becoming, not in being or eternity. Time's being is in becoming, and the only being in becoming is the \"now,\" which makes time the \"now.\" Simplicius contrasts this with his more Platonic teacher, Damascius, for whom eternity, to aei, or the realm of being, contains a form of time, a supra-temporal whole-time, or time-number, or mathematical \"time,\" the unenfolded structure of number, which, in turn, contains time or continual becoming.\r\nSimplicius replies in a more Aristotelian fashion, arguing that Damascius' region of the \"always\" or \"ever\" of time, or time as a whole, is entirely unnecessary. Time flows infinitely, an always-becoming, but this infinity of time is not an actual whole. Time flows into infinity, but there is no actual infinite or eternal whole, as personified by Damascius' Demiourgos.\r\nSimplicius' interpretation is part of the wider movement of thought in later antiquity when time as the number of motion is forgotten and replaced by a more abstract definition.\r\nThe interest in these thinkers, Damascius and Simplicius, lies in their providing us with variants or subspecies of the two great masters, Plato and Aristotle. Meyer's learned work makes these obscure texts widely accessible, and his interpretations of the rich material are cautious and sound. The presentation is not [iir die Menge; and, it is sometimes not very clear just what Greek distinctions are being noted by certain G e r m a n distinctions. There are misprints in French, G e r m a n, and Greek. The work is a fine contribution to scholarship.\r\nPAUL J. W. MILLER\r\n","btype":1,"date":"1969","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/j5J79Ih6776sfuN","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":441,"full_name":"Meyer, Hubert\u00a0","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":66,"pubplace":"Meisenheim am Glan","publisher":"Anton Hain","series":"Monographien zur Naturphilosophie","volume":"8","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Das Corollarium de Tempore des Simplikios und die Aporien des Aristoteles zur Zeit"]}
| Title | Der Bericht des Theophrast über Heraklit |
| Type | Article |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1955 |
| Journal | Hermes |
| Volume | 83 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 385-411 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Kerschensteiner, Jula |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
Die Hauptquelle für die Darstellung der Lehren Heraklits, die Theophrast in seinen Phusikôn doxai gab, ist der Bericht bei Diogenes Laertius 9, 7-II. Er zerfällt in zwei Teile, eine knappe Übersicht (im folgenden DL1) und ein ausführliches Referat (im folgenden DL2). Nach DIELS stammt DL1 aus einer Mittelquelle biographischer Tradition, auf die auch der Einschub mit den Zitaten und die Bemerkung über Heraklits Stil zurückgehe, der zweite Teil dagegen direkt aus Theophrast (Doxographi Graeci I63 f., vgl. auch I80). Dagegen hat K. DEICHGRABER, Bemerkungen zu Diogenes' Bericht fiber Heraklit (Philol. 93, I938, I2ff.) 23ff., zu zeigen versucht, daB es sich nicht um zwei verschiedene Fassungen derselben Vorlage handelt, sondern daß die beiden Teile schon urspruinglich zusammengehören und aufeinander abgestimmt seien, nur durch den spateren Einschub unterbrochen: der Aufbau entspreche der Gewohnheit Theophrasts, den Einzeldarlegungen eine allgemeine Übersicht vorauszuschicken. Eine Klärung des Problems wird sich im folgenden ergeben. [introduction, p. 25] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/46Sh00HA2QdbR2l |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1368","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1368,"authors_free":[{"id":2061,"entry_id":1368,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":233,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Kerschensteiner, Jula","free_first_name":"Jula","free_last_name":"Kerschensteiner","norm_person":{"id":233,"first_name":"Jula","last_name":"Kerschensteiner","full_name":"Kerschensteiner, Jula","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/116142448","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Der Bericht des Theophrast \u00fcber Heraklit","main_title":{"title":"Der Bericht des Theophrast \u00fcber Heraklit"},"abstract":"Die Hauptquelle f\u00fcr die Darstellung der Lehren Heraklits, die Theophrast in seinen Phusik\u00f4n doxai gab, ist der Bericht bei Diogenes Laertius 9, 7-II. Er zerf\u00e4llt in zwei Teile, eine knappe \u00dcbersicht (im folgenden DL1) und ein ausf\u00fchrliches Referat (im folgenden DL2). Nach DIELS stammt DL1 aus einer Mittelquelle biographischer Tradition, auf die auch der Einschub mit den Zitaten und die Bemerkung \u00fcber Heraklits Stil zur\u00fcckgehe, der zweite Teil dagegen direkt aus Theophrast (Doxographi Graeci I63 f., vgl. auch I80). Dagegen hat K. DEICHGRABER, Bemerkungen zu Diogenes' Bericht fiber Heraklit (Philol. 93, I938, I2ff.) 23ff., zu zeigen versucht, daB es sich nicht um zwei verschiedene Fassungen derselben Vorlage handelt, sondern da\u00df die beiden Teile schon urspruinglich zusammengeh\u00f6ren und aufeinander abgestimmt seien, nur durch den spateren Einschub unterbrochen: der Aufbau entspreche der Gewohnheit Theophrasts, den Einzeldarlegungen eine allgemeine \u00dcbersicht vorauszuschicken. Eine Kl\u00e4rung des Problems wird sich im folgenden ergeben. [introduction, p. 25]","btype":3,"date":"1955","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/46Sh00HA2QdbR2l","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":233,"full_name":"Kerschensteiner, Jula","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1368,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Hermes","volume":"83","issue":"4","pages":"385-411"}},"sort":["Der Bericht des Theophrast \u00fcber Heraklit"]}
| Title | Der Metaphysikbegriff in den Aristoteleskommentaren der Ammoniusschule |
| Type | Monograph |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1961 |
| Publication Place | Münster |
| Publisher | Aschendorff |
| Series | Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophie und Theologie des Mittelalters |
| Volume | 39.1 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Kremer, Klaus |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/AWQtFEHstD6bR1g |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"68","_score":null,"_source":{"id":68,"authors_free":[{"id":76,"entry_id":68,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":440,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Kremer, Klaus","free_first_name":"Klaus","free_last_name":"Kremer","norm_person":{"id":440,"first_name":"Klaus","last_name":"Kremer","full_name":"Kremer, Klaus","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/120476452","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Der Metaphysikbegriff in den Aristoteleskommentaren der Ammoniusschule","main_title":{"title":"Der Metaphysikbegriff in den Aristoteleskommentaren der Ammoniusschule"},"abstract":"","btype":1,"date":"1961","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/AWQtFEHstD6bR1g","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":440,"full_name":"Kremer, Klaus","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":68,"pubplace":"M\u00fcnster","publisher":"Aschendorff","series":"Beitr\u00e4ge zur Geschichte der Philosophie und Theologie des Mittelalters","volume":"39.1","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Der Metaphysikbegriff in den Aristoteleskommentaren der Ammoniusschule"]}
| Title | Der Platoniker Ptolemaios |
| Type | Article |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1957 |
| Journal | Hermes |
| Volume | 85 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 314-325 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Dihle, Albrecht |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
In den philosophischen Texten der späten Kaiserzeit stößt man zuweilen auf den Namen Ptolemaios, ohne daß dabei an einen Lagiden oder an den berühmten Astronomen zu denken wäre. Wie jene Zitate auf einen oder mehrere Träger dieses Namens zu verteilen seien, war eine einst viel diskutierte Frage, die dann allerdings im Anschluß an eine Vermutung W. v. Christs durch das Buch von A. Chatzis (Der Philosoph und Grammatiker Ptolemaios Chennos I = Stud. z Gesch. u. Kult. d. Altert. VII 2, Paderborn 1914) endgültig dahin beantwortet schien, es handele sich bei all diesen Ptolemaioi immer wieder um Ptolemaios Chennos aus der Zeit um 100 n. Chr., der uns durch den Auszug des Photios aus seiner καινὴ ἱστορία (cod. 190) recht gut bekannt ist. Diese Frage soll hier einer erneuten Prüfung unterzogen werden. [introduction, p. 314] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/vFgmnYtr8RbZ3BD |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1305","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1305,"authors_free":[{"id":1929,"entry_id":1305,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":93,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Dihle, Albrecht","free_first_name":"Albrecht","free_last_name":"Dihle","norm_person":{"id":93,"first_name":"Albrecht","last_name":"Dihle","full_name":"Dihle, Albrecht","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119194503","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Der Platoniker Ptolemaios","main_title":{"title":"Der Platoniker Ptolemaios"},"abstract":"In den philosophischen Texten der sp\u00e4ten Kaiserzeit st\u00f6\u00dft man zuweilen auf den Namen Ptolemaios, ohne da\u00df dabei an einen Lagiden oder an den ber\u00fchmten Astronomen zu denken w\u00e4re. Wie jene Zitate auf einen oder mehrere Tr\u00e4ger dieses Namens zu verteilen seien, war eine einst viel diskutierte Frage, die dann allerdings im Anschlu\u00df an eine Vermutung W. v. Christs durch das Buch von A. Chatzis (Der Philosoph und Grammatiker Ptolemaios Chennos I = Stud. z Gesch. u. Kult. d. Altert. VII 2, Paderborn 1914) endg\u00fcltig dahin beantwortet schien, es handele sich bei all diesen Ptolemaioi immer wieder um Ptolemaios Chennos aus der Zeit um 100 n. Chr., der uns durch den Auszug des Photios aus seiner \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u1f74 \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u1f77\u03b1 (cod. 190) recht gut bekannt ist. Diese Frage soll hier einer erneuten Pr\u00fcfung unterzogen werden. [introduction, p. 314]","btype":3,"date":"1957","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/vFgmnYtr8RbZ3BD","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":93,"full_name":"Dihle, Albrecht","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1305,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Hermes","volume":"85","issue":"3","pages":"314-325"}},"sort":["Der Platoniker Ptolemaios"]}
| Title | Did Melissus Believe in Incorporeal Being? |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1958 |
| Journal | The American Journal of Philology |
| Volume | 79 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 61-65 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Booth, N. B. |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
G. Vlastos, in Gnomon, XXV (1953), pp. 34-5, claims that he (and J. E. Raven before him) have laid to rest "the alleged corporeality of Melissean Being in the grave which contains Burnet's famous dogma of Eleatic materialism." There is a surprising finality about this claim of Vlastos', and it behooves his critics to consider whether such finality is justified. I think myself that, while Vlastos' arguments are forceful and well ex- pressed, they still fail to carry absolute conviction; and in this brief discussion I shall try to set out the reasons for my scepticism. [p. 61] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/0OSvPVeLSMxRqoo |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"769","_score":null,"_source":{"id":769,"authors_free":[{"id":1133,"entry_id":769,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":10,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Booth, N. B.","free_first_name":"N. B.","free_last_name":"Booth","norm_person":{"id":10,"first_name":"N. B.","last_name":"Booth","full_name":"Booth, N. B.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Did Melissus Believe in Incorporeal Being?","main_title":{"title":"Did Melissus Believe in Incorporeal Being?"},"abstract":"G. Vlastos, in Gnomon, XXV (1953), pp. 34-5, claims that \r\nhe (and J. E. Raven before him) have laid to rest \"the alleged \r\ncorporeality of Melissean Being in the grave which contains \r\nBurnet's famous dogma of Eleatic materialism.\" There is a \r\nsurprising finality about this claim of Vlastos', and it behooves \r\nhis critics to consider whether such finality is justified. I think \r\nmyself that, while Vlastos' arguments are forceful and well ex- \r\npressed, they still fail to carry absolute conviction; and in this \r\nbrief discussion I shall try to set out the reasons for my \r\nscepticism. [p. 61]","btype":3,"date":"1958","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/0OSvPVeLSMxRqoo","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":10,"full_name":"Booth, N. B.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":769,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"The American Journal of Philology","volume":"79","issue":"1","pages":"61-65"}},"sort":["Did Melissus Believe in Incorporeal Being?"]}
| Title | Die Entstehung physikalischer Terminologie aus der neuplatonischen Metaphysik |
| Type | Article |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1969 |
| Journal | Archiv für Begriffsgeschichte |
| Volume | 13 |
| Pages | 7-33 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Tsouyopoulos, Nelly |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/5pNxkufH3Ik3PjS |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"457","_score":null,"_source":{"id":457,"authors_free":[{"id":614,"entry_id":457,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":410,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Tsouyopoulos, Nelly","free_first_name":"Nelly","free_last_name":"Tsouyopoulos","norm_person":{"id":410,"first_name":" Nelly ","last_name":"Tsouyopoulos","full_name":"Tsouyopoulos, Nelly ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Die Entstehung physikalischer Terminologie aus der neuplatonischen Metaphysik","main_title":{"title":"Die Entstehung physikalischer Terminologie aus der neuplatonischen Metaphysik"},"abstract":"","btype":3,"date":"1969","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/5pNxkufH3Ik3PjS","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":410,"full_name":"Tsouyopoulos, Nelly ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":457,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Archiv f\u00fcr Begriffsgeschichte","volume":"13","issue":"","pages":"7-33"}},"sort":["Die Entstehung physikalischer Terminologie aus der neuplatonischen Metaphysik"]}
| Title | Die Neuplatonischen Aristoteleskommentatoren über die Ursachen der Pseudepigraphie |
| Type | Article |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1969 |
| Journal | Rheinisches Museum für Philologie |
| Volume | 112 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 120-126 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Müller, Carl Werner |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
Das am häufigsten interpretierte Werk des Corpus Aristote- licum in der Antike ist die Kategorienschrift. Die den Kommen taren vorausgeschickte Einleitung kommt dabei meist einer all gemeinen Einführung in das Studium der aristotelischen Philo sophie gleich. Seit Ammonios, dem Sohn des Hermeias, wird in diesem Zusammenhang auch das Problem der vöfta ßißXLa be rührt (CAG IV4, 8, 2-6)x). Während aber Ammonios selbst nur kurz das Faktum, viele hätten ihre eigenen Werke unter dem Namen des Aristoteles herausgegeben, erwähnt zu haben scheint2), erfährt dieser Punkt bei seinen Schülern eine mehr oder weniger umfangreiche Ausgestaltung. [p. 120] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/0XdjWLb1V5DzrX9 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"950","_score":null,"_source":{"id":950,"authors_free":[{"id":1426,"entry_id":950,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":273,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"M\u00fcller, Carl Werner","free_first_name":"Carl Werner","free_last_name":"M\u00fcller","norm_person":{"id":273,"first_name":"Carl Werner","last_name":"M\u00fcller","full_name":"M\u00fcller, Carl Werner","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/11944027X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Die Neuplatonischen Aristoteleskommentatoren \u00fcber die Ursachen der Pseudepigraphie","main_title":{"title":"Die Neuplatonischen Aristoteleskommentatoren \u00fcber die Ursachen der Pseudepigraphie"},"abstract":"Das am h\u00e4ufigsten interpretierte Werk des Corpus Aristote- \r\nlicum in der Antike ist die Kategorienschrift. Die den Kommen\u00ad\r\ntaren vorausgeschickte Einleitung kommt dabei meist einer all\u00ad\r\ngemeinen Einf\u00fchrung in das Studium der aristotelischen Philo\u00ad\r\nsophie gleich. Seit Ammonios, dem Sohn des Hermeias, wird in \r\ndiesem Zusammenhang auch das Problem der v\u00f6fta \u00dfi\u00dfXLa be\u00ad\r\nr\u00fchrt (CAG IV4, 8, 2-6)x). W\u00e4hrend aber Ammonios selbst nur \r\nkurz das Faktum, viele h\u00e4tten ihre eigenen Werke unter dem \r\nNamen des Aristoteles herausgegeben, erw\u00e4hnt zu haben \r\nscheint2), erf\u00e4hrt dieser Punkt bei seinen Sch\u00fclern eine mehr \r\noder weniger umfangreiche Ausgestaltung. [p. 120]","btype":3,"date":"1969","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/0XdjWLb1V5DzrX9","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":273,"full_name":"M\u00fcller, Carl Werner","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":950,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Rheinisches Museum f\u00fcr Philologie","volume":"112","issue":"2","pages":"120-126"}},"sort":["Die Neuplatonischen Aristoteleskommentatoren \u00fcber die Ursachen der Pseudepigraphie"]}
| Title | Die Welt, Ungeworden und Unvergänglch: Interpretation und Textkritik zu Aristoteles, De caelo A 11-12 |
| Type | Article |
| Language | German |
| Date | 1969 |
| Journal | Hermes |
| Volume | 97 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 198-204 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Mau, Jürgen |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
Das Thema für Kap. n — 12 ist am Schluß von Kap. 10 gegeben; 280a 28: »Einige vertreten die Ansicht, etwas dem Werden nicht Unterliegendes (aye- vy)tov) könne vergehen, und etwas Entstandenes könne unvergänglich bestehen bleiben, wie im Timaios. Dort nämlich sagt (Platon), der Himmel sei zwar ge worden, indessen werde er die übrige immerwährende Zeit existieren. Mit diesen haben wir uns bisher nur unter physikalischen Gesichtspunkten betreffs des Himmels auseinandergesetzt. Nachdem wir die Untersuchung aber allge mein über alles angestellt haben, wird auch hierüber Klarheit sein.«Wir dürfen also eine Argumentation erwarten, der Form: »Wenn für jedes Subjekt gilt: Es kann nicht geworden und unvergänglich sein, dann gilt es auch für den Himmel. Nun gilt es für jedes, also auch für den Himmel.« Dieser Beweis — besser: diese Beweise, denn es handelt sich nicht um eine elemen- tatio, wie Aristoteles sie für die Geometrie kannte und wie, aus Aristoteles schöpfend, 700 Jahre später Proklos sie für Physik und Theologie schrieb, — finden sich in Kap. 12... [p. 198] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/fufmk0R2fa91Fgd |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"994","_score":null,"_source":{"id":994,"authors_free":[{"id":1498,"entry_id":994,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":241,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mau, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Mau","norm_person":{"id":241,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Mau","full_name":"Mau,J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117747351","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Die Welt, Ungeworden und Unverg\u00e4nglch: Interpretation und Textkritik zu Aristoteles, De caelo A 11-12","main_title":{"title":"Die Welt, Ungeworden und Unverg\u00e4nglch: Interpretation und Textkritik zu Aristoteles, De caelo A 11-12"},"abstract":"Das Thema f\u00fcr Kap. n \u2014 12 ist am Schlu\u00df von Kap. 10 gegeben; 280a 28: \r\n\u00bbEinige vertreten die Ansicht, etwas dem Werden nicht Unterliegendes (aye- \r\nvy)tov) k\u00f6nne vergehen, und etwas Entstandenes k\u00f6nne unverg\u00e4nglich bestehen \r\nbleiben, wie im Timaios. Dort n\u00e4mlich sagt (Platon), der Himmel sei zwar ge\u00ad\r\nworden, indessen werde er die \u00fcbrige immerw\u00e4hrende Zeit existieren. Mit \r\ndiesen haben wir uns bisher nur unter physikalischen Gesichtspunkten betreffs \r\ndes Himmels auseinandergesetzt. Nachdem wir die Untersuchung aber allge\u00ad\r\nmein \u00fcber alles angestellt haben, wird auch hier\u00fcber Klarheit sein.\u00abWir d\u00fcrfen also eine Argumentation erwarten, der Form: \u00bbWenn f\u00fcr jedes \r\nSubjekt gilt: Es kann nicht geworden und unverg\u00e4nglich sein, dann gilt es \r\nauch f\u00fcr den Himmel. Nun gilt es f\u00fcr jedes, also auch f\u00fcr den Himmel.\u00ab Dieser \r\nBeweis \u2014 besser: diese Beweise, denn es handelt sich nicht um eine elemen- \r\ntatio, wie Aristoteles sie f\u00fcr die Geometrie kannte und wie, aus Aristoteles \r\nsch\u00f6pfend, 700 Jahre sp\u00e4ter Proklos sie f\u00fcr Physik und Theologie schrieb, \r\n\u2014 finden sich in Kap. 12... [p. 198]","btype":3,"date":"1969","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/fufmk0R2fa91Fgd","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":241,"full_name":"Mau,J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":994,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Hermes","volume":"97","issue":"2","pages":"198-204"}},"sort":["Die Welt, Ungeworden und Unverg\u00e4nglch: Interpretation und Textkritik zu Aristoteles, De caelo A 11-12"]}