Title | L'ecole néoplatonicienne d'Athènes |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1990 |
Published in | Recherches sur le néoplatonisme après Plotin |
Pages | 127-129 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Saffrey, Henri Dominique |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
À l’intérieur du vaste mouvement philosophique que l’on désigne globalement sous le nom de néo-platonisme et qui se développe du IIIe au VIe siècle après J.-C., on distingue des écoles diverses. Fondé à Rome par Plotin, qui y enseigne de 245 à 270, et maintenu vivant sur place par Porphyre et ses successeurs (dont plusieurs passèrent au christianisme, par exemple Marius Victorinus), le néo-platonisme se répandit d’abord en Asie Mineure et spécialement à Apamée et Antioche, où enseigna Jamblique. Celui-ci réussit à amalgamer la métaphysique plotinienne et les théories et pratiques de la théurgie en vogue dans l’Orient grec. Cette synthèse fournit à l’empereur Julien l’Apostat une base doctrinale pour le renouveau de la religion païenne qu’il tenta de faire triompher sous son règne (361-363). De cette école syrienne sortirent deux rameaux d’inégale valeur : d’une part, l’école de Pergame, franchement adonnée à la magie et délaissant entièrement le vieux rationalisme grec, et, d’autre part, l’école d’Athènes, qui parviendra à se greffer sur la souche de l’antique Académie de Platon au début du Ve siècle. À peu près au même moment, un autre rejeton paraîtra à Alexandrie, et cette école survivra même à celle d’Athènes pour faire passer au monde arabe vers la fin du VIe siècle tout le capital du néo-platonisme. [introduction p. 126] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/ZrGOMqaxAxCT1p0 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1174","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1174,"authors_free":[{"id":1749,"entry_id":1174,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":228,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","free_first_name":"Henri Dominique","free_last_name":"Saffrey","norm_person":{"id":228,"first_name":"Henri Dominique","last_name":"Saffrey","full_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130160059","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"L'ecole n\u00e9oplatonicienne d'Ath\u00e8nes","main_title":{"title":"L'ecole n\u00e9oplatonicienne d'Ath\u00e8nes"},"abstract":"\u00c0 l\u2019int\u00e9rieur du vaste mouvement philosophique que l\u2019on d\u00e9signe globalement sous le nom de n\u00e9o-platonisme et qui se d\u00e9veloppe du IIIe au VIe si\u00e8cle apr\u00e8s J.-C., on distingue des \u00e9coles diverses.\r\n\r\nFond\u00e9 \u00e0 Rome par Plotin, qui y enseigne de 245 \u00e0 270, et maintenu vivant sur place par Porphyre et ses successeurs (dont plusieurs pass\u00e8rent au christianisme, par exemple Marius Victorinus), le n\u00e9o-platonisme se r\u00e9pandit d\u2019abord en Asie Mineure et sp\u00e9cialement \u00e0 Apam\u00e9e et Antioche, o\u00f9 enseigna Jamblique. Celui-ci r\u00e9ussit \u00e0 amalgamer la m\u00e9taphysique plotinienne et les th\u00e9ories et pratiques de la th\u00e9urgie en vogue dans l\u2019Orient grec. Cette synth\u00e8se fournit \u00e0 l\u2019empereur Julien l\u2019Apostat une base doctrinale pour le renouveau de la religion pa\u00efenne qu\u2019il tenta de faire triompher sous son r\u00e8gne (361-363).\r\n\r\nDe cette \u00e9cole syrienne sortirent deux rameaux d\u2019in\u00e9gale valeur : d\u2019une part, l\u2019\u00e9cole de Pergame, franchement adonn\u00e9e \u00e0 la magie et d\u00e9laissant enti\u00e8rement le vieux rationalisme grec, et, d\u2019autre part, l\u2019\u00e9cole d\u2019Ath\u00e8nes, qui parviendra \u00e0 se greffer sur la souche de l\u2019antique Acad\u00e9mie de Platon au d\u00e9but du Ve si\u00e8cle.\r\n\r\n\u00c0 peu pr\u00e8s au m\u00eame moment, un autre rejeton para\u00eetra \u00e0 Alexandrie, et cette \u00e9cole survivra m\u00eame \u00e0 celle d\u2019Ath\u00e8nes pour faire passer au monde arabe vers la fin du VIe si\u00e8cle tout le capital du n\u00e9o-platonisme. [introduction p. 126]","btype":2,"date":"1990","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ZrGOMqaxAxCT1p0","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":228,"full_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1174,"section_of":1461,"pages":"127-129","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1461,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":1,"language":"fr","title":"Recherches sur le n\u00e9oplatonisme apr\u00e8s Plotin","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Saffrey1990","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1990","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/PXWKxSDEtCXXJtb","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1461,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Vrin","series":"Histoire des doctrines de l\u2019antiquit\u00e9 classique","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1990]}
Title | Les introductions aux commentaires exégétiques chez les auteurs néoplatoniciens et les auteurs chrétiens |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1990 |
Published in | Simplicius. Commentaire sur les Catégories. Traduction commentée sous la direction de Ilsetraut Hadot. Fascicule I: Introduction, Première partie (p. 1-9, 3 Kalbfleisch) |
Pages | 21-47 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
The text discusses the introductions to exegetical commentaries by Neoplatonic and Christian authors, using Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's Categories as an example. It is divided into two parts: the first provides the historical context, sources and method, and the second develops the two traditional outlines used in the introduction of commentaries on the Categories. These two outlines are found in the commentaries of the four other Neoplatonic authors who commented on the Categories, namely Ammonius, Philopon, Olympiodore and David, and also in the Arabic introductions of Al-Farabi and Al-Kindi. The text offers a comparative study of the commentaries and the introductions, highlighting the differences in structure and form. [introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/2ecCQO0VOCCVgZa |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1182","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1182,"authors_free":[{"id":1755,"entry_id":1182,"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}},{"id":1974,"entry_id":1182,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Les introductions aux commentaires ex\u00e9g\u00e9tiques chez les auteurs n\u00e9oplatoniciens et les auteurs chr\u00e9tiens","main_title":{"title":"Les introductions aux commentaires ex\u00e9g\u00e9tiques chez les auteurs n\u00e9oplatoniciens et les auteurs chr\u00e9tiens"},"abstract":"The text discusses the introductions to exegetical commentaries by Neoplatonic and Christian authors, using Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's Categories as an example. It is divided into two parts: the first provides the historical context, sources and method, and the second develops the two traditional outlines used in the introduction of commentaries on the Categories. These two outlines are found in the commentaries of the four other Neoplatonic authors who commented on the Categories, namely Ammonius, Philopon, Olympiodore and David, and also in the Arabic introductions of Al-Farabi and Al-Kindi. The text offers a comparative study of the commentaries and the introductions, highlighting the differences in structure and form. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1990","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/2ecCQO0VOCCVgZa","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1182,"section_of":179,"pages":"21-47","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":179,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Commentaire sur les Cat\u00e9gories. Traduction comment\u00e9e sous la direction de Ilsetraut Hadot. Fascicule I: Introduction, Premi\u00e8re partie (p. 1-9, 3 Kalbfleisch)","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1990e","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1990","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1990","abstract":"The French translation with commentary, the first in a modern language, allows historians of philosophy access to a fundamental work for the understanding of medieval and modern thought. They could also explore more easily the great variety of information contained in the commentary of Simplicius on the history of the exegis of the Cat\u00e9gories of Aristotle, and more generally on the history of comparative philosophy of Simplicius. They will discover some important aspects in the actual thought of Simplicius, which so far has hardly been explored. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/KyrBWf80BsqVFO8","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":179,"pubplace":"Leiden - New York - K\u00f8benhavn - K\u00f6ln","publisher":"Brill","series":"Philosophia antiqua. A Series of studies on ancient Philosophy","volume":"50.1","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1990]}
Title | The school of Alexander? |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1990 |
Published in | Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence |
Pages | 83-111 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Sharples, Robert W. |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
Alexander of Aphrodisias was appointed by the emperors as a public teacher of Aristotelian philosophy at some time between 198 and 209 AD. As a public teacher, it is likely that he had, in some sense, a school. But trying to establish what happened in that school and how it functioned is comparable to the task we would face if we had to determine what went on in a philosophy department in a modern university based on a selection of books by the professor, a confused collection of his papers, the notes from which he lectured, and the essays of his students, with no obvious indication of which was which. We know a considerable amount about the Neoplatonic schools of the fifth and sixth centuries AD and the study of Aristotle’s writings in them. We know the place they had in the curriculum, the order in which they were read, and we can compare the ways in which different commentators approached the question of the relationship between the works of Aristotle and those of Plato. We can trace relations between teachers and their pupils, and we are sometimes told that a particular text is a pupil’s record of his teacher’s utterances. The very organization of the commentaries sometimes reflects and clarifies the requirements of the teaching context—in the division of a commentary into separate lectures and the placing of a general summary of a section of argument before the discussion of particular points. For the medieval period, too, we have copious information on the organization of teaching and study. With Alexander, matters are very different. We know the names of some of his teachers, and his surviving works provide evidence for his disagreements with them. We also know something of his disagreements with other philosophers of his own generation or the generation before, and we can trace—however controversially—his influence on later thinkers. But we do not know the name of a single one of his immediate pupils, and for all that we can tell, the influence of other writers on him might have been largely, and his influence on other writers entirely, through the medium of writing rather than personal encounter. After all, we are explicitly told that Alexander’s commentaries were among those read in Plotinus’ school. It is, however, in principle unlikely that any thinker in the ancient world would have communicated entirely through the written, rather than the spoken, word. Some of the writings attributed to Alexander are most naturally seen in the context of his teaching activities or debates within his circle. These writings include commentaries on Aristotelian works, treatises or monographs on particular topics such as those On the Soul and On Fate, and numerous short discussions. Three books of these collected discussions are entitled phusikai skholikai aporiai kai luseis—‘School-discussion problems and solutions on nature’; a fourth is titled Problems on Ethics but sub-titled, no doubt in imitation of the preceding three books when it was united with them, skholikai êthikai aporiai kai luseis—‘School-discussion problems and solutions on ethics.’ A further collection was transmitted as the second book of Alexander’s treatise On the Soul and labeled mantissa or ‘makeweight’ by the Berlin editor Bruns. Other texts essentially similar to those in these collections survive in Arabic, though not in Greek, and there is evidence to suggest that there were other collections now lost. The circumstances in which these collections were put together are unclear; it was not always expertly done, and while some of the titles attached to particular pieces seem to preserve valuable additional information, others are inept or unhelpful. Nor is it clear at what date the collections were assembled. It is not my concern here to provide a full enumeration of the works attributed to Alexander or to classify them in detail. That has been done elsewhere by both myself and others. Rather, I will proceed to a discussion of what the works can tell us about the context in which they arose. It will be helpful to start with a consideration of the relation of Alexander’s works to those of his predecessors, teachers, and contemporaries. [introduction p. 83-85] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/wgzq8ffCF70YlYd |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1027","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1027,"authors_free":[{"id":1551,"entry_id":1027,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":42,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","free_first_name":"Robert W.","free_last_name":"Sharples","norm_person":{"id":42,"first_name":"Robert W.","last_name":"Sharples","full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/114269505","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1552,"entry_id":1027,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The school of Alexander?","main_title":{"title":"The school of Alexander?"},"abstract":"Alexander of Aphrodisias was appointed by the emperors as a public teacher of Aristotelian philosophy at some time between 198 and 209 AD.\r\nAs a public teacher, it is likely that he had, in some sense, a school. But trying to establish what happened in that school and how it functioned is comparable to the task we would face if we had to determine what went on in a philosophy department in a modern university based on a selection of books by the professor, a confused collection of his papers, the notes from which he lectured, and the essays of his students, with no obvious indication of which was which.\r\n\r\nWe know a considerable amount about the Neoplatonic schools of the fifth and sixth centuries AD and the study of Aristotle\u2019s writings in them. We know the place they had in the curriculum, the order in which they were read, and we can compare the ways in which different commentators approached the question of the relationship between the works of Aristotle and those of Plato. We can trace relations between teachers and their pupils, and we are sometimes told that a particular text is a pupil\u2019s record of his teacher\u2019s utterances. The very organization of the commentaries sometimes reflects and clarifies the requirements of the teaching context\u2014in the division of a commentary into separate lectures and the placing of a general summary of a section of argument before the discussion of particular points.\r\n\r\nFor the medieval period, too, we have copious information on the organization of teaching and study.\r\nWith Alexander, matters are very different. We know the names of some of his teachers, and his surviving works provide evidence for his disagreements with them. We also know something of his disagreements with other philosophers of his own generation or the generation before, and we can trace\u2014however controversially\u2014his influence on later thinkers.\r\n\r\nBut we do not know the name of a single one of his immediate pupils, and for all that we can tell, the influence of other writers on him might have been largely, and his influence on other writers entirely, through the medium of writing rather than personal encounter. After all, we are explicitly told that Alexander\u2019s commentaries were among those read in Plotinus\u2019 school.\r\n\r\nIt is, however, in principle unlikely that any thinker in the ancient world would have communicated entirely through the written, rather than the spoken, word. Some of the writings attributed to Alexander are most naturally seen in the context of his teaching activities or debates within his circle.\r\n\r\nThese writings include commentaries on Aristotelian works, treatises or monographs on particular topics such as those On the Soul and On Fate, and numerous short discussions. Three books of these collected discussions are entitled phusikai skholikai aporiai kai luseis\u2014\u2018School-discussion problems and solutions on nature\u2019; a fourth is titled Problems on Ethics but sub-titled, no doubt in imitation of the preceding three books when it was united with them, skholikai \u00eathikai aporiai kai luseis\u2014\u2018School-discussion problems and solutions on ethics.\u2019\r\n\r\nA further collection was transmitted as the second book of Alexander\u2019s treatise On the Soul and labeled mantissa or \u2018makeweight\u2019 by the Berlin editor Bruns. Other texts essentially similar to those in these collections survive in Arabic, though not in Greek, and there is evidence to suggest that there were other collections now lost.\r\n\r\nThe circumstances in which these collections were put together are unclear; it was not always expertly done, and while some of the titles attached to particular pieces seem to preserve valuable additional information, others are inept or unhelpful. Nor is it clear at what date the collections were assembled.\r\n\r\nIt is not my concern here to provide a full enumeration of the works attributed to Alexander or to classify them in detail. That has been done elsewhere by both myself and others. Rather, I will proceed to a discussion of what the works can tell us about the context in which they arose. It will be helpful to start with a consideration of the relation of Alexander\u2019s works to those of his predecessors, teachers, and contemporaries. [introduction p. 83-85]","btype":2,"date":"1990","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wgzq8ffCF70YlYd","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":42,"full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1027,"section_of":1453,"pages":"83-111","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1453,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1990","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"This book brings together twenty articles giving a comprehensive view of the work of the Aristotelian commentators. First published in 1990, the collection is now brought up to date with a new introduction by Richard Sorabji. New generations of scholars will benefit from this reissuing of classic essays, including seminal works by major scholars, and the volume gives a comprehensive background to the work of the project on the Ancient Commentators on Aristotle, which has published over 100 volumes of translations since 1987 and has disseminated these crucial texts to scholars worldwide.\r\n\r\nThe importance of the commentators is partly that they represent the thought and classroom teaching of the Aristotelian and Neoplatonist schools and partly that they provide a panorama of a thousand years of ancient Greek philosophy, revealing many original quotations from lost works. Even more significant is the profound influence - uncovered in some of the chapters of this book - that they exert on later philosophy, Islamic and Western. Not only did they preserve anti-Aristotelian material which helped inspire Medieval and Renaissance science, but they present Aristotle in a form that made him acceptable to the Christian church. It is not Aristotle, but Aristotle transformed and embedded in the philosophy of the commentators that so often lies behind the views of later thinkers. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/M8lXuAdHpDW8tvu","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1453,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"1","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1990]}
Title | Themistius: the last Peripatetic commentator on Aristotle? |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1990 |
Published in | Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence |
Pages | 113-123 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Blumenthal, Henry J. |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
[B]oth the content of Themistius’ works, and such evidence as we have of the commentators’ attitudes to him, show that he was predominantly a Peripatetic. In this he stood out against the tendencies of his time. His frequently expressed admiration for Plato does not invalidate this conclusion. Themistius may rightly claim to have been the last major figure in antiquity who was a genuine follower of Aristotle. For him, unlike his contemporaries, Plato does not surpass the master of those who know but he, and Socrates, ‘innanzi agli altri piu presso gli stanno’. [Conclusion, p. 123] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/j4M1Faq3An8bJ7v |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"875","_score":null,"_source":{"id":875,"authors_free":[{"id":1285,"entry_id":875,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1286,"entry_id":875,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Themistius: the last Peripatetic commentator on Aristotle?","main_title":{"title":"Themistius: the last Peripatetic commentator on Aristotle?"},"abstract":"[B]oth the content of Themistius\u2019 works, and such evidence as we \r\nhave of the commentators\u2019 attitudes to him, show that he was \r\npredominantly a Peripatetic. In this he stood out against the tendencies \r\nof his time. His frequently expressed admiration for Plato does not \r\ninvalidate this conclusion. Themistius may rightly claim to have been the \r\nlast major figure in antiquity who was a genuine follower of Aristotle. For \r\nhim, unlike his contemporaries, Plato does not surpass the master of \r\nthose who know but he, and Socrates, \u2018innanzi agli altri piu presso gli \r\nstanno\u2019. [Conclusion, p. 123]","btype":2,"date":"1990","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/j4M1Faq3An8bJ7v","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":875,"section_of":1453,"pages":"113-123","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1453,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1990","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"This book brings together twenty articles giving a comprehensive view of the work of the Aristotelian commentators. First published in 1990, the collection is now brought up to date with a new introduction by Richard Sorabji. New generations of scholars will benefit from this reissuing of classic essays, including seminal works by major scholars, and the volume gives a comprehensive background to the work of the project on the Ancient Commentators on Aristotle, which has published over 100 volumes of translations since 1987 and has disseminated these crucial texts to scholars worldwide.\r\n\r\nThe importance of the commentators is partly that they represent the thought and classroom teaching of the Aristotelian and Neoplatonist schools and partly that they provide a panorama of a thousand years of ancient Greek philosophy, revealing many original quotations from lost works. Even more significant is the profound influence - uncovered in some of the chapters of this book - that they exert on later philosophy, Islamic and Western. Not only did they preserve anti-Aristotelian material which helped inspire Medieval and Renaissance science, but they present Aristotle in a form that made him acceptable to the Christian church. It is not Aristotle, but Aristotle transformed and embedded in the philosophy of the commentators that so often lies behind the views of later thinkers. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/M8lXuAdHpDW8tvu","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1453,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"1","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1990]}
Title | The development of Philoponus’ thought and its chronology |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1990 |
Published in | Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence |
Pages | 233-274 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Verrycken, Koenraad |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
The position I should like to defend is to some extent intermediate between that of Gudeman and that of Ilvrard. I think Ilvrard is right in rejecting the hypothesis of Philoponus' conversion. But I also think Gudeman was right in assuming—more or less conjecturally—a duality in Philoponus’ philosophical work. Both Gudeman and Ilvrard, however, pose the problem wrongly in terms of ‘religious conviction’ only. If Philoponus did not develop a Christian philosophy in his first philosophical period, that does not show that he must have been a pagan at that time. And if he was born a Christian, that does not establish that his philosophy must always have been Christian in character. Philosophy is one thing, religion another. In my opinion, the problem should first be posed on the purely philosophical level: what does the author say? Only afterwards can one try to ‘project’ the results of the philosophical analysis onto the levels of biography and psychology. This is the method I employ. To start with, I shall outline very briefly the main characteristics of the philosophical systems of ‘Philoponus 1’ and ‘Philoponus 2’, as I shall call them. Then I shall try to piece together something of what can reasonably be said about Philoponus’ biography. Thirdly, I shall propose the first sketch of a new solution to the problem of the chronology of the author’s Aristotelian commentaries. I shall finish with some remarks on the development of Philoponus 2. [introduction p. 236] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/d1kiVpaSlWKa7uY |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"449","_score":null,"_source":{"id":449,"authors_free":[{"id":601,"entry_id":449,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":347,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verrycken, Koenraad","free_first_name":"Koenraad","free_last_name":"Verrycken","norm_person":{"id":347,"first_name":"Koenraad","last_name":"Verrycken","full_name":"Verrycken, Koenraad","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1048689964","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":602,"entry_id":449,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The development of Philoponus\u2019 thought and its chronology","main_title":{"title":"The development of Philoponus\u2019 thought and its chronology"},"abstract":"The position I should like to defend is to some extent intermediate between that of Gudeman and that of Ilvrard. I think Ilvrard is right in rejecting the hypothesis of Philoponus' conversion. But I also think Gudeman was right in assuming\u2014more or less conjecturally\u2014a duality in Philoponus\u2019 philosophical work. Both Gudeman and Ilvrard, however, pose the problem wrongly in terms of \u2018religious conviction\u2019 only. If Philoponus did not develop a Christian philosophy in his first philosophical period, that does not show that he must have been a pagan at that time. And if he was born a Christian, that does not establish that his philosophy must always have been Christian in character. Philosophy is one thing, religion another.\r\n\r\nIn my opinion, the problem should first be posed on the purely philosophical level: what does the author say? Only afterwards can one try to \u2018project\u2019 the results of the philosophical analysis onto the levels of biography and psychology. This is the method I employ.\r\n\r\nTo start with, I shall outline very briefly the main characteristics of the philosophical systems of \u2018Philoponus 1\u2019 and \u2018Philoponus 2\u2019, as I shall call them. Then I shall try to piece together something of what can reasonably be said about Philoponus\u2019 biography. Thirdly, I shall propose the first sketch of a new solution to the problem of the chronology of the author\u2019s Aristotelian commentaries. I shall finish with some remarks on the development of Philoponus 2. [introduction p. 236]","btype":2,"date":"1990","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/d1kiVpaSlWKa7uY","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":347,"full_name":"Verrycken, Koenraad","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":449,"section_of":1453,"pages":"233-274","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1453,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1990","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"This book brings together twenty articles giving a comprehensive view of the work of the Aristotelian commentators. First published in 1990, the collection is now brought up to date with a new introduction by Richard Sorabji. New generations of scholars will benefit from this reissuing of classic essays, including seminal works by major scholars, and the volume gives a comprehensive background to the work of the project on the Ancient Commentators on Aristotle, which has published over 100 volumes of translations since 1987 and has disseminated these crucial texts to scholars worldwide.\r\n\r\nThe importance of the commentators is partly that they represent the thought and classroom teaching of the Aristotelian and Neoplatonist schools and partly that they provide a panorama of a thousand years of ancient Greek philosophy, revealing many original quotations from lost works. Even more significant is the profound influence - uncovered in some of the chapters of this book - that they exert on later philosophy, Islamic and Western. Not only did they preserve anti-Aristotelian material which helped inspire Medieval and Renaissance science, but they present Aristotle in a form that made him acceptable to the Christian church. It is not Aristotle, but Aristotle transformed and embedded in the philosophy of the commentators that so often lies behind the views of later thinkers. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/M8lXuAdHpDW8tvu","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1453,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"1","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1990]}
Title | Pietro d’Abano e l’utilizzazione della traduzione di Guglielmo di Moerbeke del Commento di Simplicio al II libro del De Caelo di Aristotele |
Type | Book Section |
Language | Italian |
Date | 1989 |
Published in | Guillaume de Moerbeke. Recueil d’études à l’occasion du 700e anniversaire de sa mort (1286) |
Pages | 83-112 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Federici-Vescovini, Graziella |
Editor(s) | Brams, Jozef , Vanhamel, Willy |
Translator(s) |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/Km4PwTvVAXA9uOv |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1136","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1136,"authors_free":[{"id":1710,"entry_id":1136,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":487,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Federici-Vescovini, Graziella","free_first_name":"Graziella","free_last_name":"Federici-Vescovini","norm_person":{"id":487,"first_name":"Graziella","last_name":"Federici-Vescovini","full_name":"Federici-Vescovini, Graziella","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/128950552","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2478,"entry_id":1136,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":337,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Brams, Jozef","free_first_name":"Jozef","free_last_name":"Brams","norm_person":{"id":337,"first_name":"Jozef","last_name":"Brams","full_name":"Brams, Jozef","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1145645712","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2479,"entry_id":1136,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":338,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","free_first_name":"Willy","free_last_name":"Vanhamel","norm_person":{"id":338,"first_name":"Willy","last_name":"Vanhamel","full_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/141109661","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Pietro d\u2019Abano e l\u2019utilizzazione della traduzione di Guglielmo di Moerbeke del Commento di Simplicio al II libro del De Caelo di Aristotele","main_title":{"title":"Pietro d\u2019Abano e l\u2019utilizzazione della traduzione di Guglielmo di Moerbeke del Commento di Simplicio al II libro del De Caelo di Aristotele"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"1989","language":"Italian","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Km4PwTvVAXA9uOv","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":487,"full_name":"Federici-Vescovini, Graziella","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":337,"full_name":"Brams, Jozef","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":338,"full_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1136,"section_of":326,"pages":"83-112","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":326,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Guillaume de Moerbeke. Recueil d\u2019\u00e9tudes \u00e0 l\u2019occasion du 700e anniversaire de sa mort (1286)","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Brams1989","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1989","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1989","abstract":"T h e following articles are included in this volume: \"Moerbeke, traducteur et inter-\r\nprete: Un texte et une pensee\" by Gerard Verbeke (pp. 1-21); \"Guillaume de Moer-\r\nbeke et la cour pontificale\" by Agostino Paravicini Bagliani (pp. 23-52); \"Note con-\r\ncernant certaines missions qui auraient ete confiees a Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by\r\nWilly Vanhamel (pp. 53-56); \"Guillaume de Moerbeke et saint Thomas\" by Carlos\r\nSteel (pp. 57-82); \"Pietro d'Abano e l'utilizzazione della traduzione di Guglielmo di\r\nMoerbeke del commento di Simplicio al \/\/ De caelo di Aristotele\" by Graziella Federici\r\nVescovini (pp. 83-106); \"Quelques utilisateurs des textes rares de Moerbeke\r\n(Philopon, Tria opuscula) et particulierement Jacques de Viterbe\" by Louis Jacques\r\nBataillon (pp. 107-12); \"Quelques remarques codicologiques et paleographiques\r\nau sujet du ms. Vaticano Ottob. lat. 1850\" by Robert Wielockx (pp. 113-33);\r\n\"La liste des ceuvres d'Hippocrate dans le Vindobonensis phil. gr. 100: Un\r\nautographe de Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Gudrun Vuillemin-Diem (pp. 135-83);\r\n\"Note concernant la collation d'un deuxieme manuscrit grec de la Physique\r\npar Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Jozef Brams and Gudrun Vuillemin-Diem (pp.\r\n185-92); \"La 'Recensio Matritensis' de la Physique\" by Jozef Brams (pp. 193-220);\r\n\"La Translatio anonyma e la Translatio Guillelmi del De partibus animalium (Analisi del\r\nlibro I)\" by Pietro Rossi (pp. 221-45); \"L'attribution de la Translatio nova du De\r\ngenerations et corruptione a Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Joanna Judycka (pp. 247-51);\r\n\"Iudicialia ad Syrum: Une traduction de Guillaume de Moerbeke du Quadripartitum\r\nde Cl. Ptol\u00a3mee\" by Luc Anthonis (pp. 253-55); \"Methode de traduction et\r\nproblemes de chronologie\" by Fernand Bossier (pp. 257-94); \"L'usage des mots\r\nhybrides greco-latins par Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Louis Jacques Bataillon (pp.\r\n295-99); and \"Biobibliographie de Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Willy Vanhamel\r\n(pp. 301-83).","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/kM52uB2YgiCytgt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":326,"pubplace":"Leuven","publisher":"Leuven University Press","series":"Ancient and Medieval Philosophy de Wulf-Mansion Centre, Series 1","volume":"7","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1989]}
Title | Gibt es Spuren von Theophrasts Phys. op. bei Cicero? |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1989 |
Published in | Cicero's Knowledge of the Peripatos |
Pages | 133-158 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Mansfeld, Jaap |
Editor(s) | Fortenbaugh, William W. , Steinmetz, Peter |
Translator(s) |
Unter Hinweis auf Cicero, Lucullus (= Academica priora II) 118 und 123, Tusculanae disputationes I 18 ff. und De natura deorum I 25 ff. hat Hermann Diels diese Frage bekanntlich bejaht. Die wichtigste Stelle, auf die ich mich aus mehreren Gründen beschränke, ist dabei der Passus über die Prinzipien (Luc. 118), wo der Dissens (dissensio, Luc. 117) der Philosophen von Thales bis zu Platon und den Pythagoreern kritisiert wird. Diels hat hier ganz auffallend argumentiert. Zum einen hat er, teilweise zu Recht, auf Übereinstimmungen zwischen Luc. 118 und den entsprechenden Theophrast-Fragmenten bzw. Paraphrasen in Simplikios’ Kommentar zur aristotelischen Physik hingewiesen, die Usener und er den Physica opinionum zugewiesen haben. Als nächstes aber hat er Luc. 119–121 über die stoische Theorie der Vorsehung (SVF I 92 u. 1161) und über Aristoteles (De philos. fr. 20 Ross) und Stratons (fr. 32 Wehrli) entgegengesetzte Auffassungen ausgeklammert, weil dieses Stück nicht auf Theophrast zurückgeführt werden könne. Aus den nachfolgenden Paragraphen, die über verschiedene Ansichten von den Himmelskörpern und der Erde referieren, hat er schließlich 123 „Hiketas von Syrakus, wie Theophrast sagt“ (Hicetas Syracosius, ut ait Theophrastus …) usw. wieder als Beweis dafür angezogen, dass die doxographische Übersicht zur Astronomie aus den Physica opinionum stamme. In der Nachfolge Krisches hatte schließlich schon Diels zu Recht bemerkt, dass Ciceros unmittelbare Quelle ein Akademiker, wohl ein Karneadesschüler, sein müsse. Das Textstück über Hiketas (auch abgedruckt in Vorsokr. 51.1) hat er als Physica opinionum fr. 18 aufgenommen (DG 492–3). Es ist dies der einzige Cicerotext in der betreffenden Dielsschen Sammlung. [introduction p. 133] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/MGhjgtg4bJWxFhu |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"930","_score":null,"_source":{"id":930,"authors_free":[{"id":1375,"entry_id":930,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":29,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","free_first_name":"Jaap","free_last_name":"Mansfeld","norm_person":{"id":29,"first_name":"Jaap","last_name":"Mansfeld","full_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119383217","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1376,"entry_id":930,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":7,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Fortenbaugh, William W.","free_first_name":"William W.","free_last_name":"Fortenbaugh","norm_person":{"id":7,"first_name":"William W. ","last_name":"Fortenbaugh","full_name":"Fortenbaugh, William W. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/110233700","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1377,"entry_id":930,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":378,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Steinmetz, Peter","free_first_name":"Peter","free_last_name":"Steinmetz","norm_person":{"id":378,"first_name":"Peter","last_name":"Steinmetz","full_name":"Steinmetz, Peter","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/11891913X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Gibt es Spuren von Theophrasts Phys. op. bei Cicero?","main_title":{"title":"Gibt es Spuren von Theophrasts Phys. op. bei Cicero?"},"abstract":"Unter Hinweis auf Cicero, Lucullus (= Academica priora II) 118 und 123, Tusculanae disputationes I 18 ff. und De natura deorum I 25 ff. hat Hermann Diels diese Frage bekanntlich bejaht. Die wichtigste Stelle, auf die ich mich aus mehreren Gr\u00fcnden beschr\u00e4nke, ist dabei der Passus \u00fcber die Prinzipien (Luc. 118), wo der Dissens (dissensio, Luc. 117) der Philosophen von Thales bis zu Platon und den Pythagoreern kritisiert wird. Diels hat hier ganz auffallend argumentiert.\r\n\r\nZum einen hat er, teilweise zu Recht, auf \u00dcbereinstimmungen zwischen Luc. 118 und den entsprechenden Theophrast-Fragmenten bzw. Paraphrasen in Simplikios\u2019 Kommentar zur aristotelischen Physik hingewiesen, die Usener und er den Physica opinionum zugewiesen haben. Als n\u00e4chstes aber hat er Luc. 119\u2013121 \u00fcber die stoische Theorie der Vorsehung (SVF I 92 u. 1161) und \u00fcber Aristoteles (De philos. fr. 20 Ross) und Stratons (fr. 32 Wehrli) entgegengesetzte Auffassungen ausgeklammert, weil dieses St\u00fcck nicht auf Theophrast zur\u00fcckgef\u00fchrt werden k\u00f6nne.\r\n\r\nAus den nachfolgenden Paragraphen, die \u00fcber verschiedene Ansichten von den Himmelsk\u00f6rpern und der Erde referieren, hat er schlie\u00dflich 123 \u201eHiketas von Syrakus, wie Theophrast sagt\u201c (Hicetas Syracosius, ut ait Theophrastus \u2026) usw. wieder als Beweis daf\u00fcr angezogen, dass die doxographische \u00dcbersicht zur Astronomie aus den Physica opinionum stamme.\r\n\r\nIn der Nachfolge Krisches hatte schlie\u00dflich schon Diels zu Recht bemerkt, dass Ciceros unmittelbare Quelle ein Akademiker, wohl ein Karneadessch\u00fcler, sein m\u00fcsse. Das Textst\u00fcck \u00fcber Hiketas (auch abgedruckt in Vorsokr. 51.1) hat er als Physica opinionum fr. 18 aufgenommen (DG 492\u20133). Es ist dies der einzige Cicerotext in der betreffenden Dielsschen Sammlung. [introduction p. 133]","btype":2,"date":"1989","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/MGhjgtg4bJWxFhu","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":29,"full_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":7,"full_name":"Fortenbaugh, William W. ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":378,"full_name":"Steinmetz, Peter","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":930,"section_of":334,"pages":"133-158","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":334,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Cicero's Knowledge of the Peripatos","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Fortenbaugh1989b","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1989","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1989","abstract":"Cicero is best known for his political speeches. His Catilinarian orations are regularly studied in third or fourth year Latin; his self-proclaimed role as savior of the Republic is much discussed in courses on Roman history. But, however fascinating such material may be, there is another side to Cicero which is equally important and only now receiving the attention it deserves. This is Cicero's interest in Hellenistic thought. As a young man he studied philosophy in Greece; throughout his life he maintained a keen interest in intellectual history; and during periods of political inactivity - especially in his last years as the Republic collapsed - he wrote treatises that today are invaluable sources for our knowledge of Hellenistic philosophy, including the School of Aristotle.\r\n\r\nThe essays collected in this volume deal with these treatises and in particular with Cicero's knowledge of Peripatetic philosophy. They ask such questions as: Did Cicero-know Aristotle first hand, or was the corpus Aristotelicum unavailable to him and his contemporaries? Did Cicero have access to the writings of Theophrastus, and in general did he know the post-Aristotelians whose works are all but lost to us? When Cicero reports the views of early philosophers, is he a reliable witness, and is he conveying important information? These and other fundamental questions are asked with special reference to traditional areas of Greek thought: logic and rhetoric, politics and ethics, physics, psychology, and theology. The answers are various, but the overall impression is clear: Cicero himself was a highly intelligent, well educated Roman, whose treatises contain significant material. Scholars working on Peripatetic thought and on the Hellenistic period as a whole cannot afford to ignore them.\r\n\r\nThis fourth volume in the Rutgers University Studies in Classic Humanities series deals with Cicero, orator and writer of the late Roman Republic. Interest in Cicero arose out of Project Theophrastus, an international undertaking based at Rutgers dedicated to collecting, editing, and translating the fragments of Theophrastus. This collection will be of value to philologists, classicists, philosophers, as well as those interested in the history of science. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FFKNInd4WCcNVDu","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":334,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Routledge","series":"Rutgers Studies in Classical Humanities","volume":"4","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1989]}
Title | Simplicius' Testimony Concerning Anaxagoras |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1989 |
Published in | Ionian Philosophy |
Pages | 369-374 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Sylvestre, Maria Luisa |
Editor(s) | Boudouris, Konstantin, J. |
Translator(s) |
This text discusses Simplicius' testimony concerning Anaxagoras and the authenticity of the fragments attributed to Anaxagoras, which are mostly preserved by Simplicius. While scholars have debated the authenticity of Simplicius' fragments, the author believes in Simplicius' faithfulness to the true doctrine of Anaxagoras. However, the author notes that Simplicius wrote about a thousand years after Anaxagoras, was a pupil of Proclus, and a neo-Platonist himself. The text highlights the importance of comparing Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle with the corresponding text of Aristotle to understand his personal interpretation of Anaxagoras. Finally, the text briefly discusses Anaxagoras' concept of nous and its interpretation by Plato, Aristotle, and Simplicius. [introduction/conclusion] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/gJ3DXudfcNprrxr |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1385","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1385,"authors_free":[{"id":2137,"entry_id":1385,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":327,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sylvestre, Maria Luisa","free_first_name":"Maria Luisa","free_last_name":"Sylvestre","norm_person":{"id":327,"first_name":"Maria Luisa","last_name":"Sylvestre","full_name":"Sylvestre, Maria Luisa","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2138,"entry_id":1385,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":328,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Boudouris, Konstantin, J.","free_first_name":"Konstantin, J.","free_last_name":"Boudouris","norm_person":{"id":328,"first_name":"Konstantin J.","last_name":"Boudouris,","full_name":"Boudouris, Konstantin J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1041800053","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius' Testimony Concerning Anaxagoras","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius' Testimony Concerning Anaxagoras"},"abstract":"This text discusses Simplicius' testimony concerning Anaxagoras and the authenticity of the fragments attributed to Anaxagoras, which are mostly preserved by Simplicius. While scholars have debated the authenticity of Simplicius' fragments, the author believes in Simplicius' faithfulness to the true doctrine of Anaxagoras. However, the author notes that Simplicius wrote about a thousand years after Anaxagoras, was a pupil of Proclus, and a neo-Platonist himself. The text highlights the importance of comparing Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle with the corresponding text of Aristotle to understand his personal interpretation of Anaxagoras. Finally, the text briefly discusses Anaxagoras' concept of nous and its interpretation by Plato, Aristotle, and Simplicius. [introduction\/conclusion]","btype":2,"date":"1989","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/gJ3DXudfcNprrxr","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":327,"full_name":"Sylvestre, Maria Luisa","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":328,"full_name":"Boudouris, Konstantin J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1385,"section_of":238,"pages":"369-374","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":238,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Ionian Philosophy","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Boudouris1989","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1989","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1989","abstract":"\u2018The articles in this volume are, in the main, the texts of papers read either in full or in part at the First International Conference on Greek Philosophy (Samos 1988)\u2019 (from the editor\u2019s Preface). Appropriately to such a first conference, it was devoted to the beginnings of philosophy in Greece and, more specifically, in Ionia itself. The volume includes forty- seven papers dealing with all the major figures of Ionian philosophy, from the Milesians to Anaxagoras. Pythagoras, the most illustrious native of Samos, and the Pythagoreans (technically considered an \u2018Italian\u2019 sect, but included by courtesy in the theme of the conference), attract the attention of seven scholars. The other notable Samian, Melissus, is the subject of only one contribution, by D. Furley, possibly because Melissus is usually\r\nBOOK REVIEWS 141classified by the doxographers as an Eleatic. Xenophanes of Colophon is dealt with in five of the articles. Perhaps not surprisingly, almost half of the papers deal with Heraclitus of Ephesus, just across the water from Samos. Among those excluded from this book are the Italians Parmenides, Zeno and Empedocles, and the atomists of Abdera\" [Review Scolnicov]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/9oSZ8qRrH4iopVv","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":238,"pubplace":"Athen","publisher":"International Association for Greek Philosophy and Center for Greek Philosophy and Culture","series":"Studies in Greek Philosophy","volume":"1","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1989]}
Title | Guillaume de Moerbeke et Saint Thomas |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1989 |
Published in | Guillaume de Moerbeke. Recueil d’études à l’occasion du 700e anniversaire de sa mort (1286) |
Pages | 57-82 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | Brams, Jozef , Vanhamel, Willy |
Translator(s) |
On peut difficilement expliquer l’utilisation privilégiée des traductions de Moerbeke dont témoigne l’œuvre de saint Thomas, si on n’admet pas que les deux hommes aient été en relation directe. Certes, Guillaume a commencé son projet de traduction sans l’initiative ou l’encouragement de Thomas. Mais, quand ce dernier eut pris connaissance du travail de son confrère (probablement lors d’une rencontre à Viterbe), il a commencé à utiliser ses traductions. Il est même probable qu’il a commandé quelques fois lui-même une traduction. Les données manquent pour pouvoir parler d’une véritable collaboration entre les deux hommes. D’ailleurs, je n’ai pas l’impression que leurs intérêts intellectuels étaient convergents. Si on peut prendre le prologue de la Perspectiva de Witelo comme un témoignage indirect sur la pensée de Guillaume, il semble qu’il avait une préférence pour une philosophie platonisante, avec un intérêt particulier pour la philosophie de la nature et l’astronomie (-logie?). Il avait probablement plus de connaturalité intellectuelle avec son jeune ami et compatriote Henri Bate (qui lui a dédié son traité sur la composition de l’astrolabe) qu’avec le théologien-philosophe Thomas d’Aquin. Quoi qu’il en soit, il est hors de doute que Thomas a pu profiter largement du travail de son confrère. Selon la tradition, Thomas aurait pris des initiatives pour obtenir de nouvelles traductions d’Aristote. Les faits que nous avons examinés ne sont pas en contradiction avec ce témoignage. Mais, comme il arrive fréquemment dans une tradition hagiographique, on accentue tellement les exploits du héros principal qu’on a tendance à réduire l’activité des contemporains à celle de « collaborateurs » et à minimiser leur apport original. D’où la tradition que Guillaume de Moerbeke aurait entrepris tout son travail ad instantiam fratris Thomae. L’étude de l’histoire des traductions et les remarques critiques du F. Gauthier nous ont obligés à limiter nettement la portée de ce témoignage. Cette étude a restitué ainsi à Moerbeke son autonomie et son originalité intellectuelle. Mais elle a confirmé également qu’il y a eu communication scientifique entre les deux dominicains (ce qui est le noyau solide de la tradition). Thomas a très vite compris l’importance du travail de son confrère. Il en a profité le premier, et c’est probablement grâce à son autorité que des traductions de Moerbeke ont commencé à circuler à Paris, et à partir de là dans la culture latine. [conclusion p. 81-82] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/3D0JB4FJderQiIl |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1388","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1388,"authors_free":[{"id":2147,"entry_id":1388,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2148,"entry_id":1388,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":337,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Brams, Jozef","free_first_name":"Jozef","free_last_name":"Brams","norm_person":{"id":337,"first_name":"Jozef","last_name":"Brams","full_name":"Brams, Jozef","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1145645712","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2149,"entry_id":1388,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":338,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","free_first_name":"Willy","free_last_name":"Vanhamel","norm_person":{"id":338,"first_name":"Willy","last_name":"Vanhamel","full_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/141109661","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Guillaume de Moerbeke et Saint Thomas","main_title":{"title":"Guillaume de Moerbeke et Saint Thomas"},"abstract":"On peut difficilement expliquer l\u2019utilisation privil\u00e9gi\u00e9e des traductions de Moerbeke dont t\u00e9moigne l\u2019\u0153uvre de saint Thomas, si on n\u2019admet pas que les deux hommes aient \u00e9t\u00e9 en relation directe. Certes, Guillaume a commenc\u00e9 son projet de traduction sans l\u2019initiative ou l\u2019encouragement de Thomas. Mais, quand ce dernier eut pris connaissance du travail de son confr\u00e8re (probablement lors d\u2019une rencontre \u00e0 Viterbe), il a commenc\u00e9 \u00e0 utiliser ses traductions. Il est m\u00eame probable qu\u2019il a command\u00e9 quelques fois lui-m\u00eame une traduction. Les donn\u00e9es manquent pour pouvoir parler d\u2019une v\u00e9ritable collaboration entre les deux hommes.\r\n\r\nD\u2019ailleurs, je n\u2019ai pas l\u2019impression que leurs int\u00e9r\u00eats intellectuels \u00e9taient convergents. Si on peut prendre le prologue de la Perspectiva de Witelo comme un t\u00e9moignage indirect sur la pens\u00e9e de Guillaume, il semble qu\u2019il avait une pr\u00e9f\u00e9rence pour une philosophie platonisante, avec un int\u00e9r\u00eat particulier pour la philosophie de la nature et l\u2019astronomie (-logie?). Il avait probablement plus de connaturalit\u00e9 intellectuelle avec son jeune ami et compatriote Henri Bate (qui lui a d\u00e9di\u00e9 son trait\u00e9 sur la composition de l\u2019astrolabe) qu\u2019avec le th\u00e9ologien-philosophe Thomas d\u2019Aquin.\r\n\r\nQuoi qu\u2019il en soit, il est hors de doute que Thomas a pu profiter largement du travail de son confr\u00e8re. Selon la tradition, Thomas aurait pris des initiatives pour obtenir de nouvelles traductions d\u2019Aristote. Les faits que nous avons examin\u00e9s ne sont pas en contradiction avec ce t\u00e9moignage. Mais, comme il arrive fr\u00e9quemment dans une tradition hagiographique, on accentue tellement les exploits du h\u00e9ros principal qu\u2019on a tendance \u00e0 r\u00e9duire l\u2019activit\u00e9 des contemporains \u00e0 celle de \u00ab collaborateurs \u00bb et \u00e0 minimiser leur apport original.\r\n\r\nD\u2019o\u00f9 la tradition que Guillaume de Moerbeke aurait entrepris tout son travail ad instantiam fratris Thomae. L\u2019\u00e9tude de l\u2019histoire des traductions et les remarques critiques du F. Gauthier nous ont oblig\u00e9s \u00e0 limiter nettement la port\u00e9e de ce t\u00e9moignage. Cette \u00e9tude a restitu\u00e9 ainsi \u00e0 Moerbeke son autonomie et son originalit\u00e9 intellectuelle. Mais elle a confirm\u00e9 \u00e9galement qu\u2019il y a eu communication scientifique entre les deux dominicains (ce qui est le noyau solide de la tradition).\r\n\r\nThomas a tr\u00e8s vite compris l\u2019importance du travail de son confr\u00e8re. Il en a profit\u00e9 le premier, et c\u2019est probablement gr\u00e2ce \u00e0 son autorit\u00e9 que des traductions de Moerbeke ont commenc\u00e9 \u00e0 circuler \u00e0 Paris, et \u00e0 partir de l\u00e0 dans la culture latine. [conclusion p. 81-82]","btype":2,"date":"1989","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/3D0JB4FJderQiIl","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":337,"full_name":"Brams, Jozef","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":338,"full_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1388,"section_of":326,"pages":"57-82","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":326,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Guillaume de Moerbeke. Recueil d\u2019\u00e9tudes \u00e0 l\u2019occasion du 700e anniversaire de sa mort (1286)","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Brams1989","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1989","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1989","abstract":"T h e following articles are included in this volume: \"Moerbeke, traducteur et inter-\r\nprete: Un texte et une pensee\" by Gerard Verbeke (pp. 1-21); \"Guillaume de Moer-\r\nbeke et la cour pontificale\" by Agostino Paravicini Bagliani (pp. 23-52); \"Note con-\r\ncernant certaines missions qui auraient ete confiees a Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by\r\nWilly Vanhamel (pp. 53-56); \"Guillaume de Moerbeke et saint Thomas\" by Carlos\r\nSteel (pp. 57-82); \"Pietro d'Abano e l'utilizzazione della traduzione di Guglielmo di\r\nMoerbeke del commento di Simplicio al \/\/ De caelo di Aristotele\" by Graziella Federici\r\nVescovini (pp. 83-106); \"Quelques utilisateurs des textes rares de Moerbeke\r\n(Philopon, Tria opuscula) et particulierement Jacques de Viterbe\" by Louis Jacques\r\nBataillon (pp. 107-12); \"Quelques remarques codicologiques et paleographiques\r\nau sujet du ms. Vaticano Ottob. lat. 1850\" by Robert Wielockx (pp. 113-33);\r\n\"La liste des ceuvres d'Hippocrate dans le Vindobonensis phil. gr. 100: Un\r\nautographe de Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Gudrun Vuillemin-Diem (pp. 135-83);\r\n\"Note concernant la collation d'un deuxieme manuscrit grec de la Physique\r\npar Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Jozef Brams and Gudrun Vuillemin-Diem (pp.\r\n185-92); \"La 'Recensio Matritensis' de la Physique\" by Jozef Brams (pp. 193-220);\r\n\"La Translatio anonyma e la Translatio Guillelmi del De partibus animalium (Analisi del\r\nlibro I)\" by Pietro Rossi (pp. 221-45); \"L'attribution de la Translatio nova du De\r\ngenerations et corruptione a Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Joanna Judycka (pp. 247-51);\r\n\"Iudicialia ad Syrum: Une traduction de Guillaume de Moerbeke du Quadripartitum\r\nde Cl. Ptol\u00a3mee\" by Luc Anthonis (pp. 253-55); \"Methode de traduction et\r\nproblemes de chronologie\" by Fernand Bossier (pp. 257-94); \"L'usage des mots\r\nhybrides greco-latins par Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Louis Jacques Bataillon (pp.\r\n295-99); and \"Biobibliographie de Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Willy Vanhamel\r\n(pp. 301-83).","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/kM52uB2YgiCytgt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":326,"pubplace":"Leuven","publisher":"Leuven University Press","series":"Ancient and Medieval Philosophy de Wulf-Mansion Centre, Series 1","volume":"7","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1989]}
Title | Simplicius and others on Aristotle’s discussions of reason |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1988 |
Published in | Gonimos: Neoplatonic and Byzantine Studies presented to Leendert G. Westerink at 75 |
Pages | 103-119 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Blumenthal, Henry J. |
Editor(s) | Duffy, John , Peradotto, John J. |
Translator(s) |
What I want to do in this paper is to look at how Aristotle’s successors treated some points in his discussions of reason, and in particular the discussion in the De anima. bout their handling of relevant parts of the Nichomachaean Ethics we know very little, for unlike the De anima that treatise was not a major subject of study in the philosophical lectures and seminars of late antiquity. Though a commentary on some of it had been written by Aspasius, and notes by other, probably pre-Neoplatonic, hands survive,8 exposition of the Nicomachean Ethics seems to have been one of the gaps that the group of Aristotelians around Anna Comnena in twelfth-century Constantinople felt that they needed to fill. [pp. 104 f.] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/fYDdU8vNuJj4BJd |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"784","_score":null,"_source":{"id":784,"authors_free":[{"id":1154,"entry_id":784,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2428,"entry_id":784,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":109,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Duffy, John","free_first_name":"John","free_last_name":"Duffy","norm_person":{"id":109,"first_name":"John","last_name":"Duffy","full_name":"Duffy, John","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1032769092","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2429,"entry_id":784,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":110,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Peradotto, John J.","free_first_name":"John J.","free_last_name":"Peradotto","norm_person":{"id":110,"first_name":"John J.","last_name":"Peradotto","full_name":"Peradotto, John J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/172304636","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius and others on Aristotle\u2019s discussions of reason","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius and others on Aristotle\u2019s discussions of reason"},"abstract":"What I want to do in this paper is to look at how Aristotle\u2019s \r\nsuccessors treated some points in his discussions of reason, and in \r\nparticular the discussion in the De anima. bout their handling of \r\nrelevant parts of the Nichomachaean Ethics we know very little, for \r\nunlike the De anima that treatise was not a major subject of study in \r\nthe philosophical lectures and seminars of late antiquity. Though a \r\ncommentary on some of it had been written by Aspasius, and notes by \r\nother, probably pre-Neoplatonic, hands survive,8 exposition of the \r\nNicomachean Ethics seems to have been one of the gaps that the group \r\nof Aristotelians around Anna Comnena in twelfth-century Constantinople felt that they needed to fill. [pp. 104 f.]","btype":2,"date":"1988","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/fYDdU8vNuJj4BJd","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":109,"full_name":"Duffy, John","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":110,"full_name":"Peradotto, John J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":784,"section_of":35,"pages":"103-119","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":35,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Gonimos: Neoplatonic and Byzantine Studies presented to Leendert G. Westerink at 75","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Duffy1988","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1988","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1988","abstract":"This volume, dedicated to the scholar Leendert G. Westerink, comprises 16 articles across two main areas of his research interests: Neo-Platonic and Byzantine studies. The six Neo-Platonic articles explore subjects such as manuscript histories, philosophical debates, and influences of figures like Porphyry, Iamblichus, and Proclus. Notably, Father Saffrey investigates an anonymous commentary on Parmenides, while other authors delve into Neo-Platonic mathematics, hymns, and commentaries on Aristotle\u2019s discussions of reason.\r\n\r\nThe ten Byzantine studies articles cover a diverse range of historical and cultural insights. Topics include Byzantine letter-writing practices, with George Dennis highlighting humor in personal correspondence, and Cyril Mango examining the collapse of St. Sophia. Further articles focus on figures such as Psellus, Patriarch Cosmas, and fourteenth-century scholar Georgios Karbones, alongside explorations of political and religious tensions in the Ionian Islands under various European rulers. This collection offers an in-depth look at both Neo-Platonic philosophy and Byzantine cultural dynamics, illustrating the intellectual legacy of Westerink\u2019s scholarship. [summary of Lucas Siorvanes' Review]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/QCXOrqqEdxnvWCD","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":35,"pubplace":"Buffalo \u2013 New York","publisher":"Arethusa","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1988]}
Title | Compatible Alternatives: Middle Platonist Theology and the Xenophanes Reception |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1988 |
Published in | Knowledge of God in the Greco-Roman World |
Pages | 92-117 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Mansfeld, Jaap |
Editor(s) | Broek, Roelof van den , Baarda, Tjitze , Mansfeld, Jaap |
Translator(s) |
Students of Middle Platonism are familiar with the phenomenon that the accounts of the divine provided by various authors of the 2nd century CE strike one as incoherent. Qualifications according to the viae negationis, analogia, and eminentia, which to us seem incompatible to a degree, tend to coexist in a peaceful jumble. On the one hand, the essence or nature of God is described by means of a refusal to predicate any attributes whatsoever. Attributes withheld in this way may be arranged in polar pairs. On the other hand, God’s existence as a supreme cause tends to be described in a positive way, for example, by means of varieties of the argumentum ex gradibus entium. The theology of chapter 10 of Alkinoos’ Didaskalikos is a notorious instance of such a medley. That this is not only a problem from an anachronistic modern point of view becomes clear when we adduce important evidence neglected by students of Middle Platonism—namely, the parallel accounts of the theology of Xenophanes to be found in the pseudo-Aristotelian treatise De Melisso Xenophane Gorgia (hereafter MXG), chapters 3–4, and in Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics (pp. 22.22–23.30 Diels). Here, God is said to be, on the one hand, eternal, one, homogeneous, spherical, limited, and unmoved, and, on the other, neither limited nor unlimited, and neither at rest nor in motion. Both pseudo-Aristotle and Simplicius are aware that there is a problem here. The former dialectically exploits the contradiction between the negated pairs of polar opposites and some of the positive attributes to prove Xenophanes’ position unacceptable. The latter resolves this contradiction by arguing that “spherical” means “homogeneous” and “unmoved” means “beyond motion and rest,” i.e., he explains those positive attributes which clash with the negated polar pairs in terms of precisely these pairs. The accounts in pseudo-Aristotle and Simplicius have, as a rule, puzzled students of Presocratic philosophy. What I would like to call the “doxographical vulgate”—i.e., the plurality of sources Diels (still followed by the majority of experts in the field) wanted, at least to the extent that they agree among themselves or with purported fragments of Theophrastus, to derive from Theophrastus’ lost Physikai doxai—knows nothing of the negated pairs of polar attributes. Yet Simplicius explicitly attributes these pairs to Theophrastus. This attribution, as I argue elsewhere, should be accepted. What Theophrastus, following Aristotle (Metaphysics A 5.986b 19 ff.), meant was that Xenophanes was not clear about his one principle, neither committing himself to the view that it is limited nor to the view that it is unlimited, and neither stating clearly that it moves nor that it is at rest. It follows that the doxographical vulgate, which holds that Xenophanes’ God not only is one and eternal but also homogeneous, limited, spherical, unmoved, and rational, does not derive from Theophrastus. It also follows that the source from which the description of Xenophanes’ doctrine in pseudo-Aristotle and Simplicius derives paradoxically combined the entirely positive account found in the doxographical vulgate with Theophrastus’ negative non liquet. The motives that brought about this combination are one of the subjects of the present investigation. [introduction p. 92-93] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/wBb3nfQCrMnJw05 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"931","_score":null,"_source":{"id":931,"authors_free":[{"id":1378,"entry_id":931,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":29,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","free_first_name":"Jaap","free_last_name":"Mansfeld","norm_person":{"id":29,"first_name":"Jaap","last_name":"Mansfeld","full_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119383217","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1379,"entry_id":931,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":377,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Broek, Roelof van den","free_first_name":"Roelof van den","free_last_name":"Broek","norm_person":{"id":377,"first_name":"Roelof van den","last_name":"Broek","full_name":"Broek, Roelof van den","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1032022191","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1380,"entry_id":931,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":376,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Baarda, Tjitze","free_first_name":"Tjitze","free_last_name":"Baarda","norm_person":{"id":376,"first_name":"Tjitze","last_name":"Baarda","full_name":"Baarda, Tjitze","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119525607","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1381,"entry_id":931,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":29,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","free_first_name":"Jaap","free_last_name":"Mansfeld","norm_person":{"id":29,"first_name":"Jaap","last_name":"Mansfeld","full_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119383217","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Compatible Alternatives: Middle Platonist Theology and the Xenophanes Reception","main_title":{"title":"Compatible Alternatives: Middle Platonist Theology and the Xenophanes Reception"},"abstract":"Students of Middle Platonism are familiar with the phenomenon that the accounts of the divine provided by various authors of the 2nd century CE strike one as incoherent. Qualifications according to the viae negationis, analogia, and eminentia, which to us seem incompatible to a degree, tend to coexist in a peaceful jumble. On the one hand, the essence or nature of God is described by means of a refusal to predicate any attributes whatsoever. Attributes withheld in this way may be arranged in polar pairs. On the other hand, God\u2019s existence as a supreme cause tends to be described in a positive way, for example, by means of varieties of the argumentum ex gradibus entium. The theology of chapter 10 of Alkinoos\u2019 Didaskalikos is a notorious instance of such a medley. That this is not only a problem from an anachronistic modern point of view becomes clear when we adduce important evidence neglected by students of Middle Platonism\u2014namely, the parallel accounts of the theology of Xenophanes to be found in the pseudo-Aristotelian treatise De Melisso Xenophane Gorgia (hereafter MXG), chapters 3\u20134, and in Simplicius\u2019 Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics (pp. 22.22\u201323.30 Diels).\r\n\r\nHere, God is said to be, on the one hand, eternal, one, homogeneous, spherical, limited, and unmoved, and, on the other, neither limited nor unlimited, and neither at rest nor in motion. Both pseudo-Aristotle and Simplicius are aware that there is a problem here. The former dialectically exploits the contradiction between the negated pairs of polar opposites and some of the positive attributes to prove Xenophanes\u2019 position unacceptable. The latter resolves this contradiction by arguing that \u201cspherical\u201d means \u201chomogeneous\u201d and \u201cunmoved\u201d means \u201cbeyond motion and rest,\u201d i.e., he explains those positive attributes which clash with the negated polar pairs in terms of precisely these pairs.\r\n\r\nThe accounts in pseudo-Aristotle and Simplicius have, as a rule, puzzled students of Presocratic philosophy. What I would like to call the \u201cdoxographical vulgate\u201d\u2014i.e., the plurality of sources Diels (still followed by the majority of experts in the field) wanted, at least to the extent that they agree among themselves or with purported fragments of Theophrastus, to derive from Theophrastus\u2019 lost Physikai doxai\u2014knows nothing of the negated pairs of polar attributes. Yet Simplicius explicitly attributes these pairs to Theophrastus.\r\n\r\nThis attribution, as I argue elsewhere, should be accepted. What Theophrastus, following Aristotle (Metaphysics A 5.986b 19 ff.), meant was that Xenophanes was not clear about his one principle, neither committing himself to the view that it is limited nor to the view that it is unlimited, and neither stating clearly that it moves nor that it is at rest. It follows that the doxographical vulgate, which holds that Xenophanes\u2019 God not only is one and eternal but also homogeneous, limited, spherical, unmoved, and rational, does not derive from Theophrastus.\r\n\r\nIt also follows that the source from which the description of Xenophanes\u2019 doctrine in pseudo-Aristotle and Simplicius derives paradoxically combined the entirely positive account found in the doxographical vulgate with Theophrastus\u2019 negative non liquet. The motives that brought about this combination are one of the subjects of the present investigation. [introduction p. 92-93]","btype":2,"date":"1988","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wBb3nfQCrMnJw05","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":29,"full_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":377,"full_name":"Broek, Roelof van den","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":376,"full_name":"Baarda, Tjitze","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":29,"full_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":931,"section_of":337,"pages":"92-117","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":337,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Knowledge of God in the Greco-Roman World","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"van_den_Broek1988","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1988","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1988","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ffb4bZzRDVS1ClO","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":337,"pubplace":"Leiden","publisher":"Brill","series":"\u00c9tudes Pr\u00e9liminaires aux Religions Orientales dans l\u2019Empire Romain","volume":"112","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1988]}
Title | La relation chez Simplicius |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 113-147 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Luna, Concetta |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
This text is about Simplicius' doctrine of the relation. Although Simplicius did not dedicate a specific treatise to the relation, his views can be reconstructed from his commentary on Aristotle's Categories and certain passages in his commentary on Physics. Simplicius' approach to the Categories builds upon a rich tradition of commentaries, and he offers both questions and solutions in his own commentary. The author argues that Simplicius' elaboration of the concept of relation is not necessarily original, but his writings present a valuable contribution to the clarification of the concept. The text also discusses other traditions of reflection on the categories, such as those of the Academy and the Stoics. [introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/B73LnGwsUzauanV |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1116","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1116,"authors_free":[{"id":1685,"entry_id":1116,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":458,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Luna, Concetta","free_first_name":"Concetta","free_last_name":"Luna","norm_person":{"id":458,"first_name":"Concetta","last_name":"Luna","full_name":"Luna, Concetta","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1153489031","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1686,"entry_id":1116,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"La relation chez Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"La relation chez Simplicius"},"abstract":"This text is about Simplicius' doctrine of the relation. Although Simplicius did not dedicate a specific treatise to the relation, his views can be reconstructed from his commentary on Aristotle's Categories and certain passages in his commentary on Physics. Simplicius' approach to the Categories builds upon a rich tradition of commentaries, and he offers both questions and solutions in his own commentary. The author argues that Simplicius' elaboration of the concept of relation is not necessarily original, but his writings present a valuable contribution to the clarification of the concept. The text also discusses other traditions of reflection on the categories, such as those of the Academy and the Stoics. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/B73LnGwsUzauanV","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":458,"full_name":"Luna, Concetta","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1116,"section_of":171,"pages":"113-147","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Plotinus, Porphyry and the Neoplatonic Interpretation of the ‘Categories’ |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. 2. Teilband: Philosophie |
Pages | 955-974 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Strange, Steven, K. |
Editor(s) | Haase, Wolfgang |
Translator(s) |
The claim is often made that the most extensive of Plotinus’ treatises, On the Genera of Being (Περὶ τῶν γενῶν τοῦ ὄντος, Enn. VI.1-3), contains a polemical attack on Aristotle’s theory of categories. This claim would seem to be well-grounded, given that in the first part of the work (VI.1.1–24), Plotinus proceeds through the list of categories given by Aristotle and systematically raises a series of powerful objections to claims Aristotle makes about them in the text of the Categories. At the same time, Plotinus’ student Porphyry is rightly given credit for establishing Aristotle's Categories, along with the rest of the Aristotelian logical treatises usually referred to as the Organon, as the fundamental texts for logical doctrines in the Neoplatonic scholastic tradition, and through this tradition later for medieval philosophy, by means of his Isagoge or introduction to the Categories and his commentaries on that work. Taken together, these two propositions tend to give the impression that there was deep and substantive disagreement between master and pupil about the value of the theory found in the Categories. This impression is reinforced by the implication in the introduction to the extant commentaries on the Categories of Dexippus (5.1–12) and Simplicius (2.3–8) that Porphyry, in the massive commentary on the Categories which he dedicated to Gedalius, probably one of his students, replied in detail to Plotinus’ objections against the Categories. Indeed, in Porphyry’s extant catechism-commentary and throughout Dexippus’ and Simplicius’ commentaries, both of which seem to be following closely either Porphyry’s lost To Gedalius or Iamblichus’ lost commentary, itself based on To Gedalius, we can see Porphyry doing precisely this. Moreover, it is clear from the text of Simplicius that many of the objections Plotinus raises against the Categories in On the Genera of Being he got from a work or works of Lucius and Nicostratus, who were certainly hostile to Aristotle. Nevertheless, I am convinced that this simple way of putting the matter is more than a little misleading: it both misrepresents the nature and originality of Porphyry’s contribution to the history of logic and metaphysics and distorts our view of the fundamental Neoplatonic problem of the relationship between Plato and Aristotle. My purpose in the following essay will be to try to sharpen the statement of the historical situation by examining some of the connections between Porphyry’s interpretation of the Categories and Plotinus’ discussion of the problem of the nature of the categories, especially the category of substance, in On the Genera of Being. I will be suggesting that Plotinus’ and Porphyry’s attitudes toward the Categories are much closer to one another than has previously been supposed, and that in particular Porphyry’s position on the nature of categories has been deeply influenced by Plotinus’ arguments. The consequence of this is that Plotinus ought to be accorded a much more prominent place than he standardly has been in the history of the Neoplatonic interpretation of Aristotle, in which the problem of the proper interpretation of the Categories plays an important role. My discussion will fall into four parts. In the next section, I will look at some of the more important features of Porphyry’s interpretation of the Categories that enabled him to downplay the evidently anti-Platonic metaphysical elements that the work contains and to turn it into a basic textbook of logic for his revived school-Platonism. Here, I will be relying heavily upon an important and seminal paper by A. C. Lloyd. Then I will turn to the main arguments that Plotinus employs against what was in his day the standard interpretation of Aristotle’s Categories, and their implications for his view of the nature of that work and its relation to Platonism. In the final section of the paper, we will be able to see some important connections between Plotinus’ position and Porphyry’s which throw light on the metaphysical issues connected with the important Neoplatonic thesis of the fundamental harmony of the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle. [introduction p. 955-957] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/AVNTI4tBsipTJL7 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1151","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1151,"authors_free":[{"id":1726,"entry_id":1151,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":324,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Strange, Steven, K.","free_first_name":"Steven, K.","free_last_name":"Strange","norm_person":{"id":324,"first_name":"Steven K.","last_name":"Strange","full_name":"Strange, Steven K.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/111772655X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2412,"entry_id":1151,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":325,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Haase, Wolfgang","free_first_name":"Wolfgang","free_last_name":"Haase","norm_person":{"id":325,"first_name":"Wolfgang","last_name":"Haase","full_name":"Haase, Wolfgang","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117757527","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Plotinus, Porphyry and the Neoplatonic Interpretation of the \u2018Categories\u2019","main_title":{"title":"Plotinus, Porphyry and the Neoplatonic Interpretation of the \u2018Categories\u2019"},"abstract":"The claim is often made that the most extensive of Plotinus\u2019 treatises, On the Genera of Being (\u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, Enn. VI.1-3), contains a polemical attack on Aristotle\u2019s theory of categories. This claim would seem to be well-grounded, given that in the first part of the work (VI.1.1\u201324), Plotinus proceeds through the list of categories given by Aristotle and systematically raises a series of powerful objections to claims Aristotle makes about them in the text of the Categories.\r\n\r\nAt the same time, Plotinus\u2019 student Porphyry is rightly given credit for establishing Aristotle's Categories, along with the rest of the Aristotelian logical treatises usually referred to as the Organon, as the fundamental texts for logical doctrines in the Neoplatonic scholastic tradition, and through this tradition later for medieval philosophy, by means of his Isagoge or introduction to the Categories and his commentaries on that work. Taken together, these two propositions tend to give the impression that there was deep and substantive disagreement between master and pupil about the value of the theory found in the Categories.\r\n\r\nThis impression is reinforced by the implication in the introduction to the extant commentaries on the Categories of Dexippus (5.1\u201312) and Simplicius (2.3\u20138) that Porphyry, in the massive commentary on the Categories which he dedicated to Gedalius, probably one of his students, replied in detail to Plotinus\u2019 objections against the Categories. Indeed, in Porphyry\u2019s extant catechism-commentary and throughout Dexippus\u2019 and Simplicius\u2019 commentaries, both of which seem to be following closely either Porphyry\u2019s lost To Gedalius or Iamblichus\u2019 lost commentary, itself based on To Gedalius, we can see Porphyry doing precisely this.\r\n\r\nMoreover, it is clear from the text of Simplicius that many of the objections Plotinus raises against the Categories in On the Genera of Being he got from a work or works of Lucius and Nicostratus, who were certainly hostile to Aristotle. Nevertheless, I am convinced that this simple way of putting the matter is more than a little misleading: it both misrepresents the nature and originality of Porphyry\u2019s contribution to the history of logic and metaphysics and distorts our view of the fundamental Neoplatonic problem of the relationship between Plato and Aristotle.\r\n\r\nMy purpose in the following essay will be to try to sharpen the statement of the historical situation by examining some of the connections between Porphyry\u2019s interpretation of the Categories and Plotinus\u2019 discussion of the problem of the nature of the categories, especially the category of substance, in On the Genera of Being. I will be suggesting that Plotinus\u2019 and Porphyry\u2019s attitudes toward the Categories are much closer to one another than has previously been supposed, and that in particular Porphyry\u2019s position on the nature of categories has been deeply influenced by Plotinus\u2019 arguments.\r\n\r\nThe consequence of this is that Plotinus ought to be accorded a much more prominent place than he standardly has been in the history of the Neoplatonic interpretation of Aristotle, in which the problem of the proper interpretation of the Categories plays an important role.\r\n\r\nMy discussion will fall into four parts. In the next section, I will look at some of the more important features of Porphyry\u2019s interpretation of the Categories that enabled him to downplay the evidently anti-Platonic metaphysical elements that the work contains and to turn it into a basic textbook of logic for his revived school-Platonism. Here, I will be relying heavily upon an important and seminal paper by A. C. Lloyd.\r\n\r\nThen I will turn to the main arguments that Plotinus employs against what was in his day the standard interpretation of Aristotle\u2019s Categories, and their implications for his view of the nature of that work and its relation to Platonism.\r\n\r\nIn the final section of the paper, we will be able to see some important connections between Plotinus\u2019 position and Porphyry\u2019s which throw light on the metaphysical issues connected with the important Neoplatonic thesis of the fundamental harmony of the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle. [introduction p. 955-957]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/AVNTI4tBsipTJL7","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":324,"full_name":"Strange, Steven K.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":325,"full_name":"Haase, Wolfgang","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1151,"section_of":335,"pages":"955-974","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":335,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aufstieg und Niedergang der r\u00f6mischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. 2. Teilband: Philosophie","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Haase1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"AUFSTIEG UND NIEDERGANG DER R\u00d6MISCHEN WELT (ANRW) ist ein internationales Gemeinschaftswerk historischer Wissenschaften. Seine Aufgabe besteht darin, alle wichtigen Aspekte der antiken r\u00f6mischen Welt sowie ihres Fortwirkens und Nachlebens in Mittelalter und Neuzeit nach dem gegenw\u00e4rtigen Stand der Forschung in Einzelbeitr\u00e4gen zu behandeln. Das Werk ist in 3 Teile gegliedert:\r\nI. Von den Anf\u00e4ngen Roms bis zum Ausgang der Republik\r\nII. Principat\r\nIII. Sp\u00e4tantike\r\nJeder der drei Teile umfa\u00dft sechs systematische Rubriken, zwischen denen es vielfache \u00dcberschneidungen gibt: 1. Politische Geschichte, 2. Recht, 3. Religion, 4. Sprache und Literatur, 5. Philosophie und Wissenschaften, 6. K\u00fcnste.\r\n\r\nANRW ist ein handbuchartiges \u00dcbersichtswerk zu den r\u00f6mischen Studien im weitesten Sinne, mit Einschlu\u00df der Rezeptions- und Wirkungsgeschichte bis in die Gegenwart. Bei den Beitr\u00e4gen handelt es sich entweder um zusammenfassende Darstellungen mit Bibliographie oder um Problem- und Forschungsberichte bzw. thematisch breit angelegte exemplarische Untersuchungen. Die Artikel erscheinen in deutscher, englischer, franz\u00f6sischer oder italienischer Sprache.\r\n\r\nZum Mitarbeiterstab geh\u00f6ren rund 1000 Gelehrte aus 35 L\u00e4ndern. Der Vielfalt der Themen entsprechend geh\u00f6ren die Autoren haupts\u00e4chlich folgenden Fachrichtungen an: Alte, Mittelalterliche und Neue Geschichte; Byzantinistik, Slavistik; Klassische, Mittellateinische, Romanische und Orientalische Philologie; Klassische, Orientalische und Christliche Arch\u00e4ologie und Kunstgeschichte; Rechtswissenschaft; Religionswissenschaft und Theologie, besonders Kirchengeschichte und Patristik.\r\n\r\nIn Vorbereitung sind:\r\nTeil II, Bd. 26,4: Religion - Vorkonstantinisches Christentum: Neues Testament - Sachthemen, Fortsetzung\r\nTeil II, Bd. 37,4: Wissenschaften: Medizin und Biologie, Fortsetzung. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/vkva8h1vt1Po53c","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":335,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"De Gruyter","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Mathematics and Philosophy in Proclus' Commentary on Book I of Euclid's Elements |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Proclus, lecteur et interprète des anciens. Actes du colloque international du CNRS, Paris (2-4 octobre 1985) |
Pages | 305-318 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Mueller, Ian |
Editor(s) | Pépin, Jean , Saffrey, Henri Dominique |
Translator(s) |
In the prologue to his commentary on book I of Euclid’s Elements Proclus refers to two areas of disagreement among the Platonists concerning mathematics. In the first passage in which he does this (29.14ff.) he indicates that some philoi from his own hearth encourage students to disdain mathematics, enlisting on their side Plato himself because of some of Socrates’ remarks in the Republic, notably the rhetorical question of 533 c 3-5 [...]. The second passage comes at the end of Proclus’ famous description of the character of geometry [...]. In this paper I wish to pursue these disagreements in the hopes of throwing light on distinctive features of Proclus’ philosophy of mathematics. [Introduction, p. 305] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/KU98nZhkgyJWbsr |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1211","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1211,"authors_free":[{"id":1792,"entry_id":1211,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":270,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mueller, Ian","free_first_name":"Ian","free_last_name":"Mueller","norm_person":{"id":270,"first_name":"Ian","last_name":"Mueller","full_name":"Mueller, Ian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1793,"entry_id":1211,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":227,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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}},{"id":2119,"entry_id":1211,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":228,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","free_first_name":"Henri Dominique","free_last_name":"Saffrey","norm_person":{"id":228,"first_name":"Henri Dominique","last_name":"Saffrey","full_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130160059","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Mathematics and Philosophy in Proclus' Commentary on Book I of Euclid's Elements","main_title":{"title":"Mathematics and Philosophy in Proclus' Commentary on Book I of Euclid's Elements"},"abstract":"In the prologue to his commentary on book I of Euclid\u2019s Elements Proclus refers to two areas of disagreement among the Platonists concerning mathematics. In the first passage in which he does this (29.14ff.) he indicates that some philoi from his own hearth encourage \r\nstudents to disdain mathematics, enlisting on their side Plato himself because of some of Socrates\u2019 remarks in the Republic, notably the rhetorical question of 533 c 3-5 [...]. The second passage comes at the end of Proclus\u2019 famous description of the character of geometry [...]. In this paper I wish to pursue these disagreements in the hopes of throwing light on distinctive features of Proclus\u2019 philosophy of mathematics. [Introduction, p. 305]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/KU98nZhkgyJWbsr","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":270,"full_name":"Mueller, Ian","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":227,"full_name":"P\u00e9pin, Jean","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":228,"full_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1211,"section_of":159,"pages":"305-318","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":159,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Proclus, lecteur et interpr\u00e8te des anciens. Actes du colloque international du CNRS, Paris (2-4 octobre 1985)","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"P\u00e9pin-Saffrey1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Du 5e si\u00e8cle jusqu'au d\u00e9but du 19e si\u00e8cle, Proclus fut consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme l'h\u00e9ritier par excellence de Platon, celui qui avait su tirer des dialogues un expos\u00e9 syst\u00e9matique et coh\u00e9rent de la philosophie platonicienne. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/QluMshmjYrV5JtV","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":159,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Centre national de la recherche scientifique","series":"Colloques internationaux du Centre national de la recherche scientifique","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Recherches sur les fragments du commentaire de Simplicius sur la Métaphysique d’Aristote |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 225-245 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
The text discusses research on the fragments of Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's Metaphysics. It focuses on a scholia found in Codex Regius (Paris, gr. 1853) that mentions Simplicius as the author of a commentary on Aristotle's work. The scholia refers to a specific passage in Metaphysics I, 983 b 8, where the interpretation of the term "eidos" creates difficulties. The scholia contrasts the interpretations proposed by Alexandre d'Aphrodise and Simplicius, highlighting their differing views on the meaning of "eidos." The author argues that the scholia indicates familiarity with Simplicius' commentary, suggesting that Simplicius was known and studied in the first half of the 13th century. The scholia also mentions Michel d'Ephese and Jean Italos, providing clues about the context and potential dating of the scholia's composition. [introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/R2DUCY7PTorhIy2 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"669","_score":null,"_source":{"id":669,"authors_free":[{"id":980,"entry_id":669,"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}},{"id":981,"entry_id":669,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Recherches sur les fragments du commentaire de Simplicius sur la M\u00e9taphysique d\u2019Aristote","main_title":{"title":"Recherches sur les fragments du commentaire de Simplicius sur la M\u00e9taphysique d\u2019Aristote"},"abstract":"The text discusses research on the fragments of Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's Metaphysics. It focuses on a scholia found in Codex Regius (Paris, gr. 1853) that mentions Simplicius as the author of a commentary on Aristotle's work. The scholia refers to a specific passage in Metaphysics I, 983 b 8, where the interpretation of the term \"eidos\" creates difficulties. The scholia contrasts the interpretations proposed by Alexandre d'Aphrodise and Simplicius, highlighting their differing views on the meaning of \"eidos.\" The author argues that the scholia indicates familiarity with Simplicius' commentary, suggesting that Simplicius was known and studied in the first half of the 13th century. The scholia also mentions Michel d'Ephese and Jean Italos, providing clues about the context and potential dating of the scholia's composition. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/R2DUCY7PTorhIy2","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":669,"section_of":171,"pages":"225-245","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Sur quelques aspects de la polémique de Simplicius contre Jean Philopon: de l’invective à la réaffirmation de la transcendance du ciel |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 183-221 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hoffmann, Philippe |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
Le Commentaire de Simplicius au De caelo d'Aristote, vaste ouvrage exégétique conçu comme un hymne au Démiurge, présente une doctrine fondamentale sur la structure physique de la substance céleste : celle-ci, nous dit Simplicius, est un mélange des cimes (akrotêtes) des quatre éléments, c'est-à-dire un mélange des quatre éléments dans leur état le plus principiel et le plus pur, et dans ce mélange prédomine la cime, purement lumineuse, du feu. Cette doctrine n'est pas, quant à ses matériaux conceptuels, une création neuve ou originale de Simplicius, car de manière plus détaillée encore, on la rencontre dans le troisième livre du Commentaire de Proclus au Timée. Mais je voudrais montrer, dans le cadre d'une interprétation générale du Commentaire au De caelo, que Simplicius en donne une démonstration et en fait un usage qui lui sont propres, et qui se comprennent en grande partie comme une réaction face aux théories de Jean Philopon. Ce dernier s'était appuyé sur le Timée pour réfuter la doctrine aristotélicienne de la quintessence et de l'éternité du monde, et il niait, bien avant Copernic, toute différence substantielle entre les cieux et le monde sublunaire. Réfutant les théories du Contra Aristotelem de Philopon, Simplicius réaffirme la divinité, la transcendance et l’éternité du ciel, dans une exégèse qui vise à harmoniser (et non à opposer) le Timée et le De caelo. Cette exégèse est un acte religieux, un exercice spirituel qui convertit l'âme (celle de Simplicius et celle de son lecteur) vers le Démiurge. Cette conversion est une initiation aux grandeurs du monde et du ciel, et la description de la nature physique du ciel est l’un des contenus les plus précieux de la révélation. Celle-ci ne peut être procurée aux lecteurs momentanément abusés par Philopon qu’au terme d’une purification préparatoire, qui est la réfutation des analyses du Contra Aristotelem. Ainsi, la polémique de Simplicius est orientée vers une visée indissolublement philosophique et religieuse : lire et interpréter correctement le De caelo d’Aristote, ce n’est pas seulement acquérir des connaissances intellectuelles, c’est aussi, et surtout, s’élever par la pensée (mais de manière « vécue ») jusqu’au monde et au Démiurge, c’est leur adresser une prière. Au sacrilège blasphématoire du chrétien Philopon répond la liturgie néoplatonicienne, juste célébration du Dieu. [introduction p. 183-184] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/wBslsmZjGCgfHjc |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"688","_score":null,"_source":{"id":688,"authors_free":[{"id":1022,"entry_id":688,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":138,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe","free_first_name":"Philippe","free_last_name":"Hoffmann","norm_person":{"id":138,"first_name":"Philippe ","last_name":"Hoffmann","full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/189361905","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1023,"entry_id":688,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Sur quelques aspects de la pol\u00e9mique de Simplicius contre Jean Philopon: de l\u2019invective \u00e0 la r\u00e9affirmation de la transcendance du ciel","main_title":{"title":"Sur quelques aspects de la pol\u00e9mique de Simplicius contre Jean Philopon: de l\u2019invective \u00e0 la r\u00e9affirmation de la transcendance du ciel"},"abstract":"Le Commentaire de Simplicius au De caelo d'Aristote, vaste ouvrage ex\u00e9g\u00e9tique con\u00e7u comme un hymne au D\u00e9miurge, pr\u00e9sente une doctrine fondamentale sur la structure physique de la substance c\u00e9leste : celle-ci, nous dit Simplicius, est un m\u00e9lange des cimes (akrot\u00eates) des quatre \u00e9l\u00e9ments, c'est-\u00e0-dire un m\u00e9lange des quatre \u00e9l\u00e9ments dans leur \u00e9tat le plus principiel et le plus pur, et dans ce m\u00e9lange pr\u00e9domine la cime, purement lumineuse, du feu.\r\n\r\nCette doctrine n'est pas, quant \u00e0 ses mat\u00e9riaux conceptuels, une cr\u00e9ation neuve ou originale de Simplicius, car de mani\u00e8re plus d\u00e9taill\u00e9e encore, on la rencontre dans le troisi\u00e8me livre du Commentaire de Proclus au Tim\u00e9e. Mais je voudrais montrer, dans le cadre d'une interpr\u00e9tation g\u00e9n\u00e9rale du Commentaire au De caelo, que Simplicius en donne une d\u00e9monstration et en fait un usage qui lui sont propres, et qui se comprennent en grande partie comme une r\u00e9action face aux th\u00e9ories de Jean Philopon. Ce dernier s'\u00e9tait appuy\u00e9 sur le Tim\u00e9e pour r\u00e9futer la doctrine aristot\u00e9licienne de la quintessence et de l'\u00e9ternit\u00e9 du monde, et il niait, bien avant Copernic, toute diff\u00e9rence substantielle entre les cieux et le monde sublunaire.\r\n\r\nR\u00e9futant les th\u00e9ories du Contra Aristotelem de Philopon, Simplicius r\u00e9affirme la divinit\u00e9, la transcendance et l\u2019\u00e9ternit\u00e9 du ciel, dans une ex\u00e9g\u00e8se qui vise \u00e0 harmoniser (et non \u00e0 opposer) le Tim\u00e9e et le De caelo. Cette ex\u00e9g\u00e8se est un acte religieux, un exercice spirituel qui convertit l'\u00e2me (celle de Simplicius et celle de son lecteur) vers le D\u00e9miurge. Cette conversion est une initiation aux grandeurs du monde et du ciel, et la description de la nature physique du ciel est l\u2019un des contenus les plus pr\u00e9cieux de la r\u00e9v\u00e9lation. Celle-ci ne peut \u00eatre procur\u00e9e aux lecteurs momentan\u00e9ment abus\u00e9s par Philopon qu\u2019au terme d\u2019une purification pr\u00e9paratoire, qui est la r\u00e9futation des analyses du Contra Aristotelem.\r\n\r\nAinsi, la pol\u00e9mique de Simplicius est orient\u00e9e vers une vis\u00e9e indissolublement philosophique et religieuse : lire et interpr\u00e9ter correctement le De caelo d\u2019Aristote, ce n\u2019est pas seulement acqu\u00e9rir des connaissances intellectuelles, c\u2019est aussi, et surtout, s\u2019\u00e9lever par la pens\u00e9e (mais de mani\u00e8re \u00ab v\u00e9cue \u00bb) jusqu\u2019au monde et au D\u00e9miurge, c\u2019est leur adresser une pri\u00e8re. Au sacril\u00e8ge blasph\u00e9matoire du chr\u00e9tien Philopon r\u00e9pond la liturgie n\u00e9oplatonicienne, juste c\u00e9l\u00e9bration du Dieu. [introduction p. 183-184]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wBslsmZjGCgfHjc","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":138,"full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":688,"section_of":171,"pages":"183-221","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | La division néoplatonicienne des écrits d'Aristote |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, Überlieferung, Nachleben |
Pages | 249-285 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
Nous pouvons donc résumer en quelques mots le résultat de nos recherches. La division des écrits d’Aristote, telle quelle est présentée dans les commentaires néoplatoniciens, est, prise dans son ensemble, un pur produit de la philosophie néoplatonicienne, produit qui intègre néanmoins quelques éléments qui remontent à une époque antérieure à cette philosophie. Ce qui me paraît être typiquement et exclusivement néoplatonicien, c’est la division des écrits aristotéliciens en écrits particuliers, intermédiaires et généraux. D’abord, la place des Lettres au début de la liste est une particularité que la division néoplatonicienne ne partage, à ma connaissance, avec aucune autre liste non seulement d’écrits aristotéliciens, mais aussi d’écrits de n’importe quel auteur. Ensuite, la catégorie des écrits intermédiaires ne peut avoir de sens qu’à l’intérieur du système néoplatonicien, car elle sert surtout à se débarrasser d’un certain nombre d’écrits bio logiques d’Aristote, parce que ceux-ci n’avaient pas de place dans le cursus philosophique néoplatonicien. Pour les péripatéticiens au con traire, ces écrits rentraient tout simplement dans la partie physique de la philosophie, comme Simplicius nous l’apprend au début de son commentaire sur la Physique128, où il reproduit le classement péripatéticien des écrits physiques d’Aristote. Pour les péripatéticiens, comme d’ailleurs pour n’importe quel auteur de Pinax, le fait de séparer les écrits d’Aristote se rapportant aux choses de la nature en deux catégories, l’une qui comprendrait des écrits «intermédiaires», l’autre qui rassemblerait les écrits physiques et correspondrait à une subdivision des écrits généraux, ne pouvait avoir aucun sens. Cette séparation n’était possible que dans la perspective de l’ontologie néoplatonicienne. Il y a d’ailleurs confusion des deux systèmes dans la division de David. Il respecte d’abord la division néoplatonicienne en écrits particuliers, intermédiaires et généraux en donnant des exemples adéquats pour chaque rubrique, mais quand il arrive à la rubrique physique des écrits théorétiques, il suit, en énumérant des exemples, la liste péripatéticienne ou tout simplement le pinax des écrits d’Aristote qui se trouvait à la suite de sa biographie. Il répète donc quelques titres qu’il avait auparavant classés dans les écrits intermédiaires et ajoute bon nombre de traités qui, selon le point de vue néoplatonicien, n’ont rien à voir avec la philosophie. [conclusion, p. 284-285] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/GosX6JCGE0N12qC |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"697","_score":null,"_source":{"id":697,"authors_free":[{"id":1036,"entry_id":697,"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}},{"id":1037,"entry_id":697,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"La division n\u00e9oplatonicienne des \u00e9crits d'Aristote","main_title":{"title":"La division n\u00e9oplatonicienne des \u00e9crits d'Aristote"},"abstract":"Nous pouvons donc r\u00e9sumer en quelques mots le r\u00e9sultat de nos recherches. La division des \u00e9crits d\u2019Aristote, telle quelle est pr\u00e9sen\u00adt\u00e9e dans les commentaires n\u00e9oplatoniciens, est, prise dans son ensem\u00adble, un pur produit de la philosophie n\u00e9oplatonicienne, produit qui int\u00e8gre n\u00e9anmoins quelques \u00e9l\u00e9ments qui remontent \u00e0 une \u00e9poque ant\u00e9rieure \u00e0 cette philosophie. Ce qui me para\u00eet \u00eatre typiquement et exclusivement n\u00e9oplatonicien, c\u2019est la division des \u00e9crits aristot\u00e9li\u00adciens en \u00e9crits particuliers, interm\u00e9diaires et g\u00e9n\u00e9raux. D\u2019abord, la \r\nplace des Lettres au d\u00e9but de la liste est une particularit\u00e9 que la divi\u00adsion n\u00e9oplatonicienne ne partage, \u00e0 ma connaissance, avec aucune \r\nautre liste non seulement d\u2019\u00e9crits aristot\u00e9liciens, mais aussi d\u2019\u00e9crits de n\u2019importe quel auteur. Ensuite, la cat\u00e9gorie des \u00e9crits interm\u00e9di\u00adaires ne peut avoir de sens qu\u2019\u00e0 l\u2019int\u00e9rieur du syst\u00e8me n\u00e9oplatonicien, car elle sert surtout \u00e0 se d\u00e9barrasser d\u2019un certain nombre d\u2019\u00e9crits bio\u00ad\r\nlogiques d\u2019Aristote, parce que ceux-ci n\u2019avaient pas de place dans le cursus philosophique n\u00e9oplatonicien. Pour les p\u00e9ripat\u00e9ticiens au con\u00ad\r\ntraire, ces \u00e9crits rentraient tout simplement dans la partie physique de la philosophie, comme Simplicius nous l\u2019apprend au d\u00e9but de son commentaire sur la Physique128, o\u00f9 il reproduit le classement p\u00e9ripat\u00e9ticien des \u00e9crits physiques d\u2019Aristote. Pour les p\u00e9ripat\u00e9ticiens, \r\ncomme d\u2019ailleurs pour n\u2019importe quel auteur de Pinax, le fait de s\u00e9parer les \u00e9crits d\u2019Aristote se rapportant aux choses de la nature en \r\ndeux cat\u00e9gories, l\u2019une qui comprendrait des \u00e9crits \u00abinterm\u00e9diaires\u00bb, l\u2019autre qui rassemblerait les \u00e9crits physiques et correspondrait \u00e0 une \r\nsubdivision des \u00e9crits g\u00e9n\u00e9raux, ne pouvait avoir aucun sens. Cette s\u00e9paration n\u2019\u00e9tait possible que dans la perspective de l\u2019ontologie \r\nn\u00e9oplatonicienne. Il y a d\u2019ailleurs confusion des deux syst\u00e8mes dans la division de David. Il respecte d\u2019abord la division n\u00e9oplatonicienne \r\nen \u00e9crits particuliers, interm\u00e9diaires et g\u00e9n\u00e9raux en donnant des exemples ad\u00e9quats pour chaque rubrique, mais quand il arrive \u00e0 la \r\nrubrique physique des \u00e9crits th\u00e9or\u00e9tiques, il suit, en \u00e9num\u00e9rant des exemples, la liste p\u00e9ripat\u00e9ticienne ou tout simplement le pinax des \u00e9crits d\u2019Aristote qui se trouvait \u00e0 la suite de sa biographie. Il r\u00e9p\u00e8te donc quelques titres qu\u2019il avait auparavant class\u00e9s dans les \u00e9crits \r\ninterm\u00e9diaires et ajoute bon nombre de trait\u00e9s qui, selon le point de vue n\u00e9oplatonicien, n\u2019ont rien \u00e0 voir avec la philosophie. [conclusion, p. 284-285]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/GosX6JCGE0N12qC","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":697,"section_of":189,"pages":"249-285","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":189,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, \u00dcberlieferung, Nachleben","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Lulofs\/Kollesch\/Nutton1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Kommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles sind das Thema dieses Bandes. Mit der Aristotelesrenaissance des 1. Jh. v.Chr. einsetzend, vermitteln die Beitr\u00e4ge, unter acht Hauptkapiteln zusammengefa\u00dft, ein eindrucksvolles Bild von der Rezeption zweier Jahrtausende. D a \u00df diese Rezeption kontinuierlich in ihren wichtigen Phasen illustriert werden kann, ist - wie schon im ersten Band - der freundlichen Kooperation der beteiligten Autoren zu verdanken. Als besonderer Gl\u00fccksfall mag gelten, da\u00df einige Beitr\u00e4ge sich in idealer Weise erg\u00e4nzen. So wird der Leser in zwei auf einanderfolgenden Artikeln die Interpretationsgeschichte der zentralen Kapitel Metaphysik \u039b 7 und 9 von Plotin und Themistios \u00fcber Maimonides und Gersonides bis Hegel verfolgen k\u00f6nnen. Dieses Bem\u00fchen um Aristoteles von der Antike bis in die Neuzeit ist etwa f\u00fcr De anima bei Alexander von Aphrodisias und Leibniz, f\u00fcr die \r\nKategorien bei Plotin und Peirce dokumentiert, wobei die Erstver\u00f6ffentlichung der Ubersetzung von Cat. 1 - 4 durch den bedeutenden amerikanischen Philosophen mit besonderer Freude angezeigt werden darf. \r\nVon den Autoren dieses Bandes weilen Paul Henry und Charles B. Schmitt nicht mehr unter uns. In ein Buch \u00fcber Plotins Entretiens sollte der hier ver\u00f6ffentlichte Beitrag von Paul Henry sp\u00e4ter einmal integriert werden; daraus erkl\u00e4ren sich gelegentliche Hinweise auf geplante Teile dieses nun nicht mehr vollendeten Werkes. Die Studie von Charles B.Schmitt \u00fcber die Aristoteles-Florilegien der Renaissance bietet die erste Gesamtdarstellung zu diesem Thema und enth\u00e4lt im Anhang ein Verzeichnis mit wichtigen Erg\u00e4nzungen zu seiner grundlegenden \u201eBibliography of Aristotle Editions, 1501-1600\". [Vorwort p. V-VI]\r\n","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Q1P6OhIp8zaE99c","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":189,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet","volume":"2","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Catégories et langage selon Simplicius - La question du “skopos” du traité aristotélicien des “Catégories” |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 61-90 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hoffmann, Philippe |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's Categories is the first among three commentaries left by the renowned Neoplatonic philosopher. This commentary holds a significant place in the study of Aristotle's works, as it marks the beginning of the reading of Aristotle's oeuvre from a spiritual perspective. The prayer at the end of Simplicius' commentary highlights the transformative power of studying Aristotle's Categories, allowing the soul to ascend to higher knowledge and seek ultimate happiness. Simplicius' other commentaries, such as his work on Epictetus and De Caelo, similarly express the journey of spiritual conversion and progressive ascension to higher realities within the Neoplatonic spiritual framework. The Neoplatonic curriculum involved an ethical initiation, leading to the study of Aristotle's works and culminating in the study of Plato's Timaeus and Parmenides. Overall, Simplicius' exegesis of Aristotle's Categories reveals the profound spiritual significance and transformative potential of philosophical studies within the Neoplatonic tradition. [introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/z4JuOtqVWGpQ7Ef |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"709","_score":null,"_source":{"id":709,"authors_free":[{"id":1057,"entry_id":709,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":138,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe","free_first_name":"Philippe","free_last_name":"Hoffmann","norm_person":{"id":138,"first_name":"Philippe ","last_name":"Hoffmann","full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/189361905","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1058,"entry_id":709,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Cat\u00e9gories et langage selon Simplicius - La question du \u201cskopos\u201d du trait\u00e9 aristot\u00e9licien des \u201cCat\u00e9gories\u201d","main_title":{"title":"Cat\u00e9gories et langage selon Simplicius - La question du \u201cskopos\u201d du trait\u00e9 aristot\u00e9licien des \u201cCat\u00e9gories\u201d"},"abstract":"Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's Categories is the first among three commentaries left by the renowned Neoplatonic philosopher. This commentary holds a significant place in the study of Aristotle's works, as it marks the beginning of the reading of Aristotle's oeuvre from a spiritual perspective. The prayer at the end of Simplicius' commentary highlights the transformative power of studying Aristotle's Categories, allowing the soul to ascend to higher knowledge and seek ultimate happiness. Simplicius' other commentaries, such as his work on Epictetus and De Caelo, similarly express the journey of spiritual conversion and progressive ascension to higher realities within the Neoplatonic spiritual framework. The Neoplatonic curriculum involved an ethical initiation, leading to the study of Aristotle's works and culminating in the study of Plato's Timaeus and Parmenides. Overall, Simplicius' exegesis of Aristotle's Categories reveals the profound spiritual significance and transformative potential of philosophical studies within the Neoplatonic tradition. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/z4JuOtqVWGpQ7Ef","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":138,"full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":709,"section_of":171,"pages":"61-90","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Simplicius' polemics. Some aspects of Simplicius‘ polemical writings against John Philoponus: From invective to a reaffirmation of the transcendence of the heavens |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science. Second Edition |
Pages | 97-123 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hoffmann, Philippe |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
I am not entirely comfortable finding myself introducing a discordant note into a collection intended to celebrate the refreshing originality of Philoponus’ ideas. I shall, however, be speaking for Simplicius, vindictive pagan that he was, and shall hope to be an effective counterweight to what is said in other chapters. I shall be talking within the framework of a general interpretation of Simplicius’ commentary on Aristotle’s De caelo. The commentary is an exegetical work undertaken as a paean to the Creator or ‘Demiurge.’ Its basic theory on the physical structure of celestial matter is that this matter is a combination of the superior parts (akrotêtes) of the four elements, dominated by the purely luminous superior part of fire. My aim will be to show how this theory can be seen as a reaction to the theories of John Philoponus. Philoponus had turned to the Timaeus for support in his Contra Aristotelem and had attacked the Aristotelian doctrine that the heavens are made of a fifth element and that the world is eternal. Well before Copernicus, Philoponus denied that there was any substantial difference between the heavens and the sublunary world. In his reply to the Contra Aristotelem, Simplicius reaffirms the divinity, the transcendence, and the eternal nature of the heavens. His exegesis aims to connect, rather than contrast, Plato’s Timaeus and Aristotle’s De caelo. It is, moreover, a religious act, a spiritual exercise designed to turn the soul (both Simplicius’ and his reader’s) towards the Demiurge. This conversion is our initiation into the grandeur of the universe and of the heavens, and his description of the physical nature of the heavens is one of the most valuable aspects of the revelation. Those readers still under Philoponus’ spell cannot achieve this revelation until they have undergone a preliminary act of purification, which is the refutation of the arguments of Philoponus’ Contra Aristotelem. In this way, Simplicius’ attack is directed at a target that is simultaneously philosophical and religious. A correct reading and interpretation of Aristotle’s De caelo leads not only to the acquisition of intellectual knowledge but also, and above all, to our elevation through thought (a thought that we live) to the whole universe and to the Demiurge. It is a form of prayer addressed to them. The sacrilegious blasphemy of the Christian Philoponus is countered by the Neoplatonist liturgy, a rightful celebration of their God. [introduction p. 97-98] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/RJi3pyBneebP54s |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"712","_score":null,"_source":{"id":712,"authors_free":[{"id":1062,"entry_id":712,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":138,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe","free_first_name":"Philippe","free_last_name":"Hoffmann","norm_person":{"id":138,"first_name":"Philippe ","last_name":"Hoffmann","full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/189361905","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2012,"entry_id":712,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius' polemics. Some aspects of Simplicius\u2018 polemical writings against John Philoponus: From invective to a reaffirmation of the transcendence of the heavens","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius' polemics. Some aspects of Simplicius\u2018 polemical writings against John Philoponus: From invective to a reaffirmation of the transcendence of the heavens"},"abstract":"I am not entirely comfortable finding myself introducing a discordant note into a collection intended to celebrate the refreshing originality of Philoponus\u2019 ideas. I shall, however, be speaking for Simplicius, vindictive pagan that he was, and shall hope to be an effective counterweight to what is said in other chapters. I shall be talking within the framework of a general interpretation of Simplicius\u2019 commentary on Aristotle\u2019s De caelo. The commentary is an exegetical work undertaken as a paean to the Creator or \u2018Demiurge.\u2019 Its basic theory on the physical structure of celestial matter is that this matter is a combination of the superior parts (akrot\u00eates) of the four elements, dominated by the purely luminous superior part of fire.\r\n\r\nMy aim will be to show how this theory can be seen as a reaction to the theories of John Philoponus. Philoponus had turned to the Timaeus for support in his Contra Aristotelem and had attacked the Aristotelian doctrine that the heavens are made of a fifth element and that the world is eternal. Well before Copernicus, Philoponus denied that there was any substantial difference between the heavens and the sublunary world. In his reply to the Contra Aristotelem, Simplicius reaffirms the divinity, the transcendence, and the eternal nature of the heavens. His exegesis aims to connect, rather than contrast, Plato\u2019s Timaeus and Aristotle\u2019s De caelo.\r\n\r\nIt is, moreover, a religious act, a spiritual exercise designed to turn the soul (both Simplicius\u2019 and his reader\u2019s) towards the Demiurge. This conversion is our initiation into the grandeur of the universe and of the heavens, and his description of the physical nature of the heavens is one of the most valuable aspects of the revelation. Those readers still under Philoponus\u2019 spell cannot achieve this revelation until they have undergone a preliminary act of purification, which is the refutation of the arguments of Philoponus\u2019 Contra Aristotelem. In this way, Simplicius\u2019 attack is directed at a target that is simultaneously philosophical and religious.\r\n\r\nA correct reading and interpretation of Aristotle\u2019s De caelo leads not only to the acquisition of intellectual knowledge but also, and above all, to our elevation through thought (a thought that we live) to the whole universe and to the Demiurge. It is a form of prayer addressed to them. The sacrilegious blasphemy of the Christian Philoponus is countered by the Neoplatonist liturgy, a rightful celebration of their God. [introduction p. 97-98]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/RJi3pyBneebP54s","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":138,"full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":712,"section_of":184,"pages":"97-123","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":184,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science. Second Edition","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sorabji1987c","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2010","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Richard Sorabji is the editor of a vast and growing number of translations of ancient\r\ncommentaries on Aristotle and the editor of several excellent collections of studies on the\r\nAristotelian tradition. Philoponus, a 6th century Christian thinker who was originally trained as\r\na Neoplatonist, is best remembered today for his attack on Aristotle's 'physics'; his influence on\r\nlater philosophers and scientists and his role in the reevaluation of Aristotelian science and\r\nnatural philosophy are indeed remarkable. The second edition of Philoponus and the Rejection\r\nof Aristotelian Science includes a new two-part introduction which offers a survey of the\r\nrapidly expanding scholarship on Philoponus and of recent archeological discoveries (such as\r\nthe lecture rooms of the 6th century Alexandrian school), as well as new insights into the\r\ninteraction between Greek paganism and Christianity in connection with Philoponus and his\r\nmilieu. The twelve chapters included in this collection are written by very prominent scholars\r\nand tackle topics such as Philoponus' corollaries on space and time, the differences between his\r\ntheological views (e.g. on the three hypostases) and the prevailing dogmas of the time, the\r\nrelation between his theory about impetus and later treatments of impetus and related\r\nconcepts in a number of Arab thinkers and in Galileo. This collection is one of the most reliable\r\nand wide-ranging introductions to Philoponus' views and influence, and those interested in late\r\nancient philosophy and its interactions with Christian thought will find this to be a most\r\nvaluable resource. [Review by Tiberiu Popa]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/CJSIbOOK7lIAB00","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":184,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Institute of Classical Studies, School of Advanced Study, University of London","series":"BICS Supplement","volume":"103","edition_no":"2","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Philoponus and the Rise of Preclassical Dynamics |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science |
Pages | 84-120 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Wolff, Michael |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
If we are prepared to assume that the basic presuppositions of impetus theory can be traced back not to observational experience which Aristotle missed, but rather to a certain concept of man and to certain ethical principles, we need not attempt to explain the emergence of the theory solely by reference to new observations of falling bodies and the like. Is it not more appropriate to ask about the origin and kind of ethical problem to which impetus theory originally helped to provide an answer? The experience that forces are exhausted in all physical activities of human beings could have been just such a problem. Earlier society, which had left this experience chiefly to slaves, could not really have had such a problem. But, by the close of Antiquity, times were changing. [Conclusion p. 120] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/L1tFbjfO8UrPnAp |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"720","_score":null,"_source":{"id":720,"authors_free":[{"id":1073,"entry_id":720,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":364,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wolff, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Wolff","norm_person":{"id":364,"first_name":"Michael","last_name":"Wolff","full_name":"Wolff, Michael","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/131523120","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1074,"entry_id":720,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Philoponus and the Rise of Preclassical Dynamics","main_title":{"title":"Philoponus and the Rise of Preclassical Dynamics"},"abstract":"If we are prepared to assume that the basic presuppositions of impetus theory \r\ncan be traced back not to observational experience which Aristotle missed, \r\nbut rather to a certain concept of man and to certain ethical principles, we \r\nneed not attempt to explain the emergence of the theory solely by reference to \r\nnew observations of falling bodies and the like. Is it not more appropriate to \r\nask about the origin and kind of ethical problem to which impetus theory \r\noriginally helped to provide an answer? The experience that forces are \r\nexhausted in all physical activities of human beings could have been just such \r\na problem. Earlier society, which had left this experience chiefly to slaves, \r\ncould not really have had such a problem. But, by the close of Antiquity, \r\ntimes were changing. [Conclusion p. 120]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/L1tFbjfO8UrPnAp","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":364,"full_name":"Wolff, Michael","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":720,"section_of":1383,"pages":"84-120","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1383,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sorabij1987d","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"All the chapters in this book are new, except for the inaugural lecture (Chapter 9), which I apologise for reprinting virtually unrevised and with the original lecture context still apparent. It seemed desirable, however, that so crucial a part ofthe controversy should be represented. The collection originated in a conference on Philoponus held at the Institute of Classical Studies in London in June 1983, which provided an opportunity for interested parties to pool knowledge from the many different disciplines that are relevant to his work. Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 6 are drawn from the conference, while two other conference papers, those of Henry Blumenthal and Richard Sorabji, are being incorporated into books in preparation (see Bibliography). Sorabji's main suggestions, however, are included in Chapter I in the discussion of matter and extension (pp 18 and 23). The remairnng chapters, apart from the inaugural lecture, were solicited or written for the volume, two of them (5 and 12) having been delivered first at a seminar on Ancient Science at the Institute of Classical Studies. [preface, p. ix-x]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/buhMZZl0djmIx9v","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1383,"pubplace":"Ithaca, New York","publisher":"Cornell University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"1","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | The Text of Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 246-266 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Tarán, Leonardo |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
My main purpose here is to offer reasons why a new and truly critical edition of Simplicius' commentary is necessary. To do so, in what follows, I shall have to point out some of the shortcomings to be found in Diels' edition of this work. [p. 246] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/wSJkdX2PYdHh3n2 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"726","_score":null,"_source":{"id":726,"authors_free":[{"id":1085,"entry_id":726,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":330,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo","free_first_name":"Leonardo","free_last_name":"Tar\u00e1n","norm_person":{"id":330,"first_name":"Tar\u00e1n","last_name":" Leonardo ","full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1168065100","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1086,"entry_id":726,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"The Text of Simplicius\u2019 Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics","main_title":{"title":"The Text of Simplicius\u2019 Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics"},"abstract":"My main purpose here is to offer reasons why a new and truly critical edition of Simplicius' commentary is necessary. To do so, in what follows, I shall have to point out some of the shortcomings to be found in Diels' edition of this work. [p. 246]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wSJkdX2PYdHh3n2","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":330,"full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":726,"section_of":171,"pages":"246-266","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Philoponus' Commentary on Aristotle's Physics in the Sixtheenth Century |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science. Second Edition |
Pages | 210-230 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Schmitt, Charles Bernard |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
As it is generally accepted, the term ‘Renaissance’ refers to a historical period in which there was a revival of interest in the literature, styles, and forms of Classical Antiquity. Though the ‘revival’ is usually understood to refer specifically to ancient ‘literary’ texts, there can be no doubt that the specialized technical treatises of philosophy, natural science, mathematics, and medicine played a role equally important, if not more important, in the cultural and intellectual life of the Renaissance. In addition to the rediscovery of the integral texts of Homer and the Greek dramatists, Cicero’s Letters to Atticus, Quintilian, and Lucretius, the fifteenth century also saw the recovery of much of Galen, Theophrastus, Plato, Plotinus, and Proclus, Pappus, Diogenes Laertius, and Sextus Empiricus, as well as many additional classical authors of specialized literature. Indeed, the ‘Renaissance’ was a revival of the technical knowledge bequeathed by Antiquity as much as of works of recognized literary and rhetorical quality. One aspect of the influence of ancient literature on the Renaissance which has received little attention until fairly recently is the role of the Greek commentators on Aristotle. In that vast corpus, most of which is conveniently assembled for us in the Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca, there is a wealth of interpretative and supplementary material, which is of great use not only for an understanding of the Aristotelian text itself but also for understanding its historical context and the philosophical positions that were in competition with those of Aristotle in antiquity. A certain number of the Greek commentaries were known in the Middle Ages, both in the Islamic and in the Christian worlds, but such knowledge was very fragmentary. Only a small portion of the extant commentaries was available in Latin before the sixteenth century. Some of these attained a degree of importance and played a central role in the thirteenth- and fourteenth-century discussions of the soul, for example. These medieval versions are presently being edited in a critical fashion by a group of scholars at Louvain; this series should take its place alongside the Greek texts produced in the last century by the Berlin Academy of Sciences. So far, editions of commentaries by Themistius, Ammonius, Philoponus, Simplicius, Alexander, and Eustratius have appeared. But it remained for the sixteenth century to make accessible most of the material. For example, less than half of the works attributed to Alexander of Aphrodisias contained in the CAG and Supplementum Aristotelicum were available in the Middle Ages, and, among the expositions of Philoponus, only the commentary on the De Anima was available. The need for a comprehensive publication of all of the Greek commentaries on Aristotle was already noted and made a program for the future in Aldo Manuzio’s prefatory letter to the first volume of his editio princeps of Aristotle in 1495. Although Aldo himself did not live to achieve his aim, he did initiate it, and between that date and 1540 nearly the entire Greek corpus was made available to European scholars. Parallel with the publication of the Greek texts—and generally delayed by only a few years—was the publication of Latin translations of the same texts, thus making the material accessible to a much wider readership than the rather restricted group who could cope effectively with the Greek text of the commentators. Most of the Greek editions themselves, as well as the majority of the translations, issued from Venetian presses, though Paris and Lyon served as secondary publication centers. By mid-century essentially everything could be read in Latin, and the impact of the new material can be traced in the Aristotelian literature of the period. In reading the many commentaries on Aristotle and other philosophical works of the sixteenth century, one clearly discerns the rising tide of interest in these expositions across a spectrum of philosophical and scientific topics. Hitherto, the impact of these new sources of information has only imperfectly been charted, primarily with regard to discussions of the soul. Nardi’s fundamental work on Simplicius, the more recent studies on Alexander by Cranz, and on the general Neoplatonism of the commentaries by Mahoney have served to draw attention to the rich vein of material there to be mined. The range of the impact—in logic, natural philosophy, metaphysics, and psychology—has scarcely been charted, nor has the interplay between Greek, Arabic, Hebrew, and medieval and Renaissance Latin interpretations of Aristotle been evaluated and analyzed. During the second half of the sixteenth century, those who wanted to understand Aristotle—which for them meant philosophy tout court—frequently tried to relate the text of the Stagirite to the varying interpretations of Philoponus, Simplicius, Averroes (1126–98), Thomas Aquinas (c. 1225–74), John of Jandun (died 1328), Pomponazzi (1462–1525), and Soto (1494/5–1560), among many others. Particularly little studied has been the impact of the newly available Greek commentators on the Physics. Here is meant primarily Simplicius and Philoponus, both of whom left behind extensive and detailed expositions of that work, neither of which was known directly to Latin writers of the Middle Ages but which were to become available in the sixteenth century. As long ago as Wohlwill and Duhem, it has been known that some of the criticisms and alternative positions put forward in the commentaries on the Physics by the two sixth-century writers later attained importance in the history of the development of physical thought. Moreover, it was also realized by the same historians that the critiques of Aristotle put forward by Simplicius and Philoponus were very similar to some of the positions that became central in the formulation of the ‘new science’ of the seventeenth century. Thus far, however, there has been little systematic attempt to consider the reaction of the sixteenth century as a whole to the reorientation made possible by the availability of Simplicius and Philoponus. The story is not simple, and it cannot be covered comprehensively here, though I hope to be able to indicate some lines further research might take. What I shall do is to focus upon Philoponus, whose significance in the story is possibly less than that of Simplicius, but without a full story of the fortune of the Physics of both authors a valid conclusion regarding their relative merits is not possible. Before turning to a consideration of the impact of the Grammarian’s partial commentary on the Physics (only the first four books are integrally extant), I should like to deal briefly with two other points. First, I should like to sketch a portrait of Philoponus as a commentator, emphasizing why what he had to say was of potential importance for the sixteenth century. Secondly, I shall say something general about the recovery and assimilation of his philosophical works in the West down to the sixteenth century. [introduction p. 210-213] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/Ub0AryY729JHN5w |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1037","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1037,"authors_free":[{"id":1571,"entry_id":1037,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":284,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Schmitt, Charles Bernard","free_first_name":"Charles Bernard","free_last_name":"Schmitt","norm_person":{"id":284,"first_name":"Charles Bernard","last_name":"Schmitt","full_name":"Schmitt, Charles Bernard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118846744","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1572,"entry_id":1037,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Philoponus' Commentary on Aristotle's Physics in the Sixtheenth Century","main_title":{"title":"Philoponus' Commentary on Aristotle's Physics in the Sixtheenth Century"},"abstract":"As it is generally accepted, the term \u2018Renaissance\u2019 refers to a historical period in which there was a revival of interest in the literature, styles, and forms of Classical Antiquity. Though the \u2018revival\u2019 is usually understood to refer specifically to ancient \u2018literary\u2019 texts, there can be no doubt that the specialized technical treatises of philosophy, natural science, mathematics, and medicine played a role equally important, if not more important, in the cultural and intellectual life of the Renaissance. In addition to the rediscovery of the integral texts of Homer and the Greek dramatists, Cicero\u2019s Letters to Atticus, Quintilian, and Lucretius, the fifteenth century also saw the recovery of much of Galen, Theophrastus, Plato, Plotinus, and Proclus, Pappus, Diogenes Laertius, and Sextus Empiricus, as well as many additional classical authors of specialized literature. Indeed, the \u2018Renaissance\u2019 was a revival of the technical knowledge bequeathed by Antiquity as much as of works of recognized literary and rhetorical quality.\r\n\r\nOne aspect of the influence of ancient literature on the Renaissance which has received little attention until fairly recently is the role of the Greek commentators on Aristotle. In that vast corpus, most of which is conveniently assembled for us in the Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca, there is a wealth of interpretative and supplementary material, which is of great use not only for an understanding of the Aristotelian text itself but also for understanding its historical context and the philosophical positions that were in competition with those of Aristotle in antiquity. A certain number of the Greek commentaries were known in the Middle Ages, both in the Islamic and in the Christian worlds, but such knowledge was very fragmentary. Only a small portion of the extant commentaries was available in Latin before the sixteenth century. Some of these attained a degree of importance and played a central role in the thirteenth- and fourteenth-century discussions of the soul, for example. These medieval versions are presently being edited in a critical fashion by a group of scholars at Louvain; this series should take its place alongside the Greek texts produced in the last century by the Berlin Academy of Sciences. So far, editions of commentaries by Themistius, Ammonius, Philoponus, Simplicius, Alexander, and Eustratius have appeared.\r\n\r\nBut it remained for the sixteenth century to make accessible most of the material. For example, less than half of the works attributed to Alexander of Aphrodisias contained in the CAG and Supplementum Aristotelicum were available in the Middle Ages, and, among the expositions of Philoponus, only the commentary on the De Anima was available.\r\n\r\nThe need for a comprehensive publication of all of the Greek commentaries on Aristotle was already noted and made a program for the future in Aldo Manuzio\u2019s prefatory letter to the first volume of his editio princeps of Aristotle in 1495. Although Aldo himself did not live to achieve his aim, he did initiate it, and between that date and 1540 nearly the entire Greek corpus was made available to European scholars. Parallel with the publication of the Greek texts\u2014and generally delayed by only a few years\u2014was the publication of Latin translations of the same texts, thus making the material accessible to a much wider readership than the rather restricted group who could cope effectively with the Greek text of the commentators. Most of the Greek editions themselves, as well as the majority of the translations, issued from Venetian presses, though Paris and Lyon served as secondary publication centers. By mid-century essentially everything could be read in Latin, and the impact of the new material can be traced in the Aristotelian literature of the period.\r\n\r\nIn reading the many commentaries on Aristotle and other philosophical works of the sixteenth century, one clearly discerns the rising tide of interest in these expositions across a spectrum of philosophical and scientific topics. Hitherto, the impact of these new sources of information has only imperfectly been charted, primarily with regard to discussions of the soul. Nardi\u2019s fundamental work on Simplicius, the more recent studies on Alexander by Cranz, and on the general Neoplatonism of the commentaries by Mahoney have served to draw attention to the rich vein of material there to be mined. The range of the impact\u2014in logic, natural philosophy, metaphysics, and psychology\u2014has scarcely been charted, nor has the interplay between Greek, Arabic, Hebrew, and medieval and Renaissance Latin interpretations of Aristotle been evaluated and analyzed.\r\n\r\nDuring the second half of the sixteenth century, those who wanted to understand Aristotle\u2014which for them meant philosophy tout court\u2014frequently tried to relate the text of the Stagirite to the varying interpretations of Philoponus, Simplicius, Averroes (1126\u201398), Thomas Aquinas (c. 1225\u201374), John of Jandun (died 1328), Pomponazzi (1462\u20131525), and Soto (1494\/5\u20131560), among many others.\r\n\r\nParticularly little studied has been the impact of the newly available Greek commentators on the Physics. Here is meant primarily Simplicius and Philoponus, both of whom left behind extensive and detailed expositions of that work, neither of which was known directly to Latin writers of the Middle Ages but which were to become available in the sixteenth century. As long ago as Wohlwill and Duhem, it has been known that some of the criticisms and alternative positions put forward in the commentaries on the Physics by the two sixth-century writers later attained importance in the history of the development of physical thought. Moreover, it was also realized by the same historians that the critiques of Aristotle put forward by Simplicius and Philoponus were very similar to some of the positions that became central in the formulation of the \u2018new science\u2019 of the seventeenth century.\r\n\r\nThus far, however, there has been little systematic attempt to consider the reaction of the sixteenth century as a whole to the reorientation made possible by the availability of Simplicius and Philoponus. The story is not simple, and it cannot be covered comprehensively here, though I hope to be able to indicate some lines further research might take. What I shall do is to focus upon Philoponus, whose significance in the story is possibly less than that of Simplicius, but without a full story of the fortune of the Physics of both authors a valid conclusion regarding their relative merits is not possible.\r\n\r\nBefore turning to a consideration of the impact of the Grammarian\u2019s partial commentary on the Physics (only the first four books are integrally extant), I should like to deal briefly with two other points. First, I should like to sketch a portrait of Philoponus as a commentator, emphasizing why what he had to say was of potential importance for the sixteenth century. Secondly, I shall say something general about the recovery and assimilation of his philosophical works in the West down to the sixteenth century. [introduction p. 210-213]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Ub0AryY729JHN5w","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":284,"full_name":"Schmitt, Charles Bernard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1037,"section_of":184,"pages":"210-230","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":184,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science. Second Edition","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sorabji1987c","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2010","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Richard Sorabji is the editor of a vast and growing number of translations of ancient\r\ncommentaries on Aristotle and the editor of several excellent collections of studies on the\r\nAristotelian tradition. Philoponus, a 6th century Christian thinker who was originally trained as\r\na Neoplatonist, is best remembered today for his attack on Aristotle's 'physics'; his influence on\r\nlater philosophers and scientists and his role in the reevaluation of Aristotelian science and\r\nnatural philosophy are indeed remarkable. The second edition of Philoponus and the Rejection\r\nof Aristotelian Science includes a new two-part introduction which offers a survey of the\r\nrapidly expanding scholarship on Philoponus and of recent archeological discoveries (such as\r\nthe lecture rooms of the 6th century Alexandrian school), as well as new insights into the\r\ninteraction between Greek paganism and Christianity in connection with Philoponus and his\r\nmilieu. The twelve chapters included in this collection are written by very prominent scholars\r\nand tackle topics such as Philoponus' corollaries on space and time, the differences between his\r\ntheological views (e.g. on the three hypostases) and the prevailing dogmas of the time, the\r\nrelation between his theory about impetus and later treatments of impetus and related\r\nconcepts in a number of Arab thinkers and in Galileo. This collection is one of the most reliable\r\nand wide-ranging introductions to Philoponus' views and influence, and those interested in late\r\nancient philosophy and its interactions with Christian thought will find this to be a most\r\nvaluable resource. [Review by Tiberiu Popa]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/CJSIbOOK7lIAB00","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":184,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Institute of Classical Studies, School of Advanced Study, University of London","series":"BICS Supplement","volume":"103","edition_no":"2","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Syrianus and Pseudo-Alexander’s Commentary on Metaph. E-N |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, Überlieferung, Nachleben |
Pages | 215-232 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Tarán, Leonardo |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
The main conclusions of this study are two: (a) Neither Ps.-Alexander nor Syrianus had access to Alexander’s lost commentary on Metaphysics E-N. (b) For his commentary on books M-N, Syrianus made use of Ps.-Alexander’s commentary, which he mistook for the work of Alexander himself. [conclusion p. 231] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/TQhCHWKXBejvsjI |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"797","_score":null,"_source":{"id":797,"authors_free":[{"id":1176,"entry_id":797,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":330,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo","free_first_name":"Leonardo","free_last_name":"Tar\u00e1n","norm_person":{"id":330,"first_name":"Tar\u00e1n","last_name":" Leonardo ","full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1168065100","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1177,"entry_id":797,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Syrianus and Pseudo-Alexander\u2019s Commentary on Metaph. E-N","main_title":{"title":"Syrianus and Pseudo-Alexander\u2019s Commentary on Metaph. E-N"},"abstract":"The main conclusions of this study are two: (a) Neither Ps.-Alexander nor Syrianus had access to Alexander\u2019s lost commentary on Metaphysics E-N. (b) For his commentary on books M-N, Syrianus made use of Ps.-Alexander\u2019s commentary, which he mistook for the work of Alexander himself. [conclusion p. 231]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/TQhCHWKXBejvsjI","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":330,"full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":797,"section_of":189,"pages":"215-232","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":189,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, \u00dcberlieferung, Nachleben","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Lulofs\/Kollesch\/Nutton1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Kommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles sind das Thema dieses Bandes. Mit der Aristotelesrenaissance des 1. Jh. v.Chr. einsetzend, vermitteln die Beitr\u00e4ge, unter acht Hauptkapiteln zusammengefa\u00dft, ein eindrucksvolles Bild von der Rezeption zweier Jahrtausende. D a \u00df diese Rezeption kontinuierlich in ihren wichtigen Phasen illustriert werden kann, ist - wie schon im ersten Band - der freundlichen Kooperation der beteiligten Autoren zu verdanken. Als besonderer Gl\u00fccksfall mag gelten, da\u00df einige Beitr\u00e4ge sich in idealer Weise erg\u00e4nzen. So wird der Leser in zwei auf einanderfolgenden Artikeln die Interpretationsgeschichte der zentralen Kapitel Metaphysik \u039b 7 und 9 von Plotin und Themistios \u00fcber Maimonides und Gersonides bis Hegel verfolgen k\u00f6nnen. Dieses Bem\u00fchen um Aristoteles von der Antike bis in die Neuzeit ist etwa f\u00fcr De anima bei Alexander von Aphrodisias und Leibniz, f\u00fcr die \r\nKategorien bei Plotin und Peirce dokumentiert, wobei die Erstver\u00f6ffentlichung der Ubersetzung von Cat. 1 - 4 durch den bedeutenden amerikanischen Philosophen mit besonderer Freude angezeigt werden darf. \r\nVon den Autoren dieses Bandes weilen Paul Henry und Charles B. Schmitt nicht mehr unter uns. In ein Buch \u00fcber Plotins Entretiens sollte der hier ver\u00f6ffentlichte Beitrag von Paul Henry sp\u00e4ter einmal integriert werden; daraus erkl\u00e4ren sich gelegentliche Hinweise auf geplante Teile dieses nun nicht mehr vollendeten Werkes. Die Studie von Charles B.Schmitt \u00fcber die Aristoteles-Florilegien der Renaissance bietet die erste Gesamtdarstellung zu diesem Thema und enth\u00e4lt im Anhang ein Verzeichnis mit wichtigen Erg\u00e4nzungen zu seiner grundlegenden \u201eBibliography of Aristotle Editions, 1501-1600\". [Vorwort p. V-VI]\r\n","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Q1P6OhIp8zaE99c","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":189,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet","volume":"2","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Apories orales de Plotin sur les Catégories d’Aristote |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, Überlieferung, Nachleben |
Pages | 120-156 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Henry, Paul |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
Les premières apories que Dexippe attribue explicitement à Plotin traitent du nombre des catégories, mais plus précisément sous l’aspect du rapport des catégories du monde intelligible à celles du monde sensible. Chez Simplicius aussi ces apories sont explicitement attribuées à Plotin. D’un monde à l’autre, les catégories sont-elles les mêmes ou différentes, ou bien les unes sont-elles les mêmes, les autres différentes ? Sont-elles en nombre égal, plus nombreuses, moins nombreuses ? C’est le problème préliminaire qu’examine Plotin au chapitre 1 de son premier traité VI 1, au début du chapitre 2 sur la substance et, une troisième fois, au début du chapitre 5 de son troisième traité, VI 3. Nos textes de base sont donc : VI 1,1,19-30 ; VI 1,2,1-8 ; VI 3,5,1-7, mais aussi VI 2,16,1-2 et VI 3,27,1-4. S’y réfèrent trois apories de Dexippe, mais l’une sous trois formes différentes – ce qui nous donne cinq petits textes – et deux longues pages de Simplicius, qui correspondent pour une part aux Ennéades, pour une part aux textes de Dexippe, mais qui toutes deux associent le nom de Plotin à celui de ses prédécesseurs. En outre, deux textes anonymes, l’un de Dexippe, l’autre de Simplicius. Les relations entre tous ces textes étant fort compliquées, il est utile de les énumérer ici, avec les sigles que je leur attribue, et dans l’ordre où je les étudie : 01 = Simpl. p. 73,15-28 (Plotin, Lucius et Nicostrate) 01b* = Dex. II 1 sommaire et aporie (anonymes) = Simpl. p. 73,15-16 (Plotin) 02 = Simpl. p. 73,25-27 (Plotin) 01a* = Dex. II 4 sommaire et aporie (Plotin) F1 = Simpl. p. 76,13-22 (Plotin et Nicostrate) F1 = Dex. II 2 aporie (dans le corps de l’ouvrage) (Plotin) 01c = Dex. II 2 sommaire (Plotin) 01e = Dex. II 2 solution (Plotin), cf. Simpl. 76,22-77,4 F2 = Dex. 138 solution (anonyme) = Simpl. p. 66,30-31 (anonyme) Bien que, au début, ces distinctions paraissent compliquées, la suite montrera qu’elles aident à clarifier les questions. Je signale tout de suite que le grand texte attribué au « très divin Plotin » par Simpl. p. 73,15-28 contient aussi ce que contiennent Dex. II 1, Dex. II 2 somm., et de nombreuses correspondances avec Dex. II 4. Nous finirons notre chapitre par un texte très court relatif au problème de l’opposé du mouvement, le repos, auquel font allusion Enn. VI 3,27,4-5, ainsi que Dex. I 38 sol., p. 34,17-19 (τις) et Simpl. p. 66,30-31 (τις), et qui, faisant partie d’une source composite, justifiera le sigle F2. Le tout est un chassé-croisé de références, un enchevêtrement de textes, de correspondances et de non-correspondances entre l’écrit, l’oral, les sources, à peu près inextricable, un des ensembles les plus complexes auxquels nous ayons jamais eu affaire. Dans ce fouillis, je vais m’efforcer d’introduire un peu d’ordre et de clarté. Patiemment, car il s’agit bien d’un jeu de patience, je répartirai de mon mieux ces fragments, qui chevauchent les uns sur les autres, entre deux séries, celle des reportata de l’enseignement oral (O) et celle des sources (F). Avec des coefficients variables de certitude ou de probabilité, je compte récupérer de la sorte deux fragments certains de l’oral, deux fragments très probables, un fragment simplement probable, enfin deux sources certaines. Dès les premiers textes, nous affrontons les trois principaux problèmes qui nous intéressent et cela, on l’a dit, dans une complexité plus grande qu’ailleurs. Le problème fondamental des rapports de l’écrit et de l’oral. Les limites entre l’un et l’autre sont parfois indécises, incertaines. Ce qui est sûr, c’est que l’oral, quand oral il y a, éclaire considérablement l’écrit, sorte de commentaire ou de résumé anticipé. Le problème de l’indépendance mutuelle de Dexippe et de Simplicius et de leur complémentarité. La question essentielle, souvent insoluble, est de savoir lequel des deux est le plus fidèle à la formulation de l’aporie orale ou de la source telle que les transmettait Porphyre, voire même le seul Jamblique. Le lecteur avisé s’apercevra sans peine que Simplicius ne peut vraiment dépendre de Dexippe ; il paraît ne jamais l’utiliser dans le corps de son ouvrage ; le nom n’apparaît qu’une seule fois, et cela dans la Préface, p. 2,25, où Simplicius énumère les commentateurs des Catégories, alors qu’ailleurs il n’a pas honte de citer fidèlement ses sources, notamment Porphyre et Jamblique. Enfin, le problème des sources de Plotin. Sources de l’oral ou de l’écrit ou de l’un et de l’autre. Ici même, par deux fois, un texte attribué par Simplicius à Plotin est attribué aussi, par lui, aux prédécesseurs de Plotin. Chez Dexippe, ce n’est pas le cas ici et ce sera toujours beaucoup plus rare. Les deux seuls points vraiment fermes et solides – ce ne sera pas toujours le cas – sont : primo, que les apories sont nettement authentifiées, citées sous le nom de Plotin, tant par Dexippe que par Simplicius, lequel souvent, ailleurs, se contente d’écrire « quelques-uns », là même où nous savons pertinemment qu’il s’agit de Plotin. Secundo, qu’une partie au moins des apories, tout en étant sûrement plotiniennes, n’ont aucun parallèle dans les Ennéades et proviennent donc de l’oral. [introduction p. 120-122] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/kSddLNtzgHnzFEv |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"799","_score":null,"_source":{"id":799,"authors_free":[{"id":1179,"entry_id":799,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":175,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Henry, Paul","free_first_name":"Paul","free_last_name":"Henry","norm_person":{"id":175,"first_name":"Paul","last_name":"Henry","full_name":"Henry, Paul","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1180,"entry_id":799,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Apories orales de Plotin sur les Cat\u00e9gories d\u2019Aristote","main_title":{"title":"Apories orales de Plotin sur les Cat\u00e9gories d\u2019Aristote"},"abstract":"Les premi\u00e8res apories que Dexippe attribue explicitement \u00e0 Plotin traitent du nombre des cat\u00e9gories, mais plus pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment sous l\u2019aspect du rapport des cat\u00e9gories du monde intelligible \u00e0 celles du monde sensible. Chez Simplicius aussi ces apories sont explicitement attribu\u00e9es \u00e0 Plotin. D\u2019un monde \u00e0 l\u2019autre, les cat\u00e9gories sont-elles les m\u00eames ou diff\u00e9rentes, ou bien les unes sont-elles les m\u00eames, les autres diff\u00e9rentes ? Sont-elles en nombre \u00e9gal, plus nombreuses, moins nombreuses ? C\u2019est le probl\u00e8me pr\u00e9liminaire qu\u2019examine Plotin au chapitre 1 de son premier trait\u00e9 VI 1, au d\u00e9but du chapitre 2 sur la substance et, une troisi\u00e8me fois, au d\u00e9but du chapitre 5 de son troisi\u00e8me trait\u00e9, VI 3. Nos textes de base sont donc : VI 1,1,19-30 ; VI 1,2,1-8 ; VI 3,5,1-7, mais aussi VI 2,16,1-2 et VI 3,27,1-4.\r\n\r\nS\u2019y r\u00e9f\u00e8rent trois apories de Dexippe, mais l\u2019une sous trois formes diff\u00e9rentes \u2013 ce qui nous donne cinq petits textes \u2013 et deux longues pages de Simplicius, qui correspondent pour une part aux Enn\u00e9ades, pour une part aux textes de Dexippe, mais qui toutes deux associent le nom de Plotin \u00e0 celui de ses pr\u00e9d\u00e9cesseurs. En outre, deux textes anonymes, l\u2019un de Dexippe, l\u2019autre de Simplicius.\r\n\r\nLes relations entre tous ces textes \u00e9tant fort compliqu\u00e9es, il est utile de les \u00e9num\u00e9rer ici, avec les sigles que je leur attribue, et dans l\u2019ordre o\u00f9 je les \u00e9tudie :\r\n\r\n 01 = Simpl. p. 73,15-28 (Plotin, Lucius et Nicostrate)\r\n 01b* = Dex. II 1 sommaire et aporie (anonymes) = Simpl. p. 73,15-16 (Plotin)\r\n 02 = Simpl. p. 73,25-27 (Plotin)\r\n 01a* = Dex. II 4 sommaire et aporie (Plotin)\r\n F1 = Simpl. p. 76,13-22 (Plotin et Nicostrate)\r\n F1 = Dex. II 2 aporie (dans le corps de l\u2019ouvrage) (Plotin)\r\n 01c = Dex. II 2 sommaire (Plotin)\r\n 01e = Dex. II 2 solution (Plotin), cf. Simpl. 76,22-77,4\r\n F2 = Dex. 138 solution (anonyme) = Simpl. p. 66,30-31 (anonyme)\r\n\r\nBien que, au d\u00e9but, ces distinctions paraissent compliqu\u00e9es, la suite montrera qu\u2019elles aident \u00e0 clarifier les questions.\r\n\r\nJe signale tout de suite que le grand texte attribu\u00e9 au \u00ab tr\u00e8s divin Plotin \u00bb par Simpl. p. 73,15-28 contient aussi ce que contiennent Dex. II 1, Dex. II 2 somm., et de nombreuses correspondances avec Dex. II 4.\r\n\r\nNous finirons notre chapitre par un texte tr\u00e8s court relatif au probl\u00e8me de l\u2019oppos\u00e9 du mouvement, le repos, auquel font allusion Enn. VI 3,27,4-5, ainsi que Dex. I 38 sol., p. 34,17-19 (\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2) et Simpl. p. 66,30-31 (\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2), et qui, faisant partie d\u2019une source composite, justifiera le sigle F2.\r\n\r\nLe tout est un chass\u00e9-crois\u00e9 de r\u00e9f\u00e9rences, un enchev\u00eatrement de textes, de correspondances et de non-correspondances entre l\u2019\u00e9crit, l\u2019oral, les sources, \u00e0 peu pr\u00e8s inextricable, un des ensembles les plus complexes auxquels nous ayons jamais eu affaire.\r\n\r\nDans ce fouillis, je vais m\u2019efforcer d\u2019introduire un peu d\u2019ordre et de clart\u00e9. Patiemment, car il s\u2019agit bien d\u2019un jeu de patience, je r\u00e9partirai de mon mieux ces fragments, qui chevauchent les uns sur les autres, entre deux s\u00e9ries, celle des reportata de l\u2019enseignement oral (O) et celle des sources (F).\r\n\r\nAvec des coefficients variables de certitude ou de probabilit\u00e9, je compte r\u00e9cup\u00e9rer de la sorte deux fragments certains de l\u2019oral, deux fragments tr\u00e8s probables, un fragment simplement probable, enfin deux sources certaines.\r\n\r\nD\u00e8s les premiers textes, nous affrontons les trois principaux probl\u00e8mes qui nous int\u00e9ressent et cela, on l\u2019a dit, dans une complexit\u00e9 plus grande qu\u2019ailleurs.\r\n\r\n Le probl\u00e8me fondamental des rapports de l\u2019\u00e9crit et de l\u2019oral. Les limites entre l\u2019un et l\u2019autre sont parfois ind\u00e9cises, incertaines. Ce qui est s\u00fbr, c\u2019est que l\u2019oral, quand oral il y a, \u00e9claire consid\u00e9rablement l\u2019\u00e9crit, sorte de commentaire ou de r\u00e9sum\u00e9 anticip\u00e9.\r\n Le probl\u00e8me de l\u2019ind\u00e9pendance mutuelle de Dexippe et de Simplicius et de leur compl\u00e9mentarit\u00e9. La question essentielle, souvent insoluble, est de savoir lequel des deux est le plus fid\u00e8le \u00e0 la formulation de l\u2019aporie orale ou de la source telle que les transmettait Porphyre, voire m\u00eame le seul Jamblique. Le lecteur avis\u00e9 s\u2019apercevra sans peine que Simplicius ne peut vraiment d\u00e9pendre de Dexippe ; il para\u00eet ne jamais l\u2019utiliser dans le corps de son ouvrage ; le nom n\u2019appara\u00eet qu\u2019une seule fois, et cela dans la Pr\u00e9face, p. 2,25, o\u00f9 Simplicius \u00e9num\u00e8re les commentateurs des Cat\u00e9gories, alors qu\u2019ailleurs il n\u2019a pas honte de citer fid\u00e8lement ses sources, notamment Porphyre et Jamblique.\r\n Enfin, le probl\u00e8me des sources de Plotin. Sources de l\u2019oral ou de l\u2019\u00e9crit ou de l\u2019un et de l\u2019autre. Ici m\u00eame, par deux fois, un texte attribu\u00e9 par Simplicius \u00e0 Plotin est attribu\u00e9 aussi, par lui, aux pr\u00e9d\u00e9cesseurs de Plotin. Chez Dexippe, ce n\u2019est pas le cas ici et ce sera toujours beaucoup plus rare.\r\n\r\nLes deux seuls points vraiment fermes et solides \u2013 ce ne sera pas toujours le cas \u2013 sont : primo, que les apories sont nettement authentifi\u00e9es, cit\u00e9es sous le nom de Plotin, tant par Dexippe que par Simplicius, lequel souvent, ailleurs, se contente d\u2019\u00e9crire \u00ab quelques-uns \u00bb, l\u00e0 m\u00eame o\u00f9 nous savons pertinemment qu\u2019il s\u2019agit de Plotin. Secundo, qu\u2019une partie au moins des apories, tout en \u00e9tant s\u00fbrement plotiniennes, n\u2019ont aucun parall\u00e8le dans les Enn\u00e9ades et proviennent donc de l\u2019oral. [introduction p. 120-122]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/kSddLNtzgHnzFEv","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":175,"full_name":"Henry, Paul","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":799,"section_of":189,"pages":"120-156","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":189,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, \u00dcberlieferung, Nachleben","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Lulofs\/Kollesch\/Nutton1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Kommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles sind das Thema dieses Bandes. Mit der Aristotelesrenaissance des 1. Jh. v.Chr. einsetzend, vermitteln die Beitr\u00e4ge, unter acht Hauptkapiteln zusammengefa\u00dft, ein eindrucksvolles Bild von der Rezeption zweier Jahrtausende. D a \u00df diese Rezeption kontinuierlich in ihren wichtigen Phasen illustriert werden kann, ist - wie schon im ersten Band - der freundlichen Kooperation der beteiligten Autoren zu verdanken. Als besonderer Gl\u00fccksfall mag gelten, da\u00df einige Beitr\u00e4ge sich in idealer Weise erg\u00e4nzen. So wird der Leser in zwei auf einanderfolgenden Artikeln die Interpretationsgeschichte der zentralen Kapitel Metaphysik \u039b 7 und 9 von Plotin und Themistios \u00fcber Maimonides und Gersonides bis Hegel verfolgen k\u00f6nnen. Dieses Bem\u00fchen um Aristoteles von der Antike bis in die Neuzeit ist etwa f\u00fcr De anima bei Alexander von Aphrodisias und Leibniz, f\u00fcr die \r\nKategorien bei Plotin und Peirce dokumentiert, wobei die Erstver\u00f6ffentlichung der Ubersetzung von Cat. 1 - 4 durch den bedeutenden amerikanischen Philosophen mit besonderer Freude angezeigt werden darf. \r\nVon den Autoren dieses Bandes weilen Paul Henry und Charles B. Schmitt nicht mehr unter uns. In ein Buch \u00fcber Plotins Entretiens sollte der hier ver\u00f6ffentlichte Beitrag von Paul Henry sp\u00e4ter einmal integriert werden; daraus erkl\u00e4ren sich gelegentliche Hinweise auf geplante Teile dieses nun nicht mehr vollendeten Werkes. Die Studie von Charles B.Schmitt \u00fcber die Aristoteles-Florilegien der Renaissance bietet die erste Gesamtdarstellung zu diesem Thema und enth\u00e4lt im Anhang ein Verzeichnis mit wichtigen Erg\u00e4nzungen zu seiner grundlegenden \u201eBibliography of Aristotle Editions, 1501-1600\". [Vorwort p. V-VI]\r\n","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Q1P6OhIp8zaE99c","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":189,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet","volume":"2","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Entelechie und Monade: Bemerkungen zum Gebrauch eines aristotelischen Begriffs bei Leibniz |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, Überlieferung, Nachleben |
Pages | 560-583 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Ebert, Theodor |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
Abhandlung über die Verwendung des Begriffs 'Entelechie' bei Leibnitz: "Daß Leibniz sich, um auf unsere eingangs gestellte Frage zurück zukommen, für seinen Begriff der Entelechie nicht auf Aristoteles berufen kann, dürfte damit klar geworden sein. Aus einem Begriff, der bei Aristoteles eine Seinsweise von Gegenständen charakterisie ren soll, ist bei Leibniz ein Begriff geworden, der Seiendes selber, Monaden nämlich, charakterisiert. Aber dieses Mißverständnis eines aristotelischen Begriffs durch Leibniz, das wir damit diagnostizieren müssen, ist nicht eine simple Fehlinterpretation des aristotelischen Textes. Dieses Mißverständnis ist begünstigt worden durch eine Ar gumentation des Aristoteles, die den Charakter einer dialektischen tour de force hat und die von dem Ausdruck ,Entelecheia‘ einen in gewissem Sinn problematischen Gebrauch macht." (p. 582) |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/3k7VYtKVSM42I1L |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"801","_score":null,"_source":{"id":801,"authors_free":[{"id":1183,"entry_id":801,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":76,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Ebert, Theodor","free_first_name":"Theodor","free_last_name":"Ebert","norm_person":{"id":76,"first_name":"Theodor","last_name":"Ebert","full_name":"Ebert, Theodor","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115820787","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2096,"entry_id":801,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Entelechie und Monade: Bemerkungen zum Gebrauch eines aristotelischen Begriffs bei Leibniz","main_title":{"title":"Entelechie und Monade: Bemerkungen zum Gebrauch eines aristotelischen Begriffs bei Leibniz"},"abstract":"Abhandlung \u00fcber die Verwendung des Begriffs 'Entelechie' bei Leibnitz: \"Da\u00df Leibniz sich, um auf unsere eingangs gestellte Frage zur\u00fcck\u00ad\r\nzukommen, f\u00fcr seinen Begriff der Entelechie nicht auf Aristoteles \r\nberufen kann, d\u00fcrfte damit klar geworden sein. Aus einem Begriff, \r\nder bei Aristoteles eine Seinsweise von Gegenst\u00e4nden charakterisie\u00ad\r\nren soll, ist bei Leibniz ein Begriff geworden, der Seiendes selber, \r\nMonaden n\u00e4mlich, charakterisiert. Aber dieses Mi\u00dfverst\u00e4ndnis eines \r\naristotelischen Begriffs durch Leibniz, das wir damit diagnostizieren \r\nm\u00fcssen, ist nicht eine simple Fehlinterpretation des aristotelischen \r\nTextes. Dieses Mi\u00dfverst\u00e4ndnis ist beg\u00fcnstigt worden durch eine Ar\u00ad\r\ngumentation des Aristoteles, die den Charakter einer dialektischen \r\ntour de force hat und die von dem Ausdruck ,Entelecheia\u2018 einen in \r\ngewissem Sinn problematischen Gebrauch macht.\" (p. 582)","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/3k7VYtKVSM42I1L","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":76,"full_name":"Ebert, Theodor","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":801,"section_of":189,"pages":"560-583","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":189,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, \u00dcberlieferung, Nachleben","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Lulofs\/Kollesch\/Nutton1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Kommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles sind das Thema dieses Bandes. Mit der Aristotelesrenaissance des 1. Jh. v.Chr. einsetzend, vermitteln die Beitr\u00e4ge, unter acht Hauptkapiteln zusammengefa\u00dft, ein eindrucksvolles Bild von der Rezeption zweier Jahrtausende. D a \u00df diese Rezeption kontinuierlich in ihren wichtigen Phasen illustriert werden kann, ist - wie schon im ersten Band - der freundlichen Kooperation der beteiligten Autoren zu verdanken. Als besonderer Gl\u00fccksfall mag gelten, da\u00df einige Beitr\u00e4ge sich in idealer Weise erg\u00e4nzen. So wird der Leser in zwei auf einanderfolgenden Artikeln die Interpretationsgeschichte der zentralen Kapitel Metaphysik \u039b 7 und 9 von Plotin und Themistios \u00fcber Maimonides und Gersonides bis Hegel verfolgen k\u00f6nnen. Dieses Bem\u00fchen um Aristoteles von der Antike bis in die Neuzeit ist etwa f\u00fcr De anima bei Alexander von Aphrodisias und Leibniz, f\u00fcr die \r\nKategorien bei Plotin und Peirce dokumentiert, wobei die Erstver\u00f6ffentlichung der Ubersetzung von Cat. 1 - 4 durch den bedeutenden amerikanischen Philosophen mit besonderer Freude angezeigt werden darf. \r\nVon den Autoren dieses Bandes weilen Paul Henry und Charles B. Schmitt nicht mehr unter uns. In ein Buch \u00fcber Plotins Entretiens sollte der hier ver\u00f6ffentlichte Beitrag von Paul Henry sp\u00e4ter einmal integriert werden; daraus erkl\u00e4ren sich gelegentliche Hinweise auf geplante Teile dieses nun nicht mehr vollendeten Werkes. Die Studie von Charles B.Schmitt \u00fcber die Aristoteles-Florilegien der Renaissance bietet die erste Gesamtdarstellung zu diesem Thema und enth\u00e4lt im Anhang ein Verzeichnis mit wichtigen Erg\u00e4nzungen zu seiner grundlegenden \u201eBibliography of Aristotle Editions, 1501-1600\". [Vorwort p. V-VI]\r\n","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Q1P6OhIp8zaE99c","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":189,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet","volume":"2","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Alexander of Aphrodisias in the later Greek commentaries on Aristotle’s De Anima |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, Überlieferung, Nachleben |
Pages | 90-106 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Blumenthal, Henry J. |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
These are a few examples of how the Neoplatonist commenta tors confronted Alexander on matters where differences could hardly fail to arise. What happens is clear enough. But it would be wrong to think that these principles of interpretation are not applied at other points in the work. Let us take an apparently innocuous issue like the section where Aristotle discusses locomotion under the stimulus of the appetitive faculty (433 b 8sqq.). Alexander, giving a clearly Aristotelian explanation, said that the faculty was moved accidentally. Plutarch differed, and said that the activity of the appetitive faculty is movement: this Simplicius describes as a Pla tonic explanation, and prefers it (302,23-30).44 On the other hand, a few pages below Simplicius prefers Alexander to Plutarch on the question whether moving but ungenerated entities have sense-per ception (320,33-34): we have already looked at his and Stephanus’ account of this passage.45 As we indicated, Stephanus there quotes Alexander only to disagree with him, and here we have at least one piece of evidence to show that Neoplatonist commentators could take a different view of the same passage. If we had more examples of texts where Alexander’s views of the De anima were discussed by more than one of his successors, we should be able to form a clearer picture of how far the different commentators were prepared to accept them, and thus incidentally of the precise differences between these commentators themselves on the points at issue. [conclusion p. 105-106] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/yyFedFSkP8qo8dn |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"805","_score":null,"_source":{"id":805,"authors_free":[{"id":1191,"entry_id":805,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Alexander of Aphrodisias in the later Greek commentaries on Aristotle\u2019s De Anima","main_title":{"title":"Alexander of Aphrodisias in the later Greek commentaries on Aristotle\u2019s De Anima"},"abstract":"These are a few examples of how the Neoplatonist commenta\u00ad\r\ntors confronted Alexander on matters where differences could \r\nhardly fail to arise. What happens is clear enough. But it would be \r\nwrong to think that these principles of interpretation are not applied \r\nat other points in the work. Let us take an apparently innocuous \r\nissue like the section where Aristotle discusses locomotion under the \r\nstimulus of the appetitive faculty (433 b 8sqq.). Alexander, giving a \r\nclearly Aristotelian explanation, said that the faculty was moved \r\naccidentally. Plutarch differed, and said that the activity of the \r\nappetitive faculty is movement: this Simplicius describes as a Pla\u00ad\r\ntonic explanation, and prefers it (302,23-30).44 On the other hand, a \r\nfew pages below Simplicius prefers Alexander to Plutarch on the \r\nquestion whether moving but ungenerated entities have sense-per\u00ad\r\nception (320,33-34): we have already looked at his and Stephanus\u2019 account of this passage.45 As we indicated, Stephanus there quotes \r\nAlexander only to disagree with him, and here we have at least one \r\npiece of evidence to show that Neoplatonist commentators could \r\ntake a different view of the same passage. If we had more examples \r\nof texts where Alexander\u2019s views of the De anima were discussed by \r\nmore than one of his successors, we should be able to form a clearer \r\npicture of how far the different commentators were prepared to \r\naccept them, and thus incidentally of the precise differences between \r\nthese commentators themselves on the points at issue. [conclusion p. 105-106]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/yyFedFSkP8qo8dn","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":805,"section_of":189,"pages":"90-106","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":189,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, \u00dcberlieferung, Nachleben","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Lulofs\/Kollesch\/Nutton1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Kommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles sind das Thema dieses Bandes. Mit der Aristotelesrenaissance des 1. Jh. v.Chr. einsetzend, vermitteln die Beitr\u00e4ge, unter acht Hauptkapiteln zusammengefa\u00dft, ein eindrucksvolles Bild von der Rezeption zweier Jahrtausende. D a \u00df diese Rezeption kontinuierlich in ihren wichtigen Phasen illustriert werden kann, ist - wie schon im ersten Band - der freundlichen Kooperation der beteiligten Autoren zu verdanken. Als besonderer Gl\u00fccksfall mag gelten, da\u00df einige Beitr\u00e4ge sich in idealer Weise erg\u00e4nzen. So wird der Leser in zwei auf einanderfolgenden Artikeln die Interpretationsgeschichte der zentralen Kapitel Metaphysik \u039b 7 und 9 von Plotin und Themistios \u00fcber Maimonides und Gersonides bis Hegel verfolgen k\u00f6nnen. Dieses Bem\u00fchen um Aristoteles von der Antike bis in die Neuzeit ist etwa f\u00fcr De anima bei Alexander von Aphrodisias und Leibniz, f\u00fcr die \r\nKategorien bei Plotin und Peirce dokumentiert, wobei die Erstver\u00f6ffentlichung der Ubersetzung von Cat. 1 - 4 durch den bedeutenden amerikanischen Philosophen mit besonderer Freude angezeigt werden darf. \r\nVon den Autoren dieses Bandes weilen Paul Henry und Charles B. Schmitt nicht mehr unter uns. In ein Buch \u00fcber Plotins Entretiens sollte der hier ver\u00f6ffentlichte Beitrag von Paul Henry sp\u00e4ter einmal integriert werden; daraus erkl\u00e4ren sich gelegentliche Hinweise auf geplante Teile dieses nun nicht mehr vollendeten Werkes. Die Studie von Charles B.Schmitt \u00fcber die Aristoteles-Florilegien der Renaissance bietet die erste Gesamtdarstellung zu diesem Thema und enth\u00e4lt im Anhang ein Verzeichnis mit wichtigen Erg\u00e4nzungen zu seiner grundlegenden \u201eBibliography of Aristotle Editions, 1501-1600\". [Vorwort p. V-VI]\r\n","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Q1P6OhIp8zaE99c","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":189,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet","volume":"2","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Prolegomena to the Study of Philoponus' contra Aristotelem |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science |
Pages | 197-209 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Wildberg, Christian |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
Judging from the number and content of his commentaries, Philoponus was a thinker in the Aristotelian tradition. One of his major achievements lies in the fact that as a commentator he accepted and developed the heritage of his teacher Ammonius. For that reason alone it is remarkable that he composed a treatise which attacked vital topics of Aristotle’s philosophy with little compromise. Although it is true that throughout Antiquity many philosophers ventured to criticise the great Aristotle, one may agree that Philoponus did so, as Cesare Cremonini put it in 1616, ‘more sharply than anyone’ (acerrime omnium).' Where does this attack fit into the context of Philoponus’doctrinal development? No doubt his outspoken critique of Aristotle in the de Aetemitate Mundi contra Aristotelem somehow swayed Philoponus to desert the philosophical and join the theological camp. But the story is probably more complex. The general point of dissent was, as the title indicates, the doctrine of the eternity of the world. Being a Christian, Philoponus perhaps possessed a particular motivation for launching his attack - as a feat of praeparatio evangélica. This fact has been sufficiently recognised and appreciated. Less appreciated and studied, however, has been the philosophical side, i.e. the actual argument and structure of the treatise in question. Since it has not survived the content must be reconstructed from a number of substantial fragments found mainly in the commentaries of Philoponus’ adversary Simplicius. An adequate treatment of the double controversy Simplicius v Philoponus v Aristotle would fill a volume on its own and cannot be the subject of this chapter.2 Instead, I will attempt to revise apparently firmly established views about the treatise, in particular its composition and date. This, it is hoped, may lead to a revised view of that treatise and at the same time encourage a more advanced study of Philoponus’ doctrinal development in general. [introduction p. 197-198] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/dbFxqr9z9aZi48i |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"430","_score":null,"_source":{"id":430,"authors_free":[{"id":580,"entry_id":430,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":360,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wildberg, Christian","free_first_name":"Christian","free_last_name":"Wildberg","norm_person":{"id":360,"first_name":"Christian","last_name":"Wildberg","full_name":"Wildberg, Christian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/139018964","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":581,"entry_id":430,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Prolegomena to the Study of Philoponus' contra Aristotelem","main_title":{"title":"Prolegomena to the Study of Philoponus' contra Aristotelem"},"abstract":"Judging from the number and content of his commentaries, Philoponus was a thinker in the Aristotelian tradition. One of his major achievements lies in \r\nthe fact that as a commentator he accepted and developed the heritage of his teacher Ammonius. For that reason alone it is remarkable that he composed a treatise which attacked vital topics of Aristotle\u2019s philosophy with little compromise. Although it is true that throughout Antiquity many philosophers ventured to criticise the great Aristotle, one may agree that Philoponus did so, as Cesare Cremonini put it in 1616, \u2018more sharply than anyone\u2019 (acerrime omnium).' Where does this attack fit into the context of Philoponus\u2019doctrinal development? No doubt his outspoken critique of Aristotle in the de Aetemitate Mundi contra Aristotelem somehow swayed Philoponus to desert the philosophical and join the theological camp. But the story is probably more complex. The general point of dissent was, as the title indicates, the doctrine of the eternity of the world. Being a Christian, Philoponus perhaps possessed a \r\nparticular motivation for launching his attack - as a feat of praeparatio evang\u00e9lica. This fact has been sufficiently recognised and appreciated. Less appreciated and studied, however, has been the philosophical side, i.e. the actual argument and structure of the treatise in question. Since it has not survived the content must be reconstructed from a number of substantial fragments found mainly in the commentaries of Philoponus\u2019 adversary Simplicius. An adequate treatment of the double controversy Simplicius v Philoponus v Aristotle would fill a volume on its own and cannot be the subject of this chapter.2 Instead, I will attempt to revise apparently firmly established views about the treatise, in particular its composition and date. This, it is hoped, may lead to a revised view of that treatise and at the same time encourage a more advanced study of Philoponus\u2019 doctrinal development in general. [introduction p. 197-198]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/dbFxqr9z9aZi48i","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":360,"full_name":"Wildberg, Christian","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":430,"section_of":1383,"pages":"197-209","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1383,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sorabij1987d","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"All the chapters in this book are new, except for the inaugural lecture (Chapter 9), which I apologise for reprinting virtually unrevised and with the original lecture context still apparent. It seemed desirable, however, that so crucial a part ofthe controversy should be represented. The collection originated in a conference on Philoponus held at the Institute of Classical Studies in London in June 1983, which provided an opportunity for interested parties to pool knowledge from the many different disciplines that are relevant to his work. Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 6 are drawn from the conference, while two other conference papers, those of Henry Blumenthal and Richard Sorabji, are being incorporated into books in preparation (see Bibliography). Sorabji's main suggestions, however, are included in Chapter I in the discussion of matter and extension (pp 18 and 23). The remairnng chapters, apart from the inaugural lecture, were solicited or written for the volume, two of them (5 and 12) having been delivered first at a seminar on Ancient Science at the Institute of Classical Studies. [preface, p. ix-x]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/buhMZZl0djmIx9v","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1383,"pubplace":"Ithaca, New York","publisher":"Cornell University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"1","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Simplicius et l'école' éléate |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 166-182 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Cordero, Néstor-Luis |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
This text discusses the concept of the Eleatic school of philosophy, which is attributed to the philosophers Parmenides and Xenophanes. The author argues that the school may not have actually existed as a unified movement, but rather was an invention to help classify the philosophical systems of ancient Greece. The author discusses the historical development of the Eleatic school from Plato to Simplicius and analyzes the presentation of the four Eleatic philosophers by Simplicius. The author concludes that Simplicius, like Plato and Aristotle before him, considers Parmenides to be the central figure of the Eleatic school. The text also examines the reasons why the Eleatic school has been characterized as monistic, and argues that this may be due to a misinterpretation of the works of Parmenides and Melissus. [introduction/conclusion] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/TmkANfK25JZ4wfH |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1278","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1278,"authors_free":[{"id":1867,"entry_id":1278,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":54,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Cordero, N\u00e9stor-Luis","free_first_name":"N\u00e9stor-Luis","free_last_name":"Cordero","norm_person":{"id":54,"first_name":"N\u00e9stor-Luis","last_name":"Cordero","full_name":"Cordero, N\u00e9stor-Luis","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1055808973","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2346,"entry_id":1278,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Simplicius et l'\u00e9cole' \u00e9l\u00e9ate","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius et l'\u00e9cole' \u00e9l\u00e9ate"},"abstract":"This text discusses the concept of the Eleatic school of philosophy, which is attributed to the philosophers Parmenides and Xenophanes. The author argues that the school may not have actually existed as a unified movement, but rather was an invention to help classify the philosophical systems of ancient Greece. The author discusses the historical development of the Eleatic school from Plato to Simplicius and analyzes the presentation of the four Eleatic philosophers by Simplicius. The author concludes that Simplicius, like Plato and Aristotle before him, considers Parmenides to be the central figure of the Eleatic school. The text also examines the reasons why the Eleatic school has been characterized as monistic, and argues that this may be due to a misinterpretation of the works of Parmenides and Melissus. [introduction\/conclusion]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/TmkANfK25JZ4wfH","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":54,"full_name":"Cordero, N\u00e9stor-Luis","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1278,"section_of":171,"pages":"166-182","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Les calendriers en usage à Harran d’après les sources arabes et le commentaire de Simplicius à la Physique d’Aristote |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 40-57 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Tardieu, Michel |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
L’ordre des saisons adopté par Simplicius pour énumérer et classer les calendriers groupe d’abord deux calendriers luni-solaires (attique et asiate), puis deux calendriers solaires (romain et arabe). Comme dans l’Athènes de Proclus finissant, le premier de ces calendriers n’était en usage qu’à l’Académie. Mais, à la différence de la situation contemporaine de Marinus écrivant la biographie de son maître, la symbolique des lunaisons du calendrier attique, avec un cycle analogue de fêtes et de rites, était réalité hors de l’enceinte de l’Académie, dans la société harrânienne. Le calendrier luni-solaire attique en usage dans l’École platonicienne de Harrân ne se différenciait du calendrier luni-solaire local hérité de la colonisation macédonienne que par son début d’année et les noms de ses mois. Le passage de l’un à l’autre n’offrait aucune difficulté. Plus besoin, comme le faisait Marinus, de julianiser artificiellement le nombre du jour du mois attique pour transcrire une date du calendrier de la ville. L’hémérologe de Florence mettant la nouvelle année du calendrier asiate le 23 septembre et Jean Lydus faisant partir le calendrier attique du 23 juin, il y avait totale correspondance du point de vue du jour du mois entre le calendrier académique dont Lydus donne les noms attiques et le calendrier civil et religieux de la ville, dont l’Hémerologion et al-Hàsimî transmettent respectivement les noms macédoniens et araméens. L’exemple des débuts d’année, développé par Simplicius, offre un déroulement du temps harrânien à quatre entrées festives, comme l’a bien noté al-Bîrünî. L’année académique des Platoniciens, réglée sur le solstice d’été (calendrier attique), y commençait au 1ᵉʳ Hekatombaiôn, qui correspondait respectivement au 1ᵉʳ Lôos (Éphèse), au 23 juin (Romains), au 4 Panemos (Arabes). L’année civile et religieuse de la ville, réglée sur l’équinoxe d’automne (calendrier asiate), y commençait au 1ᵉʳ Dios/Tišrîn al-awwal, qui correspondait au 23 septembre (Romains), au 6 Gorpiaios (Arabes), au 1ᵉʳ Puanepsiôn (Athéniens). L’année civile et religieuse de l’Empire, réglée sur le solstice d’hiver (calendrier romain), y commençait au 1ᵉʳ janvier/Kânûn II, qui correspondait au 16 Audunaios (Arabes), au 8 Gamêliôn (Athéniens), au 8 Peritios (Éphèse). L’année coutumière de la région, réglée sur l’équinoxe vernal (calendrier arabe), y commençait au 1ᵉʳ Xanthikos/Nîsân, qui correspondait à la veille du 30 Elaphêboliôn (Athéniens), au 22 mars (Romains), et à la veille du 30 Xanthikos (Éphèse). La parenthèse sur les débuts d’année, ouverte par Simplicius à propos de l’exemple du début du mois choisi par Aristote pour illustrer le concept de consécution temporelle, se referme sur trois acquis essentiels. Elle constitue le plus ancien témoignage connu sur les calendriers en usage chez les Greco-araméens de Harrân. Elle permet d’identifier, par leur origine historique et leur appartenance nationale, les calendriers fournis par al-Sarahsî, al-Hàsimî et Wahb. Elle confirme que c’est bien là, dans cette «ville bénie, parce que jamais souillée par l’erreur de Nazareth», que trouvèrent refuge les derniers Platoniciens après 533. Dans les calendriers de Wahb et d’al-Hâsimî, se côtoient pêle-mêle les noms de divinités babyloniennes, égyptiennes, grecques, anatoliennes, syriennes et arabes. Un tel syncrétisme ne pouvait que faire bon ménage avec la religion de l’Académie. Selon l’objectif de l’École d’Athènes, en effet, le philosophe ne devait se contenter d’être le thérapeute d’une seule ville, ou celui des coutumes de quelques peuples. Il lui fallait aussi être «l’hiérophante du monde entier». En s’installant à Harrân à leur retour d’Iran, les compagnons de Damascius avaient choisi l’endroit idéal pour réaliser un tel programme. [conclusion p. 55-57] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/TgVuqJv1CIhi085 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"475","_score":null,"_source":{"id":475,"authors_free":[{"id":640,"entry_id":475,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":331,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Tardieu, Michel","free_first_name":"Michel","free_last_name":"Tardieu","norm_person":{"id":331,"first_name":"Michel","last_name":"Tardieu","full_name":"Tardieu, Michel","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140490701","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":641,"entry_id":475,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Les calendriers en usage \u00e0 Harran d\u2019apr\u00e8s les sources arabes et le commentaire de Simplicius \u00e0 la Physique d\u2019Aristote","main_title":{"title":"Les calendriers en usage \u00e0 Harran d\u2019apr\u00e8s les sources arabes et le commentaire de Simplicius \u00e0 la Physique d\u2019Aristote"},"abstract":"L\u2019ordre des saisons adopt\u00e9 par Simplicius pour \u00e9num\u00e9rer et classer les calendriers groupe d\u2019abord deux calendriers luni-solaires (attique et asiate), puis deux calendriers solaires (romain et arabe). Comme dans l\u2019Ath\u00e8nes de Proclus finissant, le premier de ces calendriers n\u2019\u00e9tait en usage qu\u2019\u00e0 l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie. Mais, \u00e0 la diff\u00e9rence de la situation contemporaine de Marinus \u00e9crivant la biographie de son ma\u00eetre, la symbolique des lunaisons du calendrier attique, avec un cycle analogue de f\u00eates et de rites, \u00e9tait r\u00e9alit\u00e9 hors de l\u2019enceinte de l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie, dans la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 harr\u00e2nienne.\r\n\r\nLe calendrier luni-solaire attique en usage dans l\u2019\u00c9cole platonicienne de Harr\u00e2n ne se diff\u00e9renciait du calendrier luni-solaire local h\u00e9rit\u00e9 de la colonisation mac\u00e9donienne que par son d\u00e9but d\u2019ann\u00e9e et les noms de ses mois. Le passage de l\u2019un \u00e0 l\u2019autre n\u2019offrait aucune difficult\u00e9. Plus besoin, comme le faisait Marinus, de julianiser artificiellement le nombre du jour du mois attique pour transcrire une date du calendrier de la ville.\r\n\r\nL\u2019h\u00e9m\u00e9rologe de Florence mettant la nouvelle ann\u00e9e du calendrier asiate le 23 septembre et Jean Lydus faisant partir le calendrier attique du 23 juin, il y avait totale correspondance du point de vue du jour du mois entre le calendrier acad\u00e9mique dont Lydus donne les noms attiques et le calendrier civil et religieux de la ville, dont l\u2019H\u00e9merologion et al-H\u00e0sim\u00ee transmettent respectivement les noms mac\u00e9doniens et aram\u00e9ens.\r\n\r\nL\u2019exemple des d\u00e9buts d\u2019ann\u00e9e, d\u00e9velopp\u00e9 par Simplicius, offre un d\u00e9roulement du temps harr\u00e2nien \u00e0 quatre entr\u00e9es festives, comme l\u2019a bien not\u00e9 al-B\u00eer\u00fcn\u00ee. L\u2019ann\u00e9e acad\u00e9mique des Platoniciens, r\u00e9gl\u00e9e sur le solstice d\u2019\u00e9t\u00e9 (calendrier attique), y commen\u00e7ait au 1\u1d49\u02b3 Hekatombai\u00f4n, qui correspondait respectivement au 1\u1d49\u02b3 L\u00f4os (\u00c9ph\u00e8se), au 23 juin (Romains), au 4 Panemos (Arabes).\r\n\r\nL\u2019ann\u00e9e civile et religieuse de la ville, r\u00e9gl\u00e9e sur l\u2019\u00e9quinoxe d\u2019automne (calendrier asiate), y commen\u00e7ait au 1\u1d49\u02b3 Dios\/Ti\u0161r\u00een al-awwal, qui correspondait au 23 septembre (Romains), au 6 Gorpiaios (Arabes), au 1\u1d49\u02b3 Puanepsi\u00f4n (Ath\u00e9niens).\r\n\r\nL\u2019ann\u00e9e civile et religieuse de l\u2019Empire, r\u00e9gl\u00e9e sur le solstice d\u2019hiver (calendrier romain), y commen\u00e7ait au 1\u1d49\u02b3 janvier\/K\u00e2n\u00fbn II, qui correspondait au 16 Audunaios (Arabes), au 8 Gam\u00eali\u00f4n (Ath\u00e9niens), au 8 Peritios (\u00c9ph\u00e8se).\r\n\r\nL\u2019ann\u00e9e coutumi\u00e8re de la r\u00e9gion, r\u00e9gl\u00e9e sur l\u2019\u00e9quinoxe vernal (calendrier arabe), y commen\u00e7ait au 1\u1d49\u02b3 Xanthikos\/N\u00ees\u00e2n, qui correspondait \u00e0 la veille du 30 Elaph\u00eaboli\u00f4n (Ath\u00e9niens), au 22 mars (Romains), et \u00e0 la veille du 30 Xanthikos (\u00c9ph\u00e8se).\r\n\r\nLa parenth\u00e8se sur les d\u00e9buts d\u2019ann\u00e9e, ouverte par Simplicius \u00e0 propos de l\u2019exemple du d\u00e9but du mois choisi par Aristote pour illustrer le concept de cons\u00e9cution temporelle, se referme sur trois acquis essentiels.\r\n\r\nElle constitue le plus ancien t\u00e9moignage connu sur les calendriers en usage chez les Greco-aram\u00e9ens de Harr\u00e2n. Elle permet d\u2019identifier, par leur origine historique et leur appartenance nationale, les calendriers fournis par al-Sarahs\u00ee, al-H\u00e0sim\u00ee et Wahb.\r\n\r\nElle confirme que c\u2019est bien l\u00e0, dans cette \u00abville b\u00e9nie, parce que jamais souill\u00e9e par l\u2019erreur de Nazareth\u00bb, que trouv\u00e8rent refuge les derniers Platoniciens apr\u00e8s 533.\r\n\r\nDans les calendriers de Wahb et d\u2019al-H\u00e2sim\u00ee, se c\u00f4toient p\u00eale-m\u00eale les noms de divinit\u00e9s babyloniennes, \u00e9gyptiennes, grecques, anatoliennes, syriennes et arabes. Un tel syncr\u00e9tisme ne pouvait que faire bon m\u00e9nage avec la religion de l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie.\r\n\r\nSelon l\u2019objectif de l\u2019\u00c9cole d\u2019Ath\u00e8nes, en effet, le philosophe ne devait se contenter d\u2019\u00eatre le th\u00e9rapeute d\u2019une seule ville, ou celui des coutumes de quelques peuples. Il lui fallait aussi \u00eatre \u00abl\u2019hi\u00e9rophante du monde entier\u00bb.\r\n\r\nEn s\u2019installant \u00e0 Harr\u00e2n \u00e0 leur retour d\u2019Iran, les compagnons de Damascius avaient choisi l\u2019endroit id\u00e9al pour r\u00e9aliser un tel programme. [conclusion p. 55-57]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/TgVuqJv1CIhi085","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":331,"full_name":"Tardieu, Michel","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":475,"section_of":171,"pages":"40-57","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Simplicius: Prime Matter as Extension |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 148-165 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
What conclusions can now be drawn? It is time to say that I do not think Aristotle reached the point of consciously thinking that extension would play the role of prime matter. It took the Neoplatonist Simplicius to interpret him that way, motivated by reasons of his own. The diffuseness of extension will have seemed important to Simplicius because it puts prime matter where it should be, at the opposite extreme from the unity of the One. He knew that Plato had been taken as identifying prime matter with space or with other kinds of extension, and, although he disagreed, he thought he found the justification for such an interpretation of Aristotle at least in Phys. 4,2, if not in the Metaphysics as well. But even if Simplicius' interpretation does not represent Aristotle's conscious thought, it opens new vistas. For one thing, I believe that extension would fit with Aristotle's conception of prime matter, and fit better than anything else that has been proposed. Furthermore, in considering how it would fit, we have been forced to consider a network of interlocking parts of Aristotle's philosophy. Some of the parts would require modification if extension were to be openly acknowledged as playing the role of prime matter, but the resulting modifications would yield a coherent view. Finally, views of the same general sort, which treat body as some kind of extension endowed with properties, have recurred through the ages, for example in Descartes, in Newton, and in twentieth-century physics. [conclusion p. 162-163] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/h6HONd1UnE1D8Vw |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"487","_score":null,"_source":{"id":487,"authors_free":[{"id":665,"entry_id":487,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":666,"entry_id":487,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Simplicius: Prime Matter as Extension","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius: Prime Matter as Extension"},"abstract":"What conclusions can now be drawn? It is time to say that I do not think Aristotle reached the point of consciously thinking that extension would play the role of prime matter. It took the Neoplatonist Simplicius to interpret him that way, motivated by reasons of his own.\r\n\r\nThe diffuseness of extension will have seemed important to Simplicius because it puts prime matter where it should be, at the opposite extreme from the unity of the One. He knew that Plato had been taken as identifying prime matter with space or with other kinds of extension, and, although he disagreed, he thought he found the justification for such an interpretation of Aristotle at least in Phys. 4,2, if not in the Metaphysics as well.\r\n\r\nBut even if Simplicius' interpretation does not represent Aristotle's conscious thought, it opens new vistas. For one thing, I believe that extension would fit with Aristotle's conception of prime matter, and fit better than anything else that has been proposed. Furthermore, in considering how it would fit, we have been forced to consider a network of interlocking parts of Aristotle's philosophy.\r\n\r\nSome of the parts would require modification if extension were to be openly acknowledged as playing the role of prime matter, but the resulting modifications would yield a coherent view. Finally, views of the same general sort, which treat body as some kind of extension endowed with properties, have recurred through the ages, for example in Descartes, in Newton, and in twentieth-century physics. [conclusion p. 162-163]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/h6HONd1UnE1D8Vw","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":487,"section_of":171,"pages":"148-165","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | John Philoponus |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science |
Pages | 1-40 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
This chapter delves into the life and intellectual contributions of John Philoponus, a pivotal figure bridging Neoplatonism and Christianity. It explores his relationship with Ammonius and examines how his Christian faith influenced his philosophical and scientific endeavors. The text covers Philoponus' critique of the Aristotelian worldview, focusing on key topics such as the creation of the universe, the impetus theory of dynamics, and the concept of velocity in a vacuum. It also addresses his innovative ideas about vacuum and space, his challenges to Aristotle's notions of natural place, and his interpretation of matter as extension. Philoponus is recognized for disrupting Aristotle's categorical framework, rejecting the fifth element, and presenting novel theories about the directionality of light. The chapter reflects on his attacks on Aristotle in retrospect, highlighting the interplay between his scientific theories and Christian doctrines, including Christ, the Trinity, resurrection, and the soul. Additionally, the chapter examines his influence on later thought, tracing his intellectual antecedents and the chronology of his writings. [Derived from the entire text] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/FDyWUVJUOYpvtvb |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"488","_score":null,"_source":{"id":488,"authors_free":[{"id":667,"entry_id":488,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":668,"entry_id":488,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"John Philoponus","main_title":{"title":"John Philoponus"},"abstract":"This chapter delves into the life and intellectual contributions of John Philoponus, a pivotal figure bridging Neoplatonism and Christianity. It explores his relationship with Ammonius and examines how his Christian faith influenced his philosophical and scientific endeavors. The text covers Philoponus' critique of the Aristotelian worldview, focusing on key topics such as the creation of the universe, the impetus theory of dynamics, and the concept of velocity in a vacuum. It also addresses his innovative ideas about vacuum and space, his challenges to Aristotle's notions of natural place, and his interpretation of matter as extension.\r\n\r\nPhiloponus is recognized for disrupting Aristotle's categorical framework, rejecting the fifth element, and presenting novel theories about the directionality of light. The chapter reflects on his attacks on Aristotle in retrospect, highlighting the interplay between his scientific theories and Christian doctrines, including Christ, the Trinity, resurrection, and the soul. Additionally, the chapter examines his influence on later thought, tracing his intellectual antecedents and the chronology of his writings. [Derived from the entire text]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FDyWUVJUOYpvtvb","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":488,"section_of":1383,"pages":"1-40","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1383,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sorabij1987d","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"All the chapters in this book are new, except for the inaugural lecture (Chapter 9), which I apologise for reprinting virtually unrevised and with the original lecture context still apparent. It seemed desirable, however, that so crucial a part ofthe controversy should be represented. The collection originated in a conference on Philoponus held at the Institute of Classical Studies in London in June 1983, which provided an opportunity for interested parties to pool knowledge from the many different disciplines that are relevant to his work. Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 6 are drawn from the conference, while two other conference papers, those of Henry Blumenthal and Richard Sorabji, are being incorporated into books in preparation (see Bibliography). Sorabji's main suggestions, however, are included in Chapter I in the discussion of matter and extension (pp 18 and 23). The remairnng chapters, apart from the inaugural lecture, were solicited or written for the volume, two of them (5 and 12) having been delivered first at a seminar on Ancient Science at the Institute of Classical Studies. [preface, p. ix-x]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/buhMZZl0djmIx9v","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1383,"pubplace":"Ithaca, New York","publisher":"Cornell University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"1","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Infinity and the Creation |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science |
Pages | 164-178 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
The arguments of Philoponus on which I want to focus concern the Christian view that the universe had a beginning. But here already I must draw a distinction. For in talking of the universe beginning, I am not talking merely of the present orderly arrangement of the earth, sun, moon, and stars. Many pagans would have accepted that the present arrangement of matter had a beginning. What, with very few exceptions, they all thought absurd was that matter itself should have had a beginning. Indeed, Jews and Christians themselves were embarrassed about this doctrine and were by no means unanimous in accepting it. It has been suggested that the oldest references to creation in the Old Testament come in Job, and that there God is envisaged as imposing order on pre-existing matter, not as creating matter itself. It has further been doubted whether there is any clear statement in the Bible of creation out of nothing. The opinion of Philo the Jew, in the first century A.D., is a matter of controversy, but I believe that he takes different sides in different works. A little later, Hermogenes and others offered a surprising reason for denying matter a beginning. They pointed to the use of the word "was" in the opening of Genesis, where it is said that the earth was without form and void, and they took the use of the past tense to show that earth, or matter, was already in existence when the Creator began work. It is often held, although I am not inclined to agree myself, that Boethius endorsed the Neoplatonist view of a beginningless universe at the end of his Consolation of Philosophy. What I would acknowledge is that other Christians in these centuries, such as Synesius and Elias, did deny the universe a beginning or end under the influence of Platonism. If we skip to the thirteenth century, we find Thomas Aquinas and his teacher Albert the Great saying that it cannot be established by philosophy one way or the other whether the universe had a beginning. It is only Scripture which reveals that it did. Two slightly younger contemporaries in Paris went a step further—indeed, a step too far. Boethius of Dacia (the Dane, not the sixth-century Roman) and Siger of Brabant maintained that philosophical argument showed the universe to be beginningless, but that nonetheless, reason must bow to revelation. They had to flee Paris in the condemnation of 1277, and there is a tradition that Siger was murdered. [introduction p. 165-167] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/RDC5FI7QaO4jMjf |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"489","_score":null,"_source":{"id":489,"authors_free":[{"id":669,"entry_id":489,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":670,"entry_id":489,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Infinity and the Creation","main_title":{"title":"Infinity and the Creation"},"abstract":"The arguments of Philoponus on which I want to focus concern the Christian view that the universe had a beginning. But here already I must draw a distinction. For in talking of the universe beginning, I am not talking merely of the present orderly arrangement of the earth, sun, moon, and stars. Many pagans would have accepted that the present arrangement of matter had a beginning. What, with very few exceptions, they all thought absurd was that matter itself should have had a beginning.\r\n\r\nIndeed, Jews and Christians themselves were embarrassed about this doctrine and were by no means unanimous in accepting it. It has been suggested that the oldest references to creation in the Old Testament come in Job, and that there God is envisaged as imposing order on pre-existing matter, not as creating matter itself. It has further been doubted whether there is any clear statement in the Bible of creation out of nothing. The opinion of Philo the Jew, in the first century A.D., is a matter of controversy, but I believe that he takes different sides in different works.\r\n\r\nA little later, Hermogenes and others offered a surprising reason for denying matter a beginning. They pointed to the use of the word \"was\" in the opening of Genesis, where it is said that the earth was without form and void, and they took the use of the past tense to show that earth, or matter, was already in existence when the Creator began work. It is often held, although I am not inclined to agree myself, that Boethius endorsed the Neoplatonist view of a beginningless universe at the end of his Consolation of Philosophy.\r\n\r\nWhat I would acknowledge is that other Christians in these centuries, such as Synesius and Elias, did deny the universe a beginning or end under the influence of Platonism. If we skip to the thirteenth century, we find Thomas Aquinas and his teacher Albert the Great saying that it cannot be established by philosophy one way or the other whether the universe had a beginning. It is only Scripture which reveals that it did.\r\n\r\nTwo slightly younger contemporaries in Paris went a step further\u2014indeed, a step too far. Boethius of Dacia (the Dane, not the sixth-century Roman) and Siger of Brabant maintained that philosophical argument showed the universe to be beginningless, but that nonetheless, reason must bow to revelation. They had to flee Paris in the condemnation of 1277, and there is a tradition that Siger was murdered. [introduction p. 165-167]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/RDC5FI7QaO4jMjf","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":489,"section_of":1383,"pages":"164-178","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1383,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sorabij1987d","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"All the chapters in this book are new, except for the inaugural lecture (Chapter 9), which I apologise for reprinting virtually unrevised and with the original lecture context still apparent. It seemed desirable, however, that so crucial a part ofthe controversy should be represented. The collection originated in a conference on Philoponus held at the Institute of Classical Studies in London in June 1983, which provided an opportunity for interested parties to pool knowledge from the many different disciplines that are relevant to his work. Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 6 are drawn from the conference, while two other conference papers, those of Henry Blumenthal and Richard Sorabji, are being incorporated into books in preparation (see Bibliography). Sorabji's main suggestions, however, are included in Chapter I in the discussion of matter and extension (pp 18 and 23). The remairnng chapters, apart from the inaugural lecture, were solicited or written for the volume, two of them (5 and 12) having been delivered first at a seminar on Ancient Science at the Institute of Classical Studies. [preface, p. ix-x]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/buhMZZl0djmIx9v","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1383,"pubplace":"Ithaca, New York","publisher":"Cornell University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"1","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Einige Aspekte der handschriftlichen Überlieferung des Physikkommentars des Simplikios |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 267-286 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Harlfinger, Dieter |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
In der Geschichte der Simplikios-Philologie spielen Frauen eine besondere Rolle. Aus der Feder der byzantinischen Prinzessin Theodora Palaiologina Rhaulaina (ca. 1240—1300)1 stammt eine der —wie sich zeigen wird — textkritisch relevantesten Handschriften des für die Erforschung der Vorsokratik, der Peripatetik wie auch des Neuplatonismus bekanntermaßen unschätzbaren Kommentars zur aristotelischen Physik des Simplikios. Der zwischen 1261 und 1282 datierende2 Codex Mosquensis Muz. 3649 mit den Büchern I—IV und dem Beginn von Buch V (desinit mutile3 803, 8 Diels4) ist die of- fensichtlich sehr gewissenhafte5 Abschrift jener Frau, die keinesfalls nur als Schreiberin hervorgetreten ist, sondern insbesondere auch als selbständige hagiographische Schriftstellerin, als tätige Patronin eines Scriptoriums und Buchilluminationsateliers, als Besitzerin einer wohl umfangreichen Bibliothek und nicht zuletzt als bedeutendes Mitglied eines Gelehrtenkreises, dem unter anderen auch Maximos Planudes, Gregorios von Zypern und Manuel Holobolos angehörten. Als sich auf Initiative und unter Leitung von Ilsetraut H a d o t die führenden Simplikios-Forscher unserer T a g e im Herbst 1985 in Paris zu ihrem ersten Fachkolloquium versammelten, durfte der Verfasser dieser Zeilen — obwohl kein Simplikianer — unter ihnen referieren, über ebenjenen Mosquensis von der H a n d der Rhaulaina. Ilsetraut H a d o t wußte, daß ich auf einer Bibliotheksreise des Jahres 1966 die Handschrift eingesehen hatte und sie aufgrund der Bewertung des „locus fenestratus" am Ende von Buch III p. 518 als neuen unabhängigen Textträger erkannt zu haben glaubte6. D a s Referat konnte zwar von der Klassifizierung des in der T a t unabhängigen Mosquensis ausgehen, mußte sich aber zur Klärung der stemmatischen Aporien, die beim Studium der Dielsschen Praefatio und des apparatus criticus zutage traten, auf die Situation der Handschrift Ε (Vorlagenwechsel sowie Eb und Eä als dislozierte Partien in Ε bzw. der Vorlage von E) und der Handschrift D (Duktusänderung und Vorlagenwechsel) konzentrieren und konnte darüber hinaus auf die interessante Rolle einer weiteren Moskauer Handschrift (Len) aufmerksam machen und Fingerzeige zu dem einen oder anderen jüngeren Manuskript geben. — Inzwischen habe ich noch einmal über den Codex F nachgedacht und nunmehr fast alle Simplikios-Handschriften im Film — soweit im Berliner Aristoteles-Archiv vorhanden7 — rasch eingese hen8. Im folgenden wage ich — der Veranstalterin des Kolloquiums und Editorin der Akten habe ich dabei für Ermunterung und Geduld zu danken —, meine ersten Eindrücke zu publizieren. Es sind lediglich vorläufige Ergebnisse, die durch systematische Untersuchungen verifiziert werden müßten; hierin ein Plädoyer für eine kodikologische Stemmatik. [introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/lJYydaL12PDErlM |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"515","_score":null,"_source":{"id":515,"authors_free":[{"id":714,"entry_id":515,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":5,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Harlfinger, Dieter","free_first_name":"Dieter","free_last_name":"Harlfinger","norm_person":{"id":5,"first_name":"Dieter","last_name":"Harlfinger","full_name":"Harlfinger, Dieter","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/107988674","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":715,"entry_id":515,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Einige Aspekte der handschriftlichen \u00dcberlieferung des Physikkommentars des Simplikios","main_title":{"title":"Einige Aspekte der handschriftlichen \u00dcberlieferung des Physikkommentars des Simplikios"},"abstract":"In der Geschichte der Simplikios-Philologie spielen Frauen eine besondere Rolle. Aus der Feder der byzantinischen Prinzessin Theodora Palaiologina Rhaulaina (ca. 1240\u20141300)1 stammt eine der \u2014wie sich zeigen wird \u2014 textkritisch relevantesten Handschriften des f\u00fcr die Erforschung der Vorsokratik, der Peripatetik wie auch des Neuplatonismus bekannterma\u00dfen unsch\u00e4tzbaren Kommentars zur aristotelischen Physik des Simplikios. Der zwischen 1261 und 1282 datierende2 Codex Mosquensis Muz. 3649 mit den B\u00fcchern I\u2014IV und dem Beginn von Buch V (desinit mutile3 803, 8 Diels4) ist die of- fensichtlich sehr gewissenhafte5 Abschrift jener Frau, die keinesfalls nur als Schreiberin hervorgetreten ist, sondern insbesondere auch als selbst\u00e4ndige hagiographische Schriftstellerin, als t\u00e4tige Patronin eines Scriptoriums und Buchilluminationsateliers, als Besitzerin einer wohl umfangreichen Bibliothek und nicht zuletzt als bedeutendes Mitglied eines Gelehrtenkreises, dem unter anderen auch Maximos Planudes, Gregorios von Zypern und Manuel Holobolos angeh\u00f6rten. Als sich auf Initiative und unter Leitung von Ilsetraut H a d o t die f\u00fchrenden Simplikios-Forscher unserer T a g e im Herbst 1985 in Paris zu ihrem ersten Fachkolloquium versammelten, durfte der Verfasser dieser Zeilen \u2014 obwohl kein Simplikianer \u2014 unter ihnen referieren, \u00fcber ebenjenen Mosquensis von der H a n d der Rhaulaina. Ilsetraut H a d o t wu\u00dfte, da\u00df ich auf einer Bibliotheksreise des Jahres 1966 die Handschrift eingesehen hatte und sie aufgrund der Bewertung des \u201elocus fenestratus\" am Ende von Buch III p. 518 als neuen unabh\u00e4ngigen Texttr\u00e4ger erkannt zu haben glaubte6. D a s Referat konnte zwar von der Klassifizierung des in der T a t unabh\u00e4ngigen Mosquensis ausgehen, mu\u00dfte sich aber zur Kl\u00e4rung der stemmatischen Aporien, die beim Studium der Dielsschen Praefatio und des apparatus criticus zutage traten, auf die Situation der Handschrift \u0395 (Vorlagenwechsel sowie Eb und E\u00e4 als dislozierte Partien in \u0395 bzw. der Vorlage von E) und der Handschrift D (Duktus\u00e4nderung und Vorlagenwechsel) konzentrieren und konnte dar\u00fcber hinaus auf die interessante Rolle einer weiteren Moskauer Handschrift (Len) aufmerksam machen und Fingerzeige zu dem einen oder anderen j\u00fcngeren Manuskript geben. \u2014 Inzwischen habe ich noch einmal \u00fcber den Codex F nachgedacht und nunmehr fast alle Simplikios-Handschriften im Film \u2014 soweit im Berliner Aristoteles-Archiv vorhanden7 \u2014 rasch eingese hen8. Im folgenden wage ich \u2014 der Veranstalterin des Kolloquiums und Editorin der Akten habe ich dabei f\u00fcr Ermunterung und Geduld zu danken \u2014, meine ersten Eindr\u00fccke zu publizieren. Es sind lediglich vorl\u00e4ufige Ergebnisse, die durch systematische Untersuchungen verifiziert werden m\u00fc\u00dften; hierin ein Pl\u00e4doyer f\u00fcr eine kodikologische Stemmatik. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/lJYydaL12PDErlM","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":5,"full_name":"Harlfinger, Dieter","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":515,"section_of":171,"pages":"267-286","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | La survie du Commentaire de Simplicius sur le manual d'Épictète du XVe au XVII siècles: Perotti, Politien, Steuchus, John Smith, Cudworth |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 326-367 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hadot, Pierre |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
The survival of Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' "Handbook" from the 15th to the 17th centuries can be observed from two perspectives. Firstly, there is a focus on the preservation and dissemination of the text itself through printing and translation. However, this study concentrates on the second aspect, which concerns the philosophical content of the commentary. The examination of its philosophical content has aided in understanding Epictetus' "Handbook," resolving certain philosophical problems, and demonstrating the convergence between Platonism and Christianity.The philosophical importance of Simplicius' commentary is exemplified by the work of various scholars, such as Perotti, Politien, Steuchus, John Smith, and Cudworth. They draw on Simplicius' ideas to address and resolve philosophical questions. For instance, Cudworth uses Simplicius' assertion that the principle of movement must move itself and be without parts or extension to argue for the existence of a spiritual substance. Cudworth further highlights how Simplicius perfectly expresses the Platonic idea of the soul's self-motion, where it moves not according to bodily or local movements but according to the movements of the soul, such as examination, volition, thought, and opinion. Overall, the survival of Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' "Handbook" throughout this period has not only contributed to a better understanding of the text itself but also enriched philosophical discussions and fostered connections between Platonism and Christianity. [introduction/conclusion] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/YBJwmhRAfIkqrD5 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"519","_score":null,"_source":{"id":519,"authors_free":[{"id":724,"entry_id":519,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":158,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hadot, Pierre","free_first_name":"Pierre","free_last_name":"Hadot","norm_person":{"id":158,"first_name":"Pierre","last_name":"Hadot","full_name":"Hadot, Pierre","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115663517","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":725,"entry_id":519,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"La survie du Commentaire de Simplicius sur le manual d'\u00c9pict\u00e8te du XVe au XVII si\u00e8cles: Perotti, Politien, Steuchus, John Smith, Cudworth","main_title":{"title":"La survie du Commentaire de Simplicius sur le manual d'\u00c9pict\u00e8te du XVe au XVII si\u00e8cles: Perotti, Politien, Steuchus, John Smith, Cudworth"},"abstract":"The survival of Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' \"Handbook\" from the 15th to the 17th centuries can be observed from two perspectives. Firstly, there is a focus on the preservation and dissemination of the text itself through printing and translation. However, this study concentrates on the second aspect, which concerns the philosophical content of the commentary. The examination of its philosophical content has aided in understanding Epictetus' \"Handbook,\" resolving certain philosophical problems, and demonstrating the convergence between Platonism and Christianity.The philosophical importance of Simplicius' commentary is exemplified by the work of various scholars, such as Perotti, Politien, Steuchus, John Smith, and Cudworth. They draw on Simplicius' ideas to address and resolve philosophical questions. For instance, Cudworth uses Simplicius' assertion that the principle of movement must move itself and be without parts or extension to argue for the existence of a spiritual substance. Cudworth further highlights how Simplicius perfectly expresses the Platonic idea of the soul's self-motion, where it moves not according to bodily or local movements but according to the movements of the soul, such as examination, volition, thought, and opinion. Overall, the survival of Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' \"Handbook\" throughout this period has not only contributed to a better understanding of the text itself but also enriched philosophical discussions and fostered connections between Platonism and Christianity. [introduction\/conclusion]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/YBJwmhRAfIkqrD5","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":158,"full_name":"Hadot, Pierre","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":519,"section_of":171,"pages":"326-367","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | La vie et l’œuvre de Simplicius d’après des sources grecques et arabes |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 3-39 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
Voici donc les conclusions auxquelles on peut aboutir au sujet des œuvres de Simplicius. Nous sont conservés : les commentaires sur le Manuel d’Epictète, sur le De caelo, sur la Physique, sur les Catégories, probablement sur le De anima d’Aristote. Sont perdus, mais attestés de façon plus ou moins sûre : un commentaire sur le premier livre des Éléments d’Euclide, un commentaire sur la Métaphysique d’Aristote, un commentaire sur l’ouvrage de Jamblique consacré à la secte des Pythagoriciens, une Épitomé de la Physique de Théophraste (si le commentaire sur le De anima, où se trouve un renvoi à cette œuvre, est authentique), et peut-être un commentaire sur la Techné d’Hermogène. [conclusion p. 39] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/DUSQYbD2Vn7RuIp |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"522","_score":null,"_source":{"id":522,"authors_free":[{"id":728,"entry_id":522,"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}},{"id":729,"entry_id":522,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"La vie et l\u2019\u0153uvre de Simplicius d\u2019apr\u00e8s des sources grecques et arabes","main_title":{"title":"La vie et l\u2019\u0153uvre de Simplicius d\u2019apr\u00e8s des sources grecques et arabes"},"abstract":"Voici donc les conclusions auxquelles on peut aboutir au sujet des \u0153uvres de Simplicius.\r\n\r\nNous sont conserv\u00e9s : les commentaires sur le Manuel d\u2019Epict\u00e8te, sur le De caelo, sur la Physique, sur les Cat\u00e9gories, probablement sur le De anima d\u2019Aristote.\r\n\r\nSont perdus, mais attest\u00e9s de fa\u00e7on plus ou moins s\u00fbre : un commentaire sur le premier livre des \u00c9l\u00e9ments d\u2019Euclide, un commentaire sur la M\u00e9taphysique d\u2019Aristote, un commentaire sur l\u2019ouvrage de Jamblique consacr\u00e9 \u00e0 la secte des Pythagoriciens, une \u00c9pitom\u00e9 de la Physique de Th\u00e9ophraste (si le commentaire sur le De anima, o\u00f9 se trouve un renvoi \u00e0 cette \u0153uvre, est authentique), et peut-\u00eatre un commentaire sur la Techn\u00e9 d\u2019Hermog\u00e8ne. [conclusion p. 39]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/DUSQYbD2Vn7RuIp","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":522,"section_of":171,"pages":"3-39","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Parménide d'Élée chez les Néoplatoniciens |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Études sur Parménide, Tome II: Problèmes d’interprétation |
Pages | 294-313 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Guérard, Christian |
Editor(s) | Aubenque, Pierre |
Translator(s) |
«Le néoplatonisme, écrit J. Trouillard, succède au ‘moyen platonisme’ le jour où les platoniciens se mettent à chercher dans le Parménide le secret de la philosophie de Platon»¹. Effectivement, en paraphrasant Proclus, on peut même dire que la lecture néoplatonicienne du dialogue, et avant tout de la première hypothèse, est le Néoplatonisme lui-même². Sans revenir davantage sur le rôle considérable du Parménide chez Plotin³, bornons-nous à rappeler qu’il a été commenté de façon systématique par Porphyre⁴, puis, comme en témoigne Proclus⁵, par Amélius, Théodore d’Asiné, Jamblique, l’obscur philosophe de Rhodes, Plutarque d’Athènes et Syrianus. À son tour, le Lycien a rédigé un commentaire probablement complet du dialogue qu’il a repris dans son ouvrage final, la Théologie platonicienne. De même, les deux œuvres rassemblées par C.E. Ruelle sous le titre Dubitationes et solutiones de primis principiis in Platonis Parmenidem⁶ montrent l’importance du dialogue chez Damascius. Cette relecture du Parménide a posé bien des questions aux historiens de la philosophie. On a alors invoqué l’influence d’idées orientales. Il fallait, semble-t-il, excuser des esprits aussi exceptionnels d’avoir « sombré dans l’irrationalisme ». Une telle attitude, déjà fort visible chez V. Cousin⁷, l’éditeur même de Proclus, malheureusement demeure⁸. En fait, chez Plotin, l’orientalisme se limiterait au plus à l’aspiration mystique⁹ : la définition du Bien (épékeina tês ousias) est dans la République, VI 509B9, et les spéculations néopythagoriciennes avaient reconnu dans l’Un du Parménide le Principe de tout¹⁰. Il ne restait qu’à faire le lien, peut-être en retrouvant ainsi la pensée de Speusippe¹¹, mais, sans aucun doute, en s’opposant au platonisme de l’époque. Au IIᵉ siècle notamment, le Parménide était considéré comme une œuvre « logique », un exercice éristique ou un pastiche de la sophistique mégarique. C’était l’opinion des aristotéliciens dont Alexandre d’Aphrodise¹², et aussi celle d’Albinus¹³, par exemple. Pour presque tous¹⁴, le dialogue n’était qu’un jeu discursif employant la méthode des Topiques d’Aristote¹⁵. Il était admis qu’il s’agissait d’une réfutation de l’éléatisme, et, dans la première hypothèse en particulier, d’une réplique ironique de Gorgias¹⁶. La conception néoplatonicienne n’était pas très aisée à soutenir : si le dialogue porte sur des réalités sublimes, pourquoi les faire exposer par Parménide ? D’ailleurs, l’hypothèse est-elle celle de l’Éléate¹⁷ ? Enfin, connaissait-il l’Un avant l’être et la théologie négative ? Comment donc admettre que le dialogue puisse révéler les choses les plus hautes si le Parménide du Poème n’a rien à voir avec le personnage de Platon ? Devant ces questions, la figure de l’Éléate prenait un relief nouveau nécessitant à son tour une lecture nouvelle. Nous allons tenter de montrer comment, principalement chez Plotin et Proclus, Parménide allait s’inscrire dans la perspective historique propre au néoplatonisme, et qui, d’une certaine manière, le définit. [introduction p. 294-295] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/8WXrV6XuPyldosH |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"530","_score":null,"_source":{"id":530,"authors_free":[{"id":746,"entry_id":530,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":150,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Gu\u00e9rard, Christian","free_first_name":"Christian","free_last_name":"Gu\u00e9rard","norm_person":{"id":150,"first_name":"Christian","last_name":"Gu\u00e9rard","full_name":"Gu\u00e9rard, Christian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":747,"entry_id":530,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":149,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","free_first_name":"Pierre","free_last_name":"Aubenque","norm_person":{"id":149,"first_name":"Pierre","last_name":"Aubenque","full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118919458","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Parm\u00e9nide d'\u00c9l\u00e9e chez les N\u00e9oplatoniciens","main_title":{"title":"Parm\u00e9nide d'\u00c9l\u00e9e chez les N\u00e9oplatoniciens"},"abstract":"\u00abLe n\u00e9oplatonisme, \u00e9crit J. Trouillard, succ\u00e8de au \u2018moyen platonisme\u2019 le jour o\u00f9 les platoniciens se mettent \u00e0 chercher dans le Parm\u00e9nide le secret de la philosophie de Platon\u00bb\u00b9. Effectivement, en paraphrasant Proclus, on peut m\u00eame dire que la lecture n\u00e9oplatonicienne du dialogue, et avant tout de la premi\u00e8re hypoth\u00e8se, est le N\u00e9oplatonisme lui-m\u00eame\u00b2.\r\n\r\nSans revenir davantage sur le r\u00f4le consid\u00e9rable du Parm\u00e9nide chez Plotin\u00b3, bornons-nous \u00e0 rappeler qu\u2019il a \u00e9t\u00e9 comment\u00e9 de fa\u00e7on syst\u00e9matique par Porphyre\u2074, puis, comme en t\u00e9moigne Proclus\u2075, par Am\u00e9lius, Th\u00e9odore d\u2019Asin\u00e9, Jamblique, l\u2019obscur philosophe de Rhodes, Plutarque d\u2019Ath\u00e8nes et Syrianus. \u00c0 son tour, le Lycien a r\u00e9dig\u00e9 un commentaire probablement complet du dialogue qu\u2019il a repris dans son ouvrage final, la Th\u00e9ologie platonicienne. De m\u00eame, les deux \u0153uvres rassembl\u00e9es par C.E. Ruelle sous le titre Dubitationes et solutiones de primis principiis in Platonis Parmenidem\u2076 montrent l\u2019importance du dialogue chez Damascius.\r\n\r\nCette relecture du Parm\u00e9nide a pos\u00e9 bien des questions aux historiens de la philosophie. On a alors invoqu\u00e9 l\u2019influence d\u2019id\u00e9es orientales. Il fallait, semble-t-il, excuser des esprits aussi exceptionnels d\u2019avoir \u00ab sombr\u00e9 dans l\u2019irrationalisme \u00bb. Une telle attitude, d\u00e9j\u00e0 fort visible chez V. Cousin\u2077, l\u2019\u00e9diteur m\u00eame de Proclus, malheureusement demeure\u2078.\r\n\r\nEn fait, chez Plotin, l\u2019orientalisme se limiterait au plus \u00e0 l\u2019aspiration mystique\u2079 : la d\u00e9finition du Bien (\u00e9p\u00e9keina t\u00eas ousias) est dans la R\u00e9publique, VI 509B9, et les sp\u00e9culations n\u00e9opythagoriciennes avaient reconnu dans l\u2019Un du Parm\u00e9nide le Principe de tout\u00b9\u2070. Il ne restait qu\u2019\u00e0 faire le lien, peut-\u00eatre en retrouvant ainsi la pens\u00e9e de Speusippe\u00b9\u00b9, mais, sans aucun doute, en s\u2019opposant au platonisme de l\u2019\u00e9poque.\r\n\r\nAu II\u1d49 si\u00e8cle notamment, le Parm\u00e9nide \u00e9tait consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme une \u0153uvre \u00ab logique \u00bb, un exercice \u00e9ristique ou un pastiche de la sophistique m\u00e9garique. C\u2019\u00e9tait l\u2019opinion des aristot\u00e9liciens dont Alexandre d\u2019Aphrodise\u00b9\u00b2, et aussi celle d\u2019Albinus\u00b9\u00b3, par exemple. Pour presque tous\u00b9\u2074, le dialogue n\u2019\u00e9tait qu\u2019un jeu discursif employant la m\u00e9thode des Topiques d\u2019Aristote\u00b9\u2075. Il \u00e9tait admis qu\u2019il s\u2019agissait d\u2019une r\u00e9futation de l\u2019\u00e9l\u00e9atisme, et, dans la premi\u00e8re hypoth\u00e8se en particulier, d\u2019une r\u00e9plique ironique de Gorgias\u00b9\u2076.\r\n\r\nLa conception n\u00e9oplatonicienne n\u2019\u00e9tait pas tr\u00e8s ais\u00e9e \u00e0 soutenir : si le dialogue porte sur des r\u00e9alit\u00e9s sublimes, pourquoi les faire exposer par Parm\u00e9nide ? D\u2019ailleurs, l\u2019hypoth\u00e8se est-elle celle de l\u2019\u00c9l\u00e9ate\u00b9\u2077 ? Enfin, connaissait-il l\u2019Un avant l\u2019\u00eatre et la th\u00e9ologie n\u00e9gative ? Comment donc admettre que le dialogue puisse r\u00e9v\u00e9ler les choses les plus hautes si le Parm\u00e9nide du Po\u00e8me n\u2019a rien \u00e0 voir avec le personnage de Platon ?\r\n\r\nDevant ces questions, la figure de l\u2019\u00c9l\u00e9ate prenait un relief nouveau n\u00e9cessitant \u00e0 son tour une lecture nouvelle. Nous allons tenter de montrer comment, principalement chez Plotin et Proclus, Parm\u00e9nide allait s\u2019inscrire dans la perspective historique propre au n\u00e9oplatonisme, et qui, d\u2019une certaine mani\u00e8re, le d\u00e9finit. [introduction p. 294-295]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/8WXrV6XuPyldosH","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":150,"full_name":"Gu\u00e9rard, Christian","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":149,"full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":530,"section_of":372,"pages":"294-313","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":372,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"\u00c9tudes sur Parm\u00e9nide, Tome II: Probl\u00e8mes d\u2019interpr\u00e9tation","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Aubenque1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ojgpMQbpMPY4GeV","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":372,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Vrin","series":"Biblioth\u00e8que d\u2019histoire de la philosophie","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Traductions latines et influences du commentaire in De caelo en occident (XlIIe- XIVe s.) |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 289-325 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Bossier, Fernand |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
Si l’on essaie d’évaluer l’influence exercée par un auteur grec sur l’Occident au XIIIe et XIVe s., l’on doit se tourner tout d’abord vers l’étude des traductions. En effet, bien que le nombre de ceux qui connaissaient le grec ait été plus élevé qu’on ne le croit d’ordinaire, la traduction n’en était pas moins, à cette époque et pour longtemps encore, le seul canal par lequel les idées des philosophes et savants grecs pouvaient atteindre les écoles ; le cas des dialogues de Platon est trop connu pour que nous nous y attardions longtemps. L’intention de notre communication, qui concerne la survie du commentaire In De caelo en Occident, sera donc double : d’une part, elle fera l’historique des traductions qui en ont été faites tout au long du XIIIe s. ; d’autre part, elle présentera les résultats d’une première reconnaissance d’un terrain très vaste et à peine défriché, à savoir celui de l’influence qu’ont eue ces traductions sur les traités médiévaux. [introduction p. 289] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/aFzlEmFULfnA7eU |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"568","_score":null,"_source":{"id":568,"authors_free":[{"id":806,"entry_id":568,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":12,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Bossier, Fernand","free_first_name":"Fernand","free_last_name":"Bossier","norm_person":{"id":12,"first_name":"Fernand ","last_name":"Bossier","full_name":"Bossier, Fernand ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1017981663","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":807,"entry_id":568,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Traductions latines et influences du commentaire in De caelo en occident (XlIIe- XIVe s.)","main_title":{"title":"Traductions latines et influences du commentaire in De caelo en occident (XlIIe- XIVe s.)"},"abstract":"Si l\u2019on essaie d\u2019\u00e9valuer l\u2019influence exerc\u00e9e par un auteur grec sur l\u2019Occident au XIIIe et XIVe s., l\u2019on doit se tourner tout d\u2019abord vers l\u2019\u00e9tude des traductions. En effet, bien que le nombre de ceux qui connaissaient le grec ait \u00e9t\u00e9 plus \u00e9lev\u00e9 qu\u2019on ne le croit d\u2019ordinaire, la traduction n\u2019en \u00e9tait pas moins, \u00e0 cette \u00e9poque et pour longtemps encore, le seul canal par lequel les id\u00e9es des philosophes et savants grecs pouvaient atteindre les \u00e9coles ; le cas des dialogues de Platon est trop connu pour que nous nous y attardions longtemps. L\u2019intention de notre communication, qui concerne la survie du commentaire In De caelo en Occident, sera donc double : d\u2019une part, elle fera l\u2019historique des traductions qui en ont \u00e9t\u00e9 faites tout au long du XIIIe s. ; d\u2019autre part, elle pr\u00e9sentera les r\u00e9sultats d\u2019une premi\u00e8re reconnaissance d\u2019un terrain tr\u00e8s vaste et \u00e0 peine d\u00e9frich\u00e9, \u00e0 savoir celui de l\u2019influence qu\u2019ont eue ces traductions sur les trait\u00e9s m\u00e9di\u00e9vaux. [introduction p. 289]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/aFzlEmFULfnA7eU","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":12,"full_name":"Bossier, Fernand ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":568,"section_of":171,"pages":"289-325","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Aristotelian philosophy in the Roman world from the time of Cicero to the end of the second century AD |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. 2. Teilband: Philosophie |
Pages | 1079-1174 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Gottschalk, Hans B. |
Editor(s) | Haase, Wolfgang , Temporini, Hildegard |
Translator(s) |
It is time to place our findings in a wider perspective. The propagation of Aristotelianism in the first two centuries AD seems to have taken place at several levels. For the committed student, there was the study and exposition of Aristotle’s school treatises. Much sound and lasting work was done in this field, but it seems to have been confined to a fairly restricted circle, although some contributions were made by members of other schools or by those, like Galen, who did not tie themselves to any school at all, as well as by professed Aristotelians. For a wider audience, there were compilations and handbooks purveying Aristotle’s doctrines in a more accessible form and the 'exoteric’ writings of Aristotle and his pupils, which continued to circulate in this period; the impression sometimes given that they were driven out of circulation as soon as Andronicus made the school treatises available is seriously misleading. Lastly, there was an immense production of sub-philosophical tracts, like the pseudo-Pythagorean writings, which might include some Aristotelian ideas but always diluted and heavily contaminated with others of a different origin. We may ignore the third of these, which contributed little or nothing to the development of Aristotelianism as such. Historians naturally concentrate on the first, which so profoundly influenced the subsequent tradition, but it would be a mistake to neglect the second entirely. The eminent men of affairs who professed themselves followers of Aristotle will not have been motivated by a passionate belief in the priority of the categorical over the hypothetical syllogism or the eternity of the physical universe. What Aristotelianism had to offer them was a view of the world and a reasoned set of ethical beliefs that avoided the mechanism and hedonism of the Epicureans, the determinism and rigorism of the Stoics, and the other-worldliness of Platonism; and this is more or less what we find in the popular writings influenced by Aristotle’s philosophy, whether composed by members of the school or by outsiders like Plutarch. However we rate the philosophical value of this side of the school’s activity, it undoubtedly helped to establish its position in society and the claim of its members to publicly funded teaching posts and the other privileges accorded to philosophers. This dualism entered into the popular image of the school and was believed to go back to its very beginnings. Lucian, in a well-known passage, describes the Peripatetic as the thinker with two philosophies, the 'exoteric’ and the 'esoteric,’ to offer, and according to Aulus Gellius, Aristotle used to give rigorous courses for specialists in the morning and more popular ones in the afternoon. The diffusion of this view in the literature of the second century AD suggests that it accurately reflected the conditions of the time, but this does not mean that we need doubt its historical truth. Gellius’ source was probably Andronicus, who is quoted later in the same chapter; the distinction between 'esoteric’ (or 'acroamatic’) and 'exoteric’ writings is already found in Cicero, who probably had it from Antiochus of Ascalon, and Aristotle himself refers to the 'exoteric’ works in the extant treatises. The history of the Hellenistic Peripatos is, to a large extent, one of the tension between these tendencies in the work of the school. The same continuity is found in the school’s teaching, especially at the popular level. The dialogues and handbooks read in the Hellenistic age continued in use, and the opinions about the school and its beliefs current among outsiders in the first two centuries AD hardly differed from those of the Ciceronian age. At the more specialized level, Andronicus’ edition made a new start in the study of Aristotle’s writings, but his way of presenting Aristotle’s philosophy was a legitimate extension of the work of Theophrastus and Eudemus. Even the freedom with which he and his immediate followers suggested the need for changes in details imitated the practice of the first generation of Peripatetics. There is one difference, however. The early Peripatetics not only expounded Aristotle’s philosophy but tried to extend its scope by independent study of the natural world and human behavior. The absence of this element from the work of Andronicus and those who came after him resulted in the growth of the book-centered scholasticism we meet in the Imperial age. All this is not to say that the popular and scholarly traditions were isolated from one another. The popular books and lectures of professed Peripatetics were meant to give a true outline of the philosophy developed fully in the school treatises, and even some of the pseudo-Pythagorean books contain material clearly derived from the extant pragmateiai, at however many removes; a few of them, notably the pseudo-Archytean reworkings of the Categories, reflect a stage in their understanding that can be clearly defined and connected with the names of known commentators. On the other hand, some of the commentaries on Aristotle’s pragmateiai seem to have originated in elementary lecture courses, and this may account for the superficiality of some of their contents. The specialized work of the school was based on the exegesis of Aristotle’s writings. In this field, its members developed a high degree of competence, and its influence is not exhausted even today, but the thrust of their interpretation was very different from that of the modern historian of philosophy. Their aim was to present Aristotle’s philosophy as a system and to elucidate his doctrines; they were less interested in the character of his arguments and not at all in the origin and growth of his ideas. New developments of his teaching took one of two directions. On the one hand, real or apparent discrepancies in Aristotle’s writings had to be explained. This was part of exegesis and subordinated to the systematic tendency of the school (we find no genetic explanations); some of the difficulties raised were of a kind that would only be felt by elementary students, and clearly much attention was paid to their needs. But there are real loose ends in Aristotle’s work, which his followers tried to tie up as best they could. Secondly, new problems had arisen in the course of philosophical debate in the period since Aristotle’s death, which Aristotle had not discussed or only in a marginal way; the question of Fate and Providence is the most notable instance. Here there was a constant tension between the implications of the problem and the requirements of orthodoxy, and progress was limited. On the whole, orthodoxy prevailed, backed up by polemics against rival viewpoints. At this point, we can observe a rigidity that inhibited the further development of Aristotelianism and may explain its failure to resist the encroachment of Platonism. We have already seen that many Aristotelian ideas, including the whole of his logic and a good part of his metaphysics, natural philosophy, and ethics, were taken over by Platonists from the first century onwards. In spite of some opposition, from Plotinus as well as lesser figures, this process continued until all Aristotelian doctrines that could be brought into conformity with Platonic principles were incorporated into the developed Neoplatonic systems. As this happened, Aristotelianism ceased to exist as an independent philosophy. There is a Protean quality about Platonism that has allowed it at various times to absorb alien ideas without losing its essential character, perhaps precisely because its fundamental insights were not tied to a fixed system. Aristotelianism, in the systematic form it had acquired, lacked this flexibility. It was well suited to the enlightened atmosphere of the first two centuries AD but could no longer meet the needs, especially the religious aspirations, of the centuries that followed. But it could offer the Platonists something they lacked—a ready-made set of components for building their own system. Many of the parts proved more durable than the whole; they constituted the Erkenntnisse, in N. Hartmann’s sense of the word, of Aristotle’s thinking. Within the new framework, Aristotle’s leading ideas retained their vigor, and Aristotle became what, by and large, he has remained ever since: the philosopher’s philosopher. [conclusion p. 1172-1174] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/FPwm868kRTy5Ier |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1332","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1332,"authors_free":[{"id":1965,"entry_id":1332,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":135,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Gottschalk, Hans B.","free_first_name":"Hans B.","free_last_name":"Gottschalk","norm_person":{"id":135,"first_name":"Hans B.","last_name":"Gottschalk","full_name":"Gottschalk, Hans B.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1161498559","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2382,"entry_id":1332,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":325,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Haase, Wolfgang","free_first_name":"Wolfgang","free_last_name":"Haase","norm_person":{"id":325,"first_name":"Wolfgang","last_name":"Haase","full_name":"Haase, Wolfgang","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117757527","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2383,"entry_id":1332,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":453,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Temporini, Hildegard","free_first_name":"Hildegard","free_last_name":"Temporini","norm_person":{"id":453,"first_name":"Hildegard","last_name":"Temporini","full_name":"Temporini, Hildegard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117754013","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aristotelian philosophy in the Roman world from the time of Cicero to the end of the second century AD","main_title":{"title":"Aristotelian philosophy in the Roman world from the time of Cicero to the end of the second century AD"},"abstract":"It is time to place our findings in a wider perspective. The propagation of Aristotelianism in the first two centuries AD seems to have taken place at several levels. For the committed student, there was the study and exposition of Aristotle\u2019s school treatises. Much sound and lasting work was done in this field, but it seems to have been confined to a fairly restricted circle, although some contributions were made by members of other schools or by those, like Galen, who did not tie themselves to any school at all, as well as by professed Aristotelians. For a wider audience, there were compilations and handbooks purveying Aristotle\u2019s doctrines in a more accessible form and the 'exoteric\u2019 writings of Aristotle and his pupils, which continued to circulate in this period; the impression sometimes given that they were driven out of circulation as soon as Andronicus made the school treatises available is seriously misleading. Lastly, there was an immense production of sub-philosophical tracts, like the pseudo-Pythagorean writings, which might include some Aristotelian ideas but always diluted and heavily contaminated with others of a different origin.\r\n\r\nWe may ignore the third of these, which contributed little or nothing to the development of Aristotelianism as such. Historians naturally concentrate on the first, which so profoundly influenced the subsequent tradition, but it would be a mistake to neglect the second entirely. The eminent men of affairs who professed themselves followers of Aristotle will not have been motivated by a passionate belief in the priority of the categorical over the hypothetical syllogism or the eternity of the physical universe. What Aristotelianism had to offer them was a view of the world and a reasoned set of ethical beliefs that avoided the mechanism and hedonism of the Epicureans, the determinism and rigorism of the Stoics, and the other-worldliness of Platonism; and this is more or less what we find in the popular writings influenced by Aristotle\u2019s philosophy, whether composed by members of the school or by outsiders like Plutarch. However we rate the philosophical value of this side of the school\u2019s activity, it undoubtedly helped to establish its position in society and the claim of its members to publicly funded teaching posts and the other privileges accorded to philosophers.\r\n\r\nThis dualism entered into the popular image of the school and was believed to go back to its very beginnings. Lucian, in a well-known passage, describes the Peripatetic as the thinker with two philosophies, the 'exoteric\u2019 and the 'esoteric,\u2019 to offer, and according to Aulus Gellius, Aristotle used to give rigorous courses for specialists in the morning and more popular ones in the afternoon. The diffusion of this view in the literature of the second century AD suggests that it accurately reflected the conditions of the time, but this does not mean that we need doubt its historical truth. Gellius\u2019 source was probably Andronicus, who is quoted later in the same chapter; the distinction between 'esoteric\u2019 (or 'acroamatic\u2019) and 'exoteric\u2019 writings is already found in Cicero, who probably had it from Antiochus of Ascalon, and Aristotle himself refers to the 'exoteric\u2019 works in the extant treatises. The history of the Hellenistic Peripatos is, to a large extent, one of the tension between these tendencies in the work of the school.\r\n\r\nThe same continuity is found in the school\u2019s teaching, especially at the popular level. The dialogues and handbooks read in the Hellenistic age continued in use, and the opinions about the school and its beliefs current among outsiders in the first two centuries AD hardly differed from those of the Ciceronian age. At the more specialized level, Andronicus\u2019 edition made a new start in the study of Aristotle\u2019s writings, but his way of presenting Aristotle\u2019s philosophy was a legitimate extension of the work of Theophrastus and Eudemus. Even the freedom with which he and his immediate followers suggested the need for changes in details imitated the practice of the first generation of Peripatetics.\r\n\r\nThere is one difference, however. The early Peripatetics not only expounded Aristotle\u2019s philosophy but tried to extend its scope by independent study of the natural world and human behavior. The absence of this element from the work of Andronicus and those who came after him resulted in the growth of the book-centered scholasticism we meet in the Imperial age.\r\n\r\nAll this is not to say that the popular and scholarly traditions were isolated from one another. The popular books and lectures of professed Peripatetics were meant to give a true outline of the philosophy developed fully in the school treatises, and even some of the pseudo-Pythagorean books contain material clearly derived from the extant pragmateiai, at however many removes; a few of them, notably the pseudo-Archytean reworkings of the Categories, reflect a stage in their understanding that can be clearly defined and connected with the names of known commentators. On the other hand, some of the commentaries on Aristotle\u2019s pragmateiai seem to have originated in elementary lecture courses, and this may account for the superficiality of some of their contents.\r\n\r\nThe specialized work of the school was based on the exegesis of Aristotle\u2019s writings. In this field, its members developed a high degree of competence, and its influence is not exhausted even today, but the thrust of their interpretation was very different from that of the modern historian of philosophy. Their aim was to present Aristotle\u2019s philosophy as a system and to elucidate his doctrines; they were less interested in the character of his arguments and not at all in the origin and growth of his ideas.\r\n\r\nNew developments of his teaching took one of two directions. On the one hand, real or apparent discrepancies in Aristotle\u2019s writings had to be explained. This was part of exegesis and subordinated to the systematic tendency of the school (we find no genetic explanations); some of the difficulties raised were of a kind that would only be felt by elementary students, and clearly much attention was paid to their needs. But there are real loose ends in Aristotle\u2019s work, which his followers tried to tie up as best they could. Secondly, new problems had arisen in the course of philosophical debate in the period since Aristotle\u2019s death, which Aristotle had not discussed or only in a marginal way; the question of Fate and Providence is the most notable instance. Here there was a constant tension between the implications of the problem and the requirements of orthodoxy, and progress was limited. On the whole, orthodoxy prevailed, backed up by polemics against rival viewpoints.\r\n\r\nAt this point, we can observe a rigidity that inhibited the further development of Aristotelianism and may explain its failure to resist the encroachment of Platonism. We have already seen that many Aristotelian ideas, including the whole of his logic and a good part of his metaphysics, natural philosophy, and ethics, were taken over by Platonists from the first century onwards. In spite of some opposition, from Plotinus as well as lesser figures, this process continued until all Aristotelian doctrines that could be brought into conformity with Platonic principles were incorporated into the developed Neoplatonic systems. As this happened, Aristotelianism ceased to exist as an independent philosophy.\r\n\r\nThere is a Protean quality about Platonism that has allowed it at various times to absorb alien ideas without losing its essential character, perhaps precisely because its fundamental insights were not tied to a fixed system. Aristotelianism, in the systematic form it had acquired, lacked this flexibility. It was well suited to the enlightened atmosphere of the first two centuries AD but could no longer meet the needs, especially the religious aspirations, of the centuries that followed. But it could offer the Platonists something they lacked\u2014a ready-made set of components for building their own system. Many of the parts proved more durable than the whole; they constituted the Erkenntnisse, in N. Hartmann\u2019s sense of the word, of Aristotle\u2019s thinking. Within the new framework, Aristotle\u2019s leading ideas retained their vigor, and Aristotle became what, by and large, he has remained ever since: the philosopher\u2019s philosopher.\r\n[conclusion p. 1172-1174]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FPwm868kRTy5Ier","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":135,"full_name":"Gottschalk, Hans B.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":325,"full_name":"Haase, Wolfgang","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":453,"full_name":"Temporini, Hildegard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1332,"section_of":335,"pages":"1079-1174","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":335,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aufstieg und Niedergang der r\u00f6mischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. 2. Teilband: Philosophie","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Haase1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"AUFSTIEG UND NIEDERGANG DER R\u00d6MISCHEN WELT (ANRW) ist ein internationales Gemeinschaftswerk historischer Wissenschaften. Seine Aufgabe besteht darin, alle wichtigen Aspekte der antiken r\u00f6mischen Welt sowie ihres Fortwirkens und Nachlebens in Mittelalter und Neuzeit nach dem gegenw\u00e4rtigen Stand der Forschung in Einzelbeitr\u00e4gen zu behandeln. Das Werk ist in 3 Teile gegliedert:\r\nI. Von den Anf\u00e4ngen Roms bis zum Ausgang der Republik\r\nII. Principat\r\nIII. Sp\u00e4tantike\r\nJeder der drei Teile umfa\u00dft sechs systematische Rubriken, zwischen denen es vielfache \u00dcberschneidungen gibt: 1. Politische Geschichte, 2. Recht, 3. Religion, 4. Sprache und Literatur, 5. Philosophie und Wissenschaften, 6. K\u00fcnste.\r\n\r\nANRW ist ein handbuchartiges \u00dcbersichtswerk zu den r\u00f6mischen Studien im weitesten Sinne, mit Einschlu\u00df der Rezeptions- und Wirkungsgeschichte bis in die Gegenwart. Bei den Beitr\u00e4gen handelt es sich entweder um zusammenfassende Darstellungen mit Bibliographie oder um Problem- und Forschungsberichte bzw. thematisch breit angelegte exemplarische Untersuchungen. Die Artikel erscheinen in deutscher, englischer, franz\u00f6sischer oder italienischer Sprache.\r\n\r\nZum Mitarbeiterstab geh\u00f6ren rund 1000 Gelehrte aus 35 L\u00e4ndern. Der Vielfalt der Themen entsprechend geh\u00f6ren die Autoren haupts\u00e4chlich folgenden Fachrichtungen an: Alte, Mittelalterliche und Neue Geschichte; Byzantinistik, Slavistik; Klassische, Mittellateinische, Romanische und Orientalische Philologie; Klassische, Orientalische und Christliche Arch\u00e4ologie und Kunstgeschichte; Rechtswissenschaft; Religionswissenschaft und Theologie, besonders Kirchengeschichte und Patristik.\r\n\r\nIn Vorbereitung sind:\r\nTeil II, Bd. 26,4: Religion - Vorkonstantinisches Christentum: Neues Testament - Sachthemen, Fortsetzung\r\nTeil II, Bd. 37,4: Wissenschaften: Medizin und Biologie, Fortsetzung. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/vkva8h1vt1Po53c","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":335,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"De Gruyter","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1987]}
Title | Proklos und die Form des philosophischen Kommentars |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1985 |
Published in | Proclus, lecteur et interprète des anciens. Actes du colloque international du CNRS, Paris (2-4 octobre 1985) |
Pages | 1-20 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Lamberz, Erich |
Editor(s) | Pépin, Jean , Saffrey, Henri Dominique |
Translator(s) |
In den bisherigen Untersuchungen zur Form der Kommentare des Proklos und der Neuplatoniker im allgemeinen ist vor allem Gewicht darauf gelegt worden, daß die Kommentare aus der mündlichen Exegese der Texte hervorgegangen sind und die Formen dieser mündlichen Exegese sich in den schriftlich fixierten Werken widerspiegeln. Neben Spuren mündlicher Ausdrucksformen und Reflexen von Schuldiskussionen gehört zu diesen Formen vor allem die Gliederung der Exegese in Abschnitte, die Vorlesungseinheiten (praxeis) entsprechen, und die Unterteilung der einzelnen Abschnitte in Allgemeinerklärung (theôria) und Einzelerklärung (lexis). Bis jetzt blieb jedoch weitgehend die Frage außer B etracht, ob und wie sich die von den Exegeten selbst redigierten Kommentare von Vorlesungsnachschriften unterscheiden. Es erscheint deshalb sinnvoll, den Blickwinkel einmal umzukehren und zu fragen, welche spezifischen Formelemente sich in den Kommentaren des Proklos und anderer Neuplatoniker aufzeigen lassen, wenn man sie in erster Linie als literarische Erzeugnisse und nicht als Niederschlag mündlicher Exegese betrachtet. Im folgenden soll zu diesem Zweck nach einigen terminologischen Voruntersuchungen die Form der Lemmata, deren Einfügung in den Kom m entartext und der Aufbau der einzelnen Kommentarabschnitte besprochen werden. [Introduction, p. 1-2] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/WFCq8CflnlIPypA |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1191","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1191,"authors_free":[{"id":1762,"entry_id":1191,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":226,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Lamberz, Erich","free_first_name":"Erich","free_last_name":"Lamberz","norm_person":{"id":226,"first_name":"Erich","last_name":"Lamberz","full_name":"Lamberz, Erich","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/125040709","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2057,"entry_id":1191,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":227,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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}},{"id":2058,"entry_id":1191,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":228,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","free_first_name":"Henri Dominique","free_last_name":"Saffrey","norm_person":{"id":228,"first_name":"Henri Dominique","last_name":"Saffrey","full_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130160059","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Proklos und die Form des philosophischen Kommentars","main_title":{"title":"Proklos und die Form des philosophischen Kommentars"},"abstract":"In den bisherigen Untersuchungen zur Form der Kommentare des Proklos und der Neuplatoniker im allgemeinen ist vor allem Gewicht darauf gelegt worden, da\u00df die Kommentare aus der m\u00fcndlichen Exegese der Texte hervorgegangen sind und die Formen dieser m\u00fcndlichen \r\nExegese sich in den schriftlich fixierten Werken widerspiegeln. Neben Spuren m\u00fcndlicher Ausdrucksformen und Reflexen von Schuldiskussio\u00adnen geh\u00f6rt zu diesen Formen vor allem die Gliederung der Exegese in Abschnitte, die Vorlesungseinheiten (praxeis) entsprechen, und die \r\nUnterteilung der einzelnen Abschnitte in Allgemeinerkl\u00e4rung (the\u00f4ria) und Einzelerkl\u00e4rung (lexis). Bis jetzt blieb jedoch weitgehend die Frage au\u00dfer B etracht, ob und wie sich die von den Exegeten selbst redigierten \r\nKommentare von Vorlesungsnachschriften unterscheiden. Es erscheint \r\ndeshalb sinnvoll, den Blickwinkel einmal umzukehren und zu fragen, welche spezifischen Formelemente sich in den Kommentaren des Proklos \r\nund anderer Neuplatoniker aufzeigen lassen, wenn man sie in erster Linie als literarische Erzeugnisse und nicht als Niederschlag m\u00fcndlicher Exegese betrachtet. Im folgenden soll zu diesem Zweck nach einigen \r\nterminologischen Voruntersuchungen die Form der Lemmata, deren Einf\u00fcgung in den Kom m entartext und der Aufbau der einzelnen \r\nKommentarabschnitte besprochen werden. [Introduction, p. 1-2]","btype":2,"date":"1985","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/WFCq8CflnlIPypA","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":226,"full_name":"Lamberz, Erich","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":227,"full_name":"P\u00e9pin, Jean","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":228,"full_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1191,"section_of":159,"pages":"1-20","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":159,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Proclus, lecteur et interpr\u00e8te des anciens. Actes du colloque international du CNRS, Paris (2-4 octobre 1985)","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"P\u00e9pin-Saffrey1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Du 5e si\u00e8cle jusqu'au d\u00e9but du 19e si\u00e8cle, Proclus fut consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme l'h\u00e9ritier par excellence de Platon, celui qui avait su tirer des dialogues un expos\u00e9 syst\u00e9matique et coh\u00e9rent de la philosophie platonicienne. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/QluMshmjYrV5JtV","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":159,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Centre national de la recherche scientifique","series":"Colloques internationaux du Centre national de la recherche scientifique","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1985]}
Title | Theophrastus on the Heavens |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1985 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 1: Aristoteles und seine Schule |
Pages | 577-593 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Sharples, Robert W. |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
In this paper, I shall be discussing two topics: firstly, whether Theophrastus followed Aristotle in holding that the heavens were made of a substance—the ether—distinct from the four sublunary elements, or whether, as some have argued, he held that the heavens were made of fire; and secondly, the exact interpretation of certain technical terms of astronomy attributed to Theophrastus. I am throughout indebted to the work of my colleagues in Project Theophrastus, and especially to Professor William Fortenbaugh and Mrs. Pamela Huby. It was an interest in the Peripatetic tradition generally that led me to work on Theophrastus, and that interest has been both formed and stimulated by the works of Professor Paul Moraux; the theme of the present paper is one that he has himself discussed. [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/V9G65AXaBlaZSt7 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1028","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1028,"authors_free":[{"id":1553,"entry_id":1028,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":42,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","free_first_name":"Robert W.","free_last_name":"Sharples","norm_person":{"id":42,"first_name":"Robert W.","last_name":"Sharples","full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/114269505","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1554,"entry_id":1028,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Theophrastus on the Heavens","main_title":{"title":"Theophrastus on the Heavens"},"abstract":"In this paper, I shall be discussing two topics: firstly, whether Theophrastus followed Aristotle in holding that the heavens were made of a substance\u2014the ether\u2014distinct from the four sublunary elements, or whether, as some have argued, he held that the heavens were made of fire; and secondly, the exact interpretation of certain technical terms of astronomy attributed to Theophrastus. I am throughout indebted to the work of my colleagues in Project Theophrastus, and especially to Professor William Fortenbaugh and Mrs. Pamela Huby. It was an interest in the Peripatetic tradition generally that led me to work on Theophrastus, and that interest has been both formed and stimulated by the works of Professor Paul Moraux; the theme of the present paper is one that he has himself discussed. [author's abstract]","btype":2,"date":"1985","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/V9G65AXaBlaZSt7","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":42,"full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1028,"section_of":190,"pages":"577-593","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":190,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 1: Aristoteles und seine Schule","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Plezia\/Verdenius\/P\u00e9pin1985","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1985","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1985","abstract":"Der hier vorgelegte erste Band eines zweiteiligen Werkes, das \r\nAristoteles und dem Aristotelismus gewidmet ist, enth\u00e4lt 31 Origi-\r\nnalbeitr\u00e4ge zum Corpus Aristotelicum und zum alten Peripatos. \r\nKommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles bil-\r\nden das Thema des zweiten Bandes, der so bald als m\u00f6glich folgen \r\nwird. [Vorwort]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/fo2YolqZedXU2Im","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":190,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"","volume":"1","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1985]}
Title | Strato’s theory of the void |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1985 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 1: Aristoteles und seine Schule |
Pages | 594-609 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Furley, David J. |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
At the beginning of his Corollary on Place (In Phys. 601, 14-24), Simplicius classifies theories about place, as follows. First, there is a distinction between those who make place a corporeal thing and those who suppose it is incorporeal. Only Proclus falls into the first class. O f the latter, some think it is without extension, the rest think it is extended. The first group consists of Plato, who said place is the material substrate of bodies, and Damascius, who said it is that which completes the nature of bodies. The second group is further subdivided, into those who held place to be extended in two dimen sions, “as Aristotle and the whole Peripatos did”, and those who gave it three dimensions. The latter can be subdivided again: on the one hand, there is the school of Democritus and Epicurus, who held that place is everywhere undifferentiated, and sometimes persists without any body in it, and on the other hand, “the famous Plato- nists and Strato of Lampsacus”, who said that place is an extended interval (diastema) that always contains body and is adapted to its particular occupant... [p. 594] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/67tMakGWPrXgZyV |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"785","_score":null,"_source":{"id":785,"authors_free":[{"id":1157,"entry_id":785,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":103,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Furley, David J. ","free_first_name":"David J. ","free_last_name":"Furley","norm_person":{"id":103,"first_name":"David J. ","last_name":"Furley","full_name":"Furley, David J. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/138978131","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2354,"entry_id":785,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Strato\u2019s theory of the void","main_title":{"title":"Strato\u2019s theory of the void"},"abstract":"At the beginning of his Corollary on Place (In Phys. 601, 14-24), \r\nSimplicius classifies theories about place, as follows. First, there is a \r\ndistinction between those who make place a corporeal thing and \r\nthose who suppose it is incorporeal. Only Proclus falls into the first \r\nclass. O f the latter, some think it is without extension, the rest think \r\nit is extended. The first group consists of Plato, who said place is the \r\nmaterial substrate of bodies, and Damascius, who said it is that \r\nwhich completes the nature of bodies. The second group is further \r\nsubdivided, into those who held place to be extended in two dimen\u00ad\r\nsions, \u201cas Aristotle and the whole Peripatos did\u201d, and those who \r\ngave it three dimensions. The latter can be subdivided again: on the \r\none hand, there is the school of Democritus and Epicurus, who held \r\nthat place is everywhere undifferentiated, and sometimes persists \r\nwithout any body in it, and on the other hand, \u201cthe famous Plato- \r\nnists and Strato of Lampsacus\u201d, who said that place is an extended \r\ninterval (diastema) that always contains body and is adapted to its \r\nparticular occupant... [p. 594]","btype":2,"date":"1985","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/67tMakGWPrXgZyV","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":103,"full_name":"Furley, David J. ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":785,"section_of":190,"pages":"594-609","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":190,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 1: Aristoteles und seine Schule","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Plezia\/Verdenius\/P\u00e9pin1985","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1985","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1985","abstract":"Der hier vorgelegte erste Band eines zweiteiligen Werkes, das \r\nAristoteles und dem Aristotelismus gewidmet ist, enth\u00e4lt 31 Origi-\r\nnalbeitr\u00e4ge zum Corpus Aristotelicum und zum alten Peripatos. \r\nKommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles bil-\r\nden das Thema des zweiten Bandes, der so bald als m\u00f6glich folgen \r\nwird. [Vorwort]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/fo2YolqZedXU2Im","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":190,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"","volume":"1","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1985]}
Title | Puzzles about Identity. Aristotle and his Greek Commentators |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1985 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 1: Aristoteles und seine Schule |
Pages | 57-97 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Mignucci, Mario |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
Aristotle’s conception of identity is too large a subject to be analyzed in a single article. I will try to discuss here just one of the many problems raised by his views on sameness. It is not, perhaps, the most stimulating question one could wish to see treated, but it is a question about logic, where I feel a little more at ease than among the complicated and obscure riddles of metaphysics. My subject will be Aristotle’s references to what is nowadays called ‘Leibniz’s Law’ (LL): if two objects x and y are the same, they both share all the same properties. A formal version of it could be: (1) x=y ⟹ ∀F(F(x) ⟺ F(y))x=y⟹∀F(F(x)⟺F(y)) It is perhaps worth remembering that (LL) must be distinguished from what is normally called the ‘principle of substitutivity’ (SP), according to which substitution of expressions that are said to be the same is truth-preserving. As has been shown, (LL) does not entail (SP), since there are counterexamples to (SP) that do not falsify (LL). Not only (SP), but also (LL) has been doubted by some modern logicians. The question is far from being settled, and it is perhaps of interest to examine how ancient logicians tried to manage this problem. First, I will consider Aristotle’s statements about (LL) and the analyses he gives of some supposed counterexamples to this principle. Secondly, the interpretations of his view among his Greek commentators will be taken into account, and their distance from the position of the master evaluated. As Professor Moraux has taught us, the study of the Aristotelian tradition often gives us the opportunity of understanding Aristotle’s own meaning better. [introduction p. 57-58] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/VYZdFzrmNGSDth4 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"959","_score":null,"_source":{"id":959,"authors_free":[{"id":1439,"entry_id":959,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":259,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mignucci, Mario","free_first_name":"Mario","free_last_name":"Mignucci","norm_person":{"id":259,"first_name":"Mignucci","last_name":"Mario","full_name":"Mignucci, Mario","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1194188885","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2083,"entry_id":959,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Puzzles about Identity. Aristotle and his Greek Commentators","main_title":{"title":"Puzzles about Identity. Aristotle and his Greek Commentators"},"abstract":"Aristotle\u2019s conception of identity is too large a subject to be analyzed in a single article. I will try to discuss here just one of the many problems raised by his views on sameness. It is not, perhaps, the most stimulating question one could wish to see treated, but it is a question about logic, where I feel a little more at ease than among the complicated and obscure riddles of metaphysics. My subject will be Aristotle\u2019s references to what is nowadays called \u2018Leibniz\u2019s Law\u2019 (LL): if two objects x and y are the same, they both share all the same properties. A formal version of it could be:\r\n\r\n (1) x=y\u2005\u200a\u27f9\u2005\u200a\u2200F(F(x)\u2005\u200a\u27fa\u2005\u200aF(y))x=y\u27f9\u2200F(F(x)\u27faF(y))\r\n\r\nIt is perhaps worth remembering that (LL) must be distinguished from what is normally called the \u2018principle of substitutivity\u2019 (SP), according to which substitution of expressions that are said to be the same is truth-preserving. As has been shown, (LL) does not entail (SP), since there are counterexamples to (SP) that do not falsify (LL). Not only (SP), but also (LL) has been doubted by some modern logicians. The question is far from being settled, and it is perhaps of interest to examine how ancient logicians tried to manage this problem.\r\n\r\nFirst, I will consider Aristotle\u2019s statements about (LL) and the analyses he gives of some supposed counterexamples to this principle. Secondly, the interpretations of his view among his Greek commentators will be taken into account, and their distance from the position of the master evaluated. As Professor Moraux has taught us, the study of the Aristotelian tradition often gives us the opportunity of understanding Aristotle\u2019s own meaning better. [introduction p. 57-58]","btype":2,"date":"1985","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/VYZdFzrmNGSDth4","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":259,"full_name":"Mignucci, Mario","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":959,"section_of":190,"pages":"57-97","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":190,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 1: Aristoteles und seine Schule","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Plezia\/Verdenius\/P\u00e9pin1985","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1985","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1985","abstract":"Der hier vorgelegte erste Band eines zweiteiligen Werkes, das \r\nAristoteles und dem Aristotelismus gewidmet ist, enth\u00e4lt 31 Origi-\r\nnalbeitr\u00e4ge zum Corpus Aristotelicum und zum alten Peripatos. \r\nKommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles bil-\r\nden das Thema des zweiten Bandes, der so bald als m\u00f6glich folgen \r\nwird. [Vorwort]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/fo2YolqZedXU2Im","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":190,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"","volume":"1","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1985]}
Title | Porphyre, Commentateur de la Physique d'Aristote |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1985 |
Published in | Aristotelica: Mélanges offerts à Marcel de Corte |
Pages | 227-239 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Moraux, Paul |
Editor(s) | Motte, André , Rutten, Christian |
Translator(s) |
Comme nous l’avons vu, il ne semble pas que Simplicius ait utilisé systématiquement la synopsis des livres V à VIII. Celle-ci a-t-elle laissé des traces ailleurs dans la littérature tardive ? Nous n’en avons aucune preuve formelle. Je voudrais pourtant attirer l’attention sur un passage du commentaire de Macrobe au Somnium Scipionis de Cicéron. Il s’agit d’une discussion de la thèse platonicienne selon laquelle l’âme est immortelle parce qu’elle est automotrice. Macrobe note qu’Aristote a contesté la légitimité de cette thèse et affirmé que l’âme ne peut se mouvoir elle-même et ne peut même subir aucun mouvement. Aristote montrait d’abord qu’il y a, dans la nature, quelque chose d’immobile. Ensuite, il cherchait à prouver que tout ce qui est mû l’est par quelque chose d’autre. Puis il établissait l’existence d’un premier moteur non mû. Contre Platon, il montrait alors que tout principe de mouvement est immobile, et que donc, si l’âme est principe de mouvement, elle doit être immobile. Pour illustrer ces diverses thèses d’Aristote, Macrobe reproduit, sous une forme assez squelettique, des arguments présentés par Aristote au livre VIII de la Physique. Il ne s’agit pas là de citations ou d’extraits littéraux, mais bien de résumés où la substance des développements d’Aristote est réduite à l’essentiel, donc d’une sorte d’epidromê ou de synopsis des passages utilisés. Or, nous savons que de tous les néoplatoniciens, Porphyre est l’un de ceux que Macrobe, qui dépend d’ordinaire de sources plus anciennes, utilise le plus volontiers et le plus fréquemment. Dans son ensemble, la critique moderne admet comme très probable l’hypothèse selon laquelle Macrobe aurait emprunté au traité de Porphyre Peri Psychês pros Boêthon les développements qu’il consacre au passage du Phèdre, traduit par Cicéron, sur l’automotricité et l’immortalité de l’âme. La question se pose donc de savoir si les objections d’Aristote ont été tirées de la même source, ou si Macrobe les a trouvées ailleurs, chez un péripatéticien, par exemple. Si l’on tient compte du fait que Porphyre connaissait très bien Aristote, dont il avait en partie commenté et en partie résumé la Physique, on pourra, ce me semble, fort bien imaginer que, dans son ouvrage sur l’âme, il s’était attaché non seulement à présenter les vues de Platon, mais aussi à les défendre contre les objections auxquelles elles pouvaient se heurter. Il est donc tout naturel que Porphyre se soit assez longuement étendu sur les difficultés que les théories aristotéliciennes du mouvement et du premier moteur suscitaient contre les arguments de Platon sur l’automotricité de l’âme. À cet effet, Porphyre avait exploité surtout le dernier livre de la Physique. Et comme il avait résumé sous la forme d’une synopsis les livres V à VIII, tout nous invite à croire qu’il avait largement utilisé cette synopsis en rédigeant son propre Peri Psychês. Mais pour le dire en toute franchise, cette hypothèse, tout alléchante qu’elle est, ne dépasse pas la vraisemblance. Nous ne disposons pas de fragments certains du résumé porphyrien du huitième livre de la Physique et, dès lors, nous ne sommes pas en mesure de prouver, par voie de comparaison, que les objections d’Aristote présentées par Macrobe remontent bien, en dernière analyse, à la synopsis qui a fait l’objet de la présente étude. [conclusion p. 237-239] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/HITY0gikmySrLA8 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"494","_score":null,"_source":{"id":494,"authors_free":[{"id":681,"entry_id":494,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":137,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Moraux, Paul","free_first_name":"Paul","free_last_name":"Moraux","norm_person":{"id":137,"first_name":"Paul ","last_name":"Moraux","full_name":"Moraux, Paul ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117755591","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2115,"entry_id":494,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":468,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Motte, Andre\u0301","free_first_name":"Andr\u00e9","free_last_name":"Motte","norm_person":{"id":468,"first_name":"Andr\u00e9","last_name":"Motte","full_name":"Motte, Andr\u00e9","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/124510663","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2409,"entry_id":494,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":469,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Rutten, Christian","free_first_name":"Christian","free_last_name":"Rutten","norm_person":{"id":469,"first_name":"Christian","last_name":"Rutten","full_name":"Rutten, Christian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119515512","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Porphyre, Commentateur de la Physique d'Aristote","main_title":{"title":"Porphyre, Commentateur de la Physique d'Aristote"},"abstract":"Comme nous l\u2019avons vu, il ne semble pas que Simplicius ait utilis\u00e9 syst\u00e9matiquement la synopsis des livres V \u00e0 VIII. Celle-ci a-t-elle laiss\u00e9 des traces ailleurs dans la litt\u00e9rature tardive ? Nous n\u2019en avons aucune preuve formelle. Je voudrais pourtant attirer l\u2019attention sur un passage du commentaire de Macrobe au Somnium Scipionis de Cic\u00e9ron. Il s\u2019agit d\u2019une discussion de la th\u00e8se platonicienne selon laquelle l\u2019\u00e2me est immortelle parce qu\u2019elle est automotrice.\r\n\r\nMacrobe note qu\u2019Aristote a contest\u00e9 la l\u00e9gitimit\u00e9 de cette th\u00e8se et affirm\u00e9 que l\u2019\u00e2me ne peut se mouvoir elle-m\u00eame et ne peut m\u00eame subir aucun mouvement. Aristote montrait d\u2019abord qu\u2019il y a, dans la nature, quelque chose d\u2019immobile. Ensuite, il cherchait \u00e0 prouver que tout ce qui est m\u00fb l\u2019est par quelque chose d\u2019autre. Puis il \u00e9tablissait l\u2019existence d\u2019un premier moteur non m\u00fb. Contre Platon, il montrait alors que tout principe de mouvement est immobile, et que donc, si l\u2019\u00e2me est principe de mouvement, elle doit \u00eatre immobile.\r\n\r\nPour illustrer ces diverses th\u00e8ses d\u2019Aristote, Macrobe reproduit, sous une forme assez squelettique, des arguments pr\u00e9sent\u00e9s par Aristote au livre VIII de la Physique. Il ne s\u2019agit pas l\u00e0 de citations ou d\u2019extraits litt\u00e9raux, mais bien de r\u00e9sum\u00e9s o\u00f9 la substance des d\u00e9veloppements d\u2019Aristote est r\u00e9duite \u00e0 l\u2019essentiel, donc d\u2019une sorte d\u2019epidrom\u00ea ou de synopsis des passages utilis\u00e9s. Or, nous savons que de tous les n\u00e9oplatoniciens, Porphyre est l\u2019un de ceux que Macrobe, qui d\u00e9pend d\u2019ordinaire de sources plus anciennes, utilise le plus volontiers et le plus fr\u00e9quemment.\r\n\r\nDans son ensemble, la critique moderne admet comme tr\u00e8s probable l\u2019hypoth\u00e8se selon laquelle Macrobe aurait emprunt\u00e9 au trait\u00e9 de Porphyre Peri Psych\u00eas pros Bo\u00eathon les d\u00e9veloppements qu\u2019il consacre au passage du Ph\u00e8dre, traduit par Cic\u00e9ron, sur l\u2019automotricit\u00e9 et l\u2019immortalit\u00e9 de l\u2019\u00e2me. La question se pose donc de savoir si les objections d\u2019Aristote ont \u00e9t\u00e9 tir\u00e9es de la m\u00eame source, ou si Macrobe les a trouv\u00e9es ailleurs, chez un p\u00e9ripat\u00e9ticien, par exemple.\r\n\r\nSi l\u2019on tient compte du fait que Porphyre connaissait tr\u00e8s bien Aristote, dont il avait en partie comment\u00e9 et en partie r\u00e9sum\u00e9 la Physique, on pourra, ce me semble, fort bien imaginer que, dans son ouvrage sur l\u2019\u00e2me, il s\u2019\u00e9tait attach\u00e9 non seulement \u00e0 pr\u00e9senter les vues de Platon, mais aussi \u00e0 les d\u00e9fendre contre les objections auxquelles elles pouvaient se heurter. Il est donc tout naturel que Porphyre se soit assez longuement \u00e9tendu sur les difficult\u00e9s que les th\u00e9ories aristot\u00e9liciennes du mouvement et du premier moteur suscitaient contre les arguments de Platon sur l\u2019automotricit\u00e9 de l\u2019\u00e2me.\r\n\r\n\u00c0 cet effet, Porphyre avait exploit\u00e9 surtout le dernier livre de la Physique. Et comme il avait r\u00e9sum\u00e9 sous la forme d\u2019une synopsis les livres V \u00e0 VIII, tout nous invite \u00e0 croire qu\u2019il avait largement utilis\u00e9 cette synopsis en r\u00e9digeant son propre Peri Psych\u00eas. Mais pour le dire en toute franchise, cette hypoth\u00e8se, tout all\u00e9chante qu\u2019elle est, ne d\u00e9passe pas la vraisemblance. Nous ne disposons pas de fragments certains du r\u00e9sum\u00e9 porphyrien du huiti\u00e8me livre de la Physique et, d\u00e8s lors, nous ne sommes pas en mesure de prouver, par voie de comparaison, que les objections d\u2019Aristote pr\u00e9sent\u00e9es par Macrobe remontent bien, en derni\u00e8re analyse, \u00e0 la synopsis qui a fait l\u2019objet de la pr\u00e9sente \u00e9tude. [conclusion p. 237-239]","btype":2,"date":"1985","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/HITY0gikmySrLA8","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":137,"full_name":"Moraux, Paul ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":468,"full_name":"Motte, Andr\u00e9","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":469,"full_name":"Rutten, Christian","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":494,"section_of":297,"pages":"227-239","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":297,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aristotelica: M\u00e9langes offerts \u00e0 Marcel de Corte","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Motte1985","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1985","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1985","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/vbTKdtbzJ5KxKIX","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":297,"pubplace":"Bruxelles \u2013 Lie\u0300ge","publisher":"E\u0301ditions Ousia \u2013 Presses universitaires","series":"Cahiers de philosophie ancienne","volume":"3","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1985]}
Title | Levels of human thinking in Philoponus |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1985 |
Published in | After Chalcedon. Studies in Theology and Church History. Offered to Professor Albert van Roey for his seventieth birthday |
Pages | 451-470 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Verbeke, Gérard |
Editor(s) | Laga, Carl , Munitiz, Joseph A. , Rompay, Lucas van |
Translator(s) |
What is finally the meaning of Philoponus’s teaching on the levels of thought? Taking into account the previous considerations, we may conclude that this doctrine is intended to disclose the true nature of philosophical reflection as a direct and immediate intuition of the intelligible world. This disclosure is an internal one: each individual bears within himself, in the hidden abodes of his consciousness, a treasure of philosophical wisdom". In order to contemplate the highest truth, man should not leave himself, on the contrary he should come back and turn to himself, to his true self. Most people live outside themselves in a permanent forgetfulness of their real nature: they hardly participate in philosophical wisdom, they only possess some common intuitions, which are a kind of trace or vestige of rational truth. They never come to the level of a direct contemplation of the intelligibles. In order to reach the supreme level of thinking man needs a moral preparation, which makes him able to overcome the influence of irrational movements; he also needs an intellectual training by means of discursive reasoning in order to free himself from the impact of senses and imagination. If these requirements are fulfilled, man be comes able to contemplate directly true reality in the internal world of his consciousness. [conclusion, p. 469] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/PBqIyB5guZfHl6C |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1391","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1391,"authors_free":[{"id":2156,"entry_id":1391,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2160,"entry_id":1391,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":349,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Laga, Carl","free_first_name":"Carl","free_last_name":"Laga","norm_person":{"id":349,"first_name":"Carl","last_name":"Laga","full_name":"Laga, Carl","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119278146","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2161,"entry_id":1391,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":350,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Munitiz, Joseph A.","free_first_name":"Joseph A.","free_last_name":"Munitiz","norm_person":{"id":350,"first_name":"Joseph A.","last_name":"Munitiz","full_name":"Munitiz, Joseph A.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/105468202X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2162,"entry_id":1391,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":351,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Rompay, Lucas van","free_first_name":"Lucas","free_last_name":"Rompay van","norm_person":{"id":351,"first_name":"Lucas","last_name":"Rompay, van","full_name":"Rompay, Lucas van","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1055081453","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Levels of human thinking in Philoponus","main_title":{"title":"Levels of human thinking in Philoponus"},"abstract":"What is finally the meaning of Philoponus\u2019s teaching on the levels of thought? Taking into account the previous considerations, we may \r\nconclude that this doctrine is intended to disclose the true nature of philosophical reflection as a direct and immediate intuition of the \r\nintelligible world. This disclosure is an internal one: each individual bears within himself, in the hidden abodes of his consciousness, a treasure \r\nof philosophical wisdom\". In order to contemplate the highest truth, man should not leave himself, on the contrary he should come back \r\nand turn to himself, to his true self. Most people live outside them\u00adselves in a permanent forgetfulness of their real nature: they hardly \r\nparticipate in philosophical wisdom, they only possess some common intuitions, which are a kind of trace or vestige of rational truth. \r\nThey never come to the level of a direct contemplation of the intelligibles. In order to reach the supreme level of thinking man needs a moral preparation, which makes him able to overcome the influence of irrational movements; he also needs an intellectual training by means \r\nof discursive reasoning in order to free himself from the impact of senses and imagination. If these requirements are fulfilled, man be\u00ad\r\ncomes able to contemplate directly true reality in the internal world of his consciousness. [conclusion, p. 469]","btype":2,"date":"1985","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/PBqIyB5guZfHl6C","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":349,"full_name":"Laga, Carl","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":350,"full_name":"Munitiz, Joseph A.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":351,"full_name":"Rompay, Lucas van","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1391,"section_of":1392,"pages":"451-470","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1392,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"After Chalcedon. Studies in Theology and Church History. Offered to Professor Albert van Roey for his seventieth birthday","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Laga1985","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1985","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"This volume in honour of Prof. P.H.L. Eggermont, Indologist and Classicist, is focused on North and Northwest India, and on the adjacent regions to the west, with special attention to the Hellenistic monarchies, the historical geography of India, the ancient trade routes, and the contacts between India, Greece and Rome. The contributions of this Festschrift provide a bulk of material, especially for those interested in relations between Classical and Oriental philological, historical, archaeological, and geographical sources. Besides, the volume contains a biography and a bibliography of Prof. Eggermont. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ERNutaoLJTpirTN","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1392,"pubplace":"Leuven","publisher":"Itgeverij Peeters Leuven","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1985]}
Title | Les circonstances de la transmission des fragments de Diogène et la reconstruction de l’argument (Simplicius, Commentaire de la Physique, p. 148,26-153,24) |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1983 |
Published in | Diogène d’Apollonie: Edition, traduction et commentaire des fragments et témoignages |
Pages | 37-53 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Laks, André |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
The article discusses the circumstances of the transmission of the fragments of Diogenes and the reconstruction of his argument by Simplicius in his Commentary on Physics. It highlights the significance of Simplicius' work in shedding light on the ancient philosopher, and explains how Simplicius came to cite Diogenes verbatim. The article also explores the issue of intermediaries in the texts and the difficulties in their construction. The study is important in understanding the history of philosophy and the transmission of ancient texts. [introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/NoBGGFCfD4qd7PP |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1188","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1188,"authors_free":[{"id":1760,"entry_id":1188,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":225,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","free_first_name":"Andr\u00e9","free_last_name":"Laks","norm_person":{"id":225,"first_name":"Andr\u00e9","last_name":"Laks","full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/135869161","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Les circonstances de la transmission des fragments de Diog\u00e8ne et la reconstruction de l\u2019argument (Simplicius, Commentaire de la Physique, p. 148,26-153,24)","main_title":{"title":"Les circonstances de la transmission des fragments de Diog\u00e8ne et la reconstruction de l\u2019argument (Simplicius, Commentaire de la Physique, p. 148,26-153,24)"},"abstract":"The article discusses the circumstances of the transmission of the fragments of Diogenes and the reconstruction of his argument by Simplicius in his Commentary on Physics. It highlights the significance of Simplicius' work in shedding light on the ancient philosopher, and explains how Simplicius came to cite Diogenes verbatim. The article also explores the issue of intermediaries in the texts and the difficulties in their construction. The study is important in understanding the history of philosophy and the transmission of ancient texts. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1983","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/NoBGGFCfD4qd7PP","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":225,"full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1188,"section_of":1367,"pages":"37-53","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1367,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":1,"language":"fr","title":"Diog\u00e8ne d\u2019Apollonie: Edition, traduction et commentaire des fragments et t\u00e9moignages","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Laks2008","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2008","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"Depuis la premi\u00e8re \u00e9dition de ce livre, Diog\u00e8ne d'Apollonie, un des derniers \"physiciens\" pr\u00e9socratiques, longtemps d\u00e9valoris\u00e9 par la r\u00e9putation d' \"\u00e9clectique\" que H. Diels avait attach\u00e9e \u00e0 son nom dans un article de 1881, a suscit\u00e9 un regain d'int\u00e9r\u00eat.\r\n\r\nCette seconde \u00e9dition d'un ouvrage qui reste \u00e0 ce jour le seul commentaire exhaustif des fragments et des t\u00e9moignages de Diog\u00e8ne, a \u00e9t\u00e9 revue et corrig\u00e9e, mais elle prend aussi en compte, dans une s\u00e9rie d'ajouts marqu\u00e9s comme tels, les travaux parus au cours des vint-cinq ann\u00e9es \u00e9coul\u00e9es. Le livre retrace l'histoire de la transmission des fragments de Diog\u00e8ne, analyse les positions de la critique moderne depuis l'article s\u00e9minal de F. Schleiermacher (1811), et offre, pour chacun des douze fragments et des quelques trente-six t\u00e9moignages, dont un nouveau classement est propos\u00e9, une analyse visant \u00e0 reconstruire la logique de l'original perdu.\r\n\r\nQuatre des Notes additionnelles abordent des probl\u00e8mes sp\u00e9cifiques, qui requ\u00e9raient un traitement s\u00e9par\u00e9. Une cinqui\u00e8me, en anglais, offre une pr\u00e9sentation synth\u00e9tique de l'interpr\u00e9tation ici d\u00e9fendue, qui situe l'importance de Diog\u00e8ne dans son rapport \u00e0 Anaxagore et \u00e0 sa doctrine de l' \"intellect\". [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/WWBP0kG5a0nZ1I3","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1367,"pubplace":"Sankt Augustin","publisher":"Academia Verlag","series":"International Pre-Platonic Studies","volume":"6","edition_no":"2 (1st 1983)","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1983]}
Title | Ort und Raum nach Aristoteles und Simplikios. Eine philosophische Topologie |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1983 |
Published in | Aristoteles als Wissenschaftstheoretiker. Eine Aufsatzsammlung |
Pages | 113-122 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Verbeke, Gérard |
Editor(s) | Irmscher, Johannes , Müller, Reimar |
Translator(s) |
Der Text diskutiert die aristotelische Perspektive zu Ort und Raum sowie die Interpretationen, die Simplikios in späteren neuplatonischen Kommentaren dazu geliefert hat. Die Studie widmet sich drei Hauptfragen bezüglich des Orts: ob er ein Bestandteil von Körpern ist, ob er ein Zwischenraum zwischen umgebenden Körpern ist und welche Bedeutung der Ort hat und welchen Einfluss er auf die Dinge hat. Die aristotelische Physik strebt nach einer grundlegenden Erklärung der sinnlichen Welt und untersucht die Essenz der Bewegung, die Zusammensetzung physischer Körper, Notwendigkeit, Zufall, Unendlichkeit, Ort und Zeit. Der Artikel vergleicht zudem Physik und Metaphysik und betont, dass beide nach umfassenden Erklärungen der Realität streben. Die Untersuchung beleuchtet das aristotelische Verständnis von Ort und Raum und unterstreicht die Wechselwirkung zwischen Ort und der Struktur physischer Objekte. Es wird erörtert, ob Ort ein räumliches Substrat oder eine Form ist und welche Bedeutung die Lokalisierung und ihr Einfluss auf Körper haben. Spätere neuplatonische Kommentare, insbesondere die von Simplikios, haben Aristoteles' Ideen zu diesen Themen kritisch bewertet und weiterentwickelt. [Introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/gefH5Atxe7LieDs |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"451","_score":null,"_source":{"id":451,"authors_free":[{"id":605,"entry_id":451,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":606,"entry_id":451,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":352,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Irmscher, Johannes","free_first_name":"Johannes","free_last_name":"Irmscher","norm_person":{"id":352,"first_name":"Johannes","last_name":"Irmscher","full_name":"Irmscher, Johannes","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119489201","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":607,"entry_id":451,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":353,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"M\u00fcller, Reimar","free_first_name":"Reimar","free_last_name":"M\u00fcller","norm_person":{"id":353,"first_name":"Reimar","last_name":"M\u00fcller","full_name":"M\u00fcller, Reimar","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/106717707","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Ort und Raum nach Aristoteles und Simplikios. Eine philosophische Topologie","main_title":{"title":"Ort und Raum nach Aristoteles und Simplikios. Eine philosophische Topologie"},"abstract":"Der Text diskutiert die aristotelische Perspektive zu Ort und Raum sowie die Interpretationen, die Simplikios in sp\u00e4teren neuplatonischen Kommentaren dazu geliefert hat. Die Studie widmet sich drei Hauptfragen bez\u00fcglich des Orts: ob er ein Bestandteil von K\u00f6rpern ist, ob er ein Zwischenraum zwischen umgebenden K\u00f6rpern ist und welche Bedeutung der Ort hat und welchen Einfluss er auf die Dinge hat. Die aristotelische Physik strebt nach einer grundlegenden Erkl\u00e4rung der sinnlichen Welt und untersucht die Essenz der Bewegung, die Zusammensetzung physischer K\u00f6rper, Notwendigkeit, Zufall, Unendlichkeit, Ort und Zeit. Der Artikel vergleicht zudem Physik und Metaphysik und betont, dass beide nach umfassenden Erkl\u00e4rungen der Realit\u00e4t streben. Die Untersuchung beleuchtet das aristotelische Verst\u00e4ndnis von Ort und Raum und unterstreicht die Wechselwirkung zwischen Ort und der Struktur physischer Objekte. Es wird er\u00f6rtert, ob Ort ein r\u00e4umliches Substrat oder eine Form ist und welche Bedeutung die Lokalisierung und ihr Einfluss auf K\u00f6rper haben. Sp\u00e4tere neuplatonische Kommentare, insbesondere die von Simplikios, haben Aristoteles' Ideen zu diesen Themen kritisch bewertet und weiterentwickelt. [Introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1983","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/gefH5Atxe7LieDs","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":352,"full_name":"Irmscher, Johannes","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":353,"full_name":"M\u00fcller, Reimar","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":451,"section_of":325,"pages":"113-122","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":325,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles als Wissenschaftstheoretiker. Eine Aufsatzsammlung","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Irmscher_M\u00fcller1983","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1983","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1983","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/A1XXLVpd3w2XvXY","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":325,"pubplace":"Berlin","publisher":"Akademie-Verlag","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1983]}
Title | Neoplatonism, the Greek Commentators, and Renaissance Aristotelianism |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1982 |
Published in | Neoplatonism and Christian thought |
Pages | 169-177 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Mahoney, Edward P. |
Editor(s) | O'Meara, Dominic J. |
Translator(s) |
In this paper I should like to share with my fellow students of Neoplatonism the results of researches in medieval and Renaissance Aristotelianism that have brought to light interesting ways in which Neoplatonism came to have a special impact on the development of Renaissance Aristotelianism. It is certainly not my aim to exclude other possible ways in which Neoplatonism had its effect, but I do believe that historians of ancient Neoplatonism will themselves be surprised to learn of the pervasiveness of certain themes among supposed proponents of Aristotle during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The two topics on which I wish to concentrate are (1) the influence on late fifteenth- and early sixteenth-century Aristotelianism of two late ancient commentators on Aristotle, namely, Themistius <317—388) and Simplicius (Jl. 530),1 and (2) a conceptual scheme of metaphysical hierarchy whose origins are clearly Neoplatonic and which was constantly debated during the same period. [Author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/2eyv4WzmHFlkenV |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1111","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1111,"authors_free":[{"id":1678,"entry_id":1111,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":459,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mahoney, Edward P.","free_first_name":"Edward P.","free_last_name":"Mahoney","norm_person":{"id":459,"first_name":"Edward P.","last_name":"Mahoney","full_name":"Mahoney, Edward P.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/123905818","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1679,"entry_id":1111,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":279,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","free_first_name":"Dominic J.","free_last_name":"O'Meara","norm_person":{"id":279,"first_name":"Dominic J.","last_name":"O'Meara","full_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/11180664X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Neoplatonism, the Greek Commentators, and Renaissance Aristotelianism","main_title":{"title":"Neoplatonism, the Greek Commentators, and Renaissance Aristotelianism"},"abstract":"In this paper I should like to share with my fellow students of Neoplatonism the results of researches in medieval and Renaissance Aristotelianism that have brought to light interesting ways in which Neoplatonism came to have a special impact on the development of Renaissance Aristotelianism. It is certainly not my aim to exclude other possible ways in which Neoplatonism had its effect, but I do believe that historians of ancient Neoplatonism will themselves be surprised to learn of the pervasiveness of certain themes among supposed proponents of Aris\u00adtotle during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The two topics on which I wish to concentrate are (1) the influence on late fifteenth- and early sixteenth-century Aristotelianism of two late ancient commentators on Aristotle, namely, Themistius <317\u2014388) and Simplicius (Jl. 530),1 and (2) a conceptual scheme of metaphysical hierarchy whose origins are clearly Neoplatonic and which was constantly debated during the same period. [Author's abstract]","btype":2,"date":"1982","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/2eyv4WzmHFlkenV","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":459,"full_name":"Mahoney, Edward P.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":279,"full_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1111,"section_of":12,"pages":"169-177","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":12,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Neoplatonism and Christian thought","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"O'Meara1982","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1982","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1981","abstract":"In this volume, the relationships between two of the most vital currents in Western thought are examined by a group of nineteen internationally known specialists in a variety of disciplines\u2014classics, patristics, philosophy, theology, history of ideas, literature. The contributing scholars discuss Neoplatonic theories about God, creation, man, and salvation, in relation to the ways in which they were adopted, adapted, or rejected by major Christian thinkers of five periods: Patristic, Later Greek and Byzantine, Medieval, Renaissance, and Modern. [a.a]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/8tb5ZmmacZhgjDn","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":12,"pubplace":"Albany","publisher":"State University of New York Press","series":"Studies in Neoplatonism: Ancient and Modern","volume":"3","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1982]}
Title | Le programme d'enseignement dans les Ecoles neoplatoniciennes |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1982 |
Published in | Porphyre. La vie de Plotin. Travaux préliminaires et index grec complet |
Pages | 277-280 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Goulet- Cazé, Marie-Odile |
Editor(s) | Brisson, Luc , Goulet-Cazé, Marie-Odile , Goulet, Richard , O’Brien, Denis |
Translator(s) |
Les écoles néoplatoniciennes postérieures ont établi un programme d’enseignement qu’on peut reconstituer dans ses grandes lignes. Voici quelles sont les principales étapes de ce cursus : a) Propédeutique morale : Étude de textes comme le Manuel d’Épictète et le Carmen aureum pythagoricien pour introduire la vie morale. Ces œuvres étaient souvent accompagnées de commentaires, notamment par Simplicius et Hiéroclès. b) Introduction générale à la philosophie : Basée sur l'Isagogè de Porphyre, cette étape proposait une définition et des divisions de la philosophie (théorétique et pratique), suivant un schéma attribué à Porphyre ou Andronicus. c) Étude préparatoire à Aristote : Lecture et commentaire de l'Isagogè comme introduction indispensable aux Catégories d’Aristote, en appliquant un cadre méthodologique précis avant d’entamer le commentaire. d) Introduction à Aristote : Les commentaires sur les Catégories soulevaient dix questions essentielles sur Aristote, incluant son style, la structure de ses écrits, et les qualités requises pour ses lecteurs et exégètes. e) Cycle d’études aristotéliciennes : Études couvrant logique, éthique, politique, physique et théologie sur une durée estimée à deux ou trois ans. Ce cycle préparait les étudiants à l’étude des dialogues platoniciens. f) Étude de Platon : Introduction systématique à Platon, incluant l’ordre de lecture des dialogues. Cette phase s’inspirait également des médio-platoniciens comme Albinus et Alcinoos. g) Oracles chaldaïques : Étudiés comme le sommet de la formation philosophique. Proclus et d’autres néoplatoniciens harmonisaient ces enseignements avec ceux de Platon. h) Poésie orphique : Considérée comme le niveau suprême, la poésie orphique, notamment les Hymnes, faisait l’objet de commentaires approfondis, particulièrement chez Proclus et Syrianus. [derived from the entire text] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/kPjIT5NBhbhdLeA |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"534","_score":null,"_source":{"id":534,"authors_free":[{"id":754,"entry_id":534,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":100,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Goulet- Caz\u00e9, Marie-Odile","free_first_name":"Marie-Odile","free_last_name":"Goulet- Caz\u00e9","norm_person":{"id":100,"first_name":"Marie-Odile ","last_name":"Goulet-Caz\u00e9","full_name":"Goulet-Caz\u00e9, Marie-Odile ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/124602924","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2105,"entry_id":534,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":18,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Brisson, Luc","free_first_name":"Luc","free_last_name":"Brisson","norm_person":{"id":18,"first_name":"Luc","last_name":"Brisson","full_name":"Brisson, Luc ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/114433259","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2106,"entry_id":534,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":100,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Goulet-Caz\u00e9, Marie-Odile ","free_first_name":"Marie-Odile ","free_last_name":"Goulet-Caz\u00e9","norm_person":{"id":100,"first_name":"Marie-Odile ","last_name":"Goulet-Caz\u00e9","full_name":"Goulet-Caz\u00e9, Marie-Odile ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/124602924","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2107,"entry_id":534,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":136,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Goulet, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Goulet","norm_person":{"id":136,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Goulet","full_name":"Goulet, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1042353395","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2108,"entry_id":534,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":144,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"O\u2019Brien, Denis","free_first_name":"Denis","free_last_name":"O\u2019Brien","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":"Le programme d'enseignement dans les Ecoles neoplatoniciennes","main_title":{"title":"Le programme d'enseignement dans les Ecoles neoplatoniciennes"},"abstract":"Les \u00e9coles n\u00e9oplatoniciennes post\u00e9rieures ont \u00e9tabli un programme d\u2019enseignement qu\u2019on peut reconstituer dans ses grandes lignes. Voici quelles sont les principales \u00e9tapes de ce cursus : a) Prop\u00e9deutique morale : \u00c9tude de textes comme le Manuel d\u2019\u00c9pict\u00e8te et le Carmen aureum pythagoricien pour introduire la vie morale. Ces \u0153uvres \u00e9taient souvent accompagn\u00e9es de commentaires, notamment par Simplicius et Hi\u00e9rocl\u00e8s.\r\n\r\nb) Introduction g\u00e9n\u00e9rale \u00e0 la philosophie : Bas\u00e9e sur l'Isagog\u00e8 de Porphyre, cette \u00e9tape proposait une d\u00e9finition et des divisions de la philosophie (th\u00e9or\u00e9tique et pratique), suivant un sch\u00e9ma attribu\u00e9 \u00e0 Porphyre ou Andronicus.\r\n\r\nc) \u00c9tude pr\u00e9paratoire \u00e0 Aristote : Lecture et commentaire de l'Isagog\u00e8 comme introduction indispensable aux Cat\u00e9gories d\u2019Aristote, en appliquant un cadre m\u00e9thodologique pr\u00e9cis avant d\u2019entamer le commentaire.\r\n\r\nd) Introduction \u00e0 Aristote : Les commentaires sur les Cat\u00e9gories soulevaient dix questions essentielles sur Aristote, incluant son style, la structure de ses \u00e9crits, et les qualit\u00e9s requises pour ses lecteurs et ex\u00e9g\u00e8tes.\r\n\r\ne) Cycle d\u2019\u00e9tudes aristot\u00e9liciennes : \u00c9tudes couvrant logique, \u00e9thique, politique, physique et th\u00e9ologie sur une dur\u00e9e estim\u00e9e \u00e0 deux ou trois ans. Ce cycle pr\u00e9parait les \u00e9tudiants \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9tude des dialogues platoniciens.\r\n\r\nf) \u00c9tude de Platon : Introduction syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 Platon, incluant l\u2019ordre de lecture des dialogues. Cette phase s\u2019inspirait \u00e9galement des m\u00e9dio-platoniciens comme Albinus et Alcinoos.\r\n\r\ng) Oracles chalda\u00efques : \u00c9tudi\u00e9s comme le sommet de la formation philosophique. Proclus et d\u2019autres n\u00e9oplatoniciens harmonisaient ces enseignements avec ceux de Platon.\r\n\r\nh) Po\u00e9sie orphique : Consid\u00e9r\u00e9e comme le niveau supr\u00eame, la po\u00e9sie orphique, notamment les Hymnes, faisait l\u2019objet de commentaires approfondis, particuli\u00e8rement chez Proclus et Syrianus. [derived from the entire text]","btype":2,"date":"1982","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/kPjIT5NBhbhdLeA","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":100,"full_name":"Goulet-Caz\u00e9, Marie-Odile ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":18,"full_name":"Brisson, Luc ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":100,"full_name":"Goulet-Caz\u00e9, Marie-Odile ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":136,"full_name":"Goulet, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":144,"full_name":"O'Brien, Denis","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":534,"section_of":377,"pages":"277-280","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":377,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Porphyre. La vie de Plotin. Travaux pr\u00e9liminaires et index grec complet","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Brisson1982","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1982","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1982","abstract":"Il est apparu que le dernier mot n'avait pas \u00e9t\u00e9 dit sur ce texte de Porphyre, capital pour notre connaissance de la personne et de l'\u00e9cole de Plotin, et plus largement de la vie philosophique au IIIe si\u00e8cle de notre \u00e8re. Car on est en pr\u00e9sence d'un document dont la simplicit\u00e9 est illusoire : la traduction m\u00eame en est h\u00e9riss\u00e9e de difficult\u00e9s, qui, dans nombre de cas, semblent avoir jusqu'ici \u00e9chapp\u00e9 \u00e0 l'attention ; d'autre part, la valeur historique de cette biographie, indubitable en apparence, ne cesse en v\u00e9rit\u00e9 de faire probl\u00e8me par suite de l'application de Porphyre \u00e0 se donner en toute circonstance le beau r\u00f4le.\r\nDe telles consid\u00e9rations, et d'autres encore, ont donn\u00e9 \u00e0 penser que l'on ne perdrait pas son temps en reprenant l'\u00e9tude de ce vieux texte sur des bases enti\u00e8rement nouvelles. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/dg4i4rIRJWOzIZa","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":377,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Vrin","series":"Histoire des doctrines de l'Antiquit\u00e9 classique","volume":"6","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1982]}
Title | Plotinus in later Platonism |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1981 |
Published in | Neoplatonism and early Christian thought: Essays in honour of A.H. Armstrong |
Pages | 212-222 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Blumenthal, Henry J. |
Editor(s) | Blumenthal, Henry J. , Markus, R. A. |
Translator(s) |
We have seen, then, that in some areas later Neoplatonists introduced Plotinus’ views to corroborate their own. This was equally true of his opinions as a Platonist and, as they understood him, as an interpreter of Aristotle. These agreements are most often found in relatively uncontroversial areas of their thought. However, at the extremes of the metaphysical world and in those other areas where difficulties were likely to arise, we do find substantial differences. We must, however, be cautious about interpreting these differences in terms of chronological changes. The later Neoplatonists continued to disagree among themselves, and the process we have examined was not one of linear development away from Plotinus. [conclusion p. 220] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/ydcrCuFuFOAFW6r |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"873","_score":null,"_source":{"id":873,"authors_free":[{"id":1282,"entry_id":873,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1283,"entry_id":873,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":403,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Markus, R. A.","free_first_name":"R. A.","free_last_name":"Markus","norm_person":{"id":403,"first_name":"R. A.","last_name":"Markus","full_name":"Markus, R. A.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/121838862","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2229,"entry_id":873,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Plotinus in later Platonism","main_title":{"title":"Plotinus in later Platonism"},"abstract":"We have seen, then, that in some areas later Neoplatonists introduced Plotinus\u2019 views to corroborate their own. This was equally true of his opinions as a Platonist and, as they understood him, as an interpreter of Aristotle. These agreements are most often found in relatively uncontroversial areas of their thought.\r\n\r\nHowever, at the extremes of the metaphysical world and in those other areas where difficulties were likely to arise, we do find substantial differences. We must, however, be cautious about interpreting these differences in terms of chronological changes. The later Neoplatonists continued to disagree among themselves, and the process we have examined was not one of linear development away from Plotinus. [conclusion p. 220]","btype":2,"date":"1981","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ydcrCuFuFOAFW6r","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":403,"full_name":"Markus, R. A.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":873,"section_of":131,"pages":"212-222","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":131,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Neoplatonism and early Christian thought: Essays in honour of A.H. Armstrong","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Blumenthal\/Markus1981a","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1981","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1981","abstract":"The studies collected in this book are all concerned with aspects of the Platonic tradition, either in its own internal development in the Hellenistic age and the period of the Roman Empire, or with the influence of Platonism, in one or other of its forms, on other spiritual traditions, especially that of Christianity. [offical abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/PcJka3NQUzhA8jZ","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":131,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Variorum","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1981]}
Title | La Physique d’Aristote et les anciens commentateurs grecs |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1981 |
Published in | Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Thessaloniki August 7-14 1978 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Verbeke, Gérard |
Editor(s) | Theodōrakopulos, Iōannēs N. |
Translator(s) |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/WCFPRwh1E2k3zgK |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"185","_score":null,"_source":{"id":185,"authors_free":[{"id":241,"entry_id":185,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2506,"entry_id":185,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":514,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Theod\u014drakopulos, I\u014dann\u0113s N.","free_first_name":" I\u014dann\u0113s N.","free_last_name":"Theod\u014drakopulos","norm_person":{"id":514,"first_name":" Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","last_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos","full_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos, Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117302619","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"La Physique d\u2019Aristote et les anciens commentateurs grecs","main_title":{"title":"La Physique d\u2019Aristote et les anciens commentateurs grecs"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"1981","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/WCFPRwh1E2k3zgK","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":514,"full_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos, Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":185,"pubplace":"Athen","publisher":"Minist\u00e8re de la culture et des sciences","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":{"id":185,"section_of":1459,"pages":"","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1459,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Thessaloniki August 7-14 1978","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1981","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/O3DQotq4JIjFp7W","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1459,"pubplace":"Athen","publisher":"Athe\u0304na : Ministry of Culture and Sciences","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1981]}
Title | Aristotle and Simplicius on Mathematical Infinity |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1981 |
Published in | Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Thessaloniki August 7-14 1978 |
Pages | 179-182 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Mueller, Ian |
Editor(s) | Theodōrakopulos, Iōannēs Nikolaou |
Translator(s) |
Aristotle was the first not only to distinguish between potential and actual infinity but also to insist that potential infinity alone is enough for mathematics thus initiating an issue still central to the philosophy of mathematics. Modern scholarship, however, has attacked Aristotle's thesis because, according to the received doctrine, it does not square with Euclidean geometry and it also seems to contravene Aristotle's belief in the finitude of the physical universe. This monograph, the first thorough study of the issue, puts Aristotle's views on infinity in the proper perspective. Through a close study of the relevant Aristotelian passages it shows that the Stagirite's theory of infinity forms a well argued philosophical position which does not bear on his belief in a finite cosmos and does not undermine the Euclidean nature of geometry. The monograph draws a much more positive picture of Aristotle's views and reaffirms his disputed stature as a serious philosopher of mathematics. This innovative and stimulating contribution will be essential reading to a wide range of scholars, including classicists, philosophers of science and mathematics as well as historians of ideas. [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/XpR1jO7FPHTJmR4 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"63","_score":null,"_source":{"id":63,"authors_free":[{"id":71,"entry_id":63,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":270,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mueller, Ian","free_first_name":"Ian","free_last_name":"Mueller","norm_person":{"id":270,"first_name":"Ian","last_name":"Mueller","full_name":"Mueller, Ian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2505,"entry_id":63,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":514,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Theod\u014drakopulos, I\u014dann\u0113s Nikolaou","free_first_name":"I\u014dann\u0113s Nikolaou","free_last_name":"Theod\u014drakopulos","norm_person":{"id":514,"first_name":" Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","last_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos","full_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos, Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117302619","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aristotle and Simplicius on Mathematical Infinity","main_title":{"title":"Aristotle and Simplicius on Mathematical Infinity"},"abstract":"Aristotle was the first not only to distinguish between potential and actual infinity but also to insist that potential infinity alone is enough for mathematics thus initiating an issue still central to the philosophy of mathematics. Modern scholarship, however, has attacked Aristotle's thesis because, according to the received doctrine, it does not square with Euclidean geometry and it also seems to contravene Aristotle's belief in the finitude of the physical universe. This monograph, the first thorough study of the issue, puts Aristotle's views on infinity in the proper perspective. Through a close study of the relevant Aristotelian passages it shows that the Stagirite's theory of infinity forms a well argued philosophical position which does not bear on his belief in a finite cosmos and does not undermine the Euclidean nature of geometry. The monograph draws a much more positive picture of Aristotle's views and reaffirms his disputed stature as a serious philosopher of mathematics. This innovative and stimulating contribution will be essential reading to a wide range of scholars, including classicists, philosophers of science and mathematics as well as historians of ideas. [author's abstract]","btype":2,"date":"1981","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/XpR1jO7FPHTJmR4","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":270,"full_name":"Mueller, Ian","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":514,"full_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos, Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":63,"pubplace":"Athen","publisher":"International Association for Greek Philosophy","series":"Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Ath\u00e8nes, Minist\u00e8re de la culture et des sciences","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":{"id":63,"section_of":1459,"pages":"179-182","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1459,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Thessaloniki August 7-14 1978","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1981","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/O3DQotq4JIjFp7W","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1459,"pubplace":"Athen","publisher":"Athe\u0304na : Ministry of Culture and Sciences","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1981]}
Title | Some Later Neoplatonic Views on Divine Creation and the Eternity of the World |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1981 |
Published in | Neoplatonism and Christian thought |
Pages | 45-53 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Verbeke, Gérard |
Editor(s) | O'Meara, Dominic J. |
Translator(s) |
The commentary of Simplicius on Aristotle’s Physics is particularly inter esting thanks to the rich information it provides concerning the doctrines of pre vious philosophers. His interpretation shows a great erudition, but it is not always faithful to the authentic thought of Aristotle. The first cause of Aristotle is not that of Simplicius and this is not the only case in which Simplicius gave to Aristotelian thought a turn that does not correspond to its original content. A similar distortion may be found in the interpretation of the intricate question of chance and fortune. It is more difficult to formulate a judgment about the commentary of Philoponus: to what extent does it reflect the teaching of Ammonius? In any case, the interpretation is very penetrating, especially in those passages where the author criticizes the doctrine of Aristotle and expresses manifestly his own ideas. Alfarabi takes Philoponus to task for settling a philosophical question with the help of religious doctrines:60 nothing is less true, as W. Wieland has already noticed. Philoponus, rather, uses Aristotelian philosophy in order to refute Aristotle.61 On the other hand he appeals to the concept of creation against the eternity of the world: he very sharply notices, perhaps also under the influence of Ammonius, that creation as an integral causation is not a movement and does not belong to the continuous process of coming-to-be and passing away. Thanks mainly to the concept of creation, the author escapes from the eternity of movement and time. [conclusion p. 52-53] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/QSUX1JffS4trd4H |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"450","_score":null,"_source":{"id":450,"authors_free":[{"id":603,"entry_id":450,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":604,"entry_id":450,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":279,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","free_first_name":"Dominic J.","free_last_name":"O'Meara","norm_person":{"id":279,"first_name":"Dominic J.","last_name":"O'Meara","full_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/11180664X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Some Later Neoplatonic Views on Divine Creation and the Eternity of the World","main_title":{"title":"Some Later Neoplatonic Views on Divine Creation and the Eternity of the World"},"abstract":"The commentary of Simplicius on Aristotle\u2019s Physics is particularly inter\u00ad\r\nesting thanks to the rich information it provides concerning the doctrines of pre\u00ad\r\nvious philosophers. His interpretation shows a great erudition, but it is not always \r\nfaithful to the authentic thought of Aristotle. The first cause of Aristotle is not \r\nthat of Simplicius and this is not the only case in which Simplicius gave to \r\nAristotelian thought a turn that does not correspond to its original content. A similar \r\ndistortion may be found in the interpretation of the intricate question of chance \r\nand fortune. It is more difficult to formulate a judgment about the commentary \r\nof Philoponus: to what extent does it reflect the teaching of Ammonius? In any \r\ncase, the interpretation is very penetrating, especially in those passages where \r\nthe author criticizes the doctrine of Aristotle and expresses manifestly his own \r\nideas. Alfarabi takes Philoponus to task for settling a philosophical question with \r\nthe help of religious doctrines:60 nothing is less true, as W. Wieland has already \r\nnoticed. Philoponus, rather, uses Aristotelian philosophy in order to refute \r\nAristotle.61 On the other hand he appeals to the concept of creation against the eternity of the world: he very sharply notices, perhaps also under the influence of \r\nAmmonius, that creation as an integral causation is not a movement and does not \r\nbelong to the continuous process of coming-to-be and passing away. Thanks mainly \r\nto the concept of creation, the author escapes from the eternity of movement \r\nand time. [conclusion p. 52-53]","btype":2,"date":"1981","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/QSUX1JffS4trd4H","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":279,"full_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":450,"section_of":12,"pages":"45-53","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":12,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Neoplatonism and Christian thought","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"O'Meara1982","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1982","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1981","abstract":"In this volume, the relationships between two of the most vital currents in Western thought are examined by a group of nineteen internationally known specialists in a variety of disciplines\u2014classics, patristics, philosophy, theology, history of ideas, literature. The contributing scholars discuss Neoplatonic theories about God, creation, man, and salvation, in relation to the ways in which they were adopted, adapted, or rejected by major Christian thinkers of five periods: Patristic, Later Greek and Byzantine, Medieval, Renaissance, and Modern. [a.a]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/8tb5ZmmacZhgjDn","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":12,"pubplace":"Albany","publisher":"State University of New York Press","series":"Studies in Neoplatonism: Ancient and Modern","volume":"3","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1981]}
Title | Simplicios, commentateur représentatif d’Aristote dans le néoplatonisme tardif |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1981 |
Published in | Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Thessaloniki August 7-14 1978 |
Pages | 250 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Vamvoukakis, Nicolas |
Editor(s) | Theodōrakopulos, Iōannēs N. |
Translator(s) |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/UItMYMORGj0gHKz |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1460","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1460,"authors_free":[{"id":2524,"entry_id":1460,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":344,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Vamvoukakis, Nicolas","free_first_name":"Nicolas","free_last_name":"Vamvoukakis","norm_person":{"id":344,"first_name":"Nicolas","last_name":"Vamvoukakis","full_name":"Vamvoukakis, Nicolas","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2525,"entry_id":1460,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":514,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Theod\u014drakopulos, I\u014dann\u0113s N.","free_first_name":"I\u014dann\u0113s N.","free_last_name":"Theod\u014drakopulos,","norm_person":{"id":514,"first_name":" Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","last_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos","full_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos, Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117302619","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicios, commentateur repr\u00e9sentatif d\u2019Aristote dans le n\u00e9oplatonisme tardif","main_title":{"title":"Simplicios, commentateur repr\u00e9sentatif d\u2019Aristote dans le n\u00e9oplatonisme tardif"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"1981","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/UItMYMORGj0gHKz","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":344,"full_name":"Vamvoukakis, Nicolas","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":514,"full_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos, Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1460,"section_of":1459,"pages":"250","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1459,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Thessaloniki August 7-14 1978","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Theod\u014drakopulos1981","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1981","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/I0bn1qB2TUZcu8q","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1459,"pubplace":"Athen","publisher":"Athe\u0304na : Ministry of Culture and Sciences","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1981]}
Title | Aristote: quantité et contrariété. Une critique de l’école d’Oxford |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1980 |
Published in | Concepts et catégories dans la pensée antique |
Pages | 89-165 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | O'Brien, Denis |
Editor(s) | Aubenque, Pierre |
Translator(s) |
Avant-propos L’école d’Oxford et le commentaire du Professeur J. L. Ackrill sur les Catégories d’Aristote. Les divisions du texte — un point de repère. Objet de l’argument (5b11-15) Distinction entre propriétés et possesseurs de propriétés. Distinction entre l’aire et la surface, le volume et le corps. Distinction entre quantités déterminées et quantités indéterminées. Le premier argument (5b15-29) La grandeur relative et la grandeur en soi. Les nombreux et les peu nombreux : motif de la double comparaison. Commentaire de Simplicius : les deux formes du paradoxe. Commentaire de Simplicius : la grandeur relative et la grandeur absolue. Le doublet (5b26-29). Le deuxième argument (5b30-33) Rubrique liminaire : une même chose peut-elle se rencontrer dans plus d’une catégorie ? Les relatifs peuvent-ils avoir des contraires ? Les deux groupes de relatifs : ceux qui peuvent avoir un contraire, ceux qui ne peuvent pas avoir de contraire. Relation et contrariété : la prémisse sous-jacente de l’argument. Le troisième argument (5b33-6a11) Introduction à l’argument (5b33-35). Première partie de l’argument : une chose admettra deux contraires à la fois (5b35-6a4). Seconde partie de l’argument : les choses contraires seront, à elles-mêmes, contraires (6a4-8). Conclusion de l’argument (6a8-11). Traduction-Paraphrase du chapitre six des Catégories (4b20-6a35) [structure by the author] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/fSSFgeHBQMgQH3p |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1099","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1099,"authors_free":[{"id":1661,"entry_id":1099,"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\u2019Brien","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}},{"id":1662,"entry_id":1099,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":149,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","free_first_name":"Pierre","free_last_name":"Aubenque","norm_person":{"id":149,"first_name":"Pierre","last_name":"Aubenque","full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118919458","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aristote: quantit\u00e9 et contrari\u00e9t\u00e9. Une critique de l\u2019\u00e9cole d\u2019Oxford","main_title":{"title":"Aristote: quantit\u00e9 et contrari\u00e9t\u00e9. Une critique de l\u2019\u00e9cole d\u2019Oxford"},"abstract":"Avant-propos\r\nL\u2019\u00e9cole d\u2019Oxford et le commentaire du Professeur J. L. Ackrill sur les Cat\u00e9gories d\u2019Aristote.\r\nLes divisions du texte \u2014 un point de rep\u00e8re.\r\nObjet de l\u2019argument (5b11-15)\r\n\r\n Distinction entre propri\u00e9t\u00e9s et possesseurs de propri\u00e9t\u00e9s.\r\n Distinction entre l\u2019aire et la surface, le volume et le corps.\r\n Distinction entre quantit\u00e9s d\u00e9termin\u00e9es et quantit\u00e9s ind\u00e9termin\u00e9es.\r\n\r\nLe premier argument (5b15-29)\r\n\r\n La grandeur relative et la grandeur en soi.\r\n Les nombreux et les peu nombreux : motif de la double comparaison.\r\n Commentaire de Simplicius : les deux formes du paradoxe.\r\n Commentaire de Simplicius : la grandeur relative et la grandeur absolue.\r\n Le doublet (5b26-29).\r\n\r\nLe deuxi\u00e8me argument (5b30-33)\r\n\r\n Rubrique liminaire : une m\u00eame chose peut-elle se rencontrer dans plus d\u2019une cat\u00e9gorie ?\r\n Les relatifs peuvent-ils avoir des contraires ?\r\n Les deux groupes de relatifs : ceux qui peuvent avoir un contraire, ceux qui ne peuvent pas avoir de contraire.\r\n Relation et contrari\u00e9t\u00e9 : la pr\u00e9misse sous-jacente de l\u2019argument.\r\n\r\nLe troisi\u00e8me argument (5b33-6a11)\r\n\r\n Introduction \u00e0 l\u2019argument (5b33-35).\r\n Premi\u00e8re partie de l\u2019argument : une chose admettra deux contraires \u00e0 la fois (5b35-6a4).\r\n Seconde partie de l\u2019argument : les choses contraires seront, \u00e0 elles-m\u00eames, contraires (6a4-8).\r\n Conclusion de l\u2019argument (6a8-11).\r\n\r\nTraduction-Paraphrase du chapitre six des Cat\u00e9gories (4b20-6a35) [structure by the author]","btype":2,"date":"1980","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/fSSFgeHBQMgQH3p","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":144,"full_name":"O'Brien, Denis","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":149,"full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1099,"section_of":302,"pages":"89-165","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":302,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Concepts et cat\u00e9gories dans la pens\u00e9e antique","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Aubenque1980b","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1980","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1980","abstract":"Depuis Aristote, on entend par cat\u00e9gories des concepts tr\u00e8s g\u00e9n\u00e9raux, dont la g\u00e9n\u00e9ralit\u00e9 ne d\u00e9rive pas de l\u2019exp\u00e9rience, mais en quelque sorte la pr\u00e9c\u00e8de, puisque c\u2019est eux et eux seuls qui nous permettent de l\u2019organiser et de la penser. Ces concepts \u2013 substance, quantit\u00e9, relation, qualit\u00e9, lieu, temps, action, passion, situation, avoir \u2013 sont-ils des structures universelles de toute pens\u00e9e ou bien sont-ils li\u00e9s aux particularit\u00e9s s\u00e9mantiques ou syntaxiques d\u2019un syst\u00e8me linguistique particulier, en l\u2019occurrence de la langue grecque, \u00e0 l\u2019int\u00e9rieur de laquelle ils ont \u00e9t\u00e9 pour la premi\u00e8re fois \u00e9nonc\u00e9s et rassembl\u00e9s?\r\nLes \u00e9tudes ici r\u00e9unies, issues d\u2019un s\u00e9minaire qui s\u2019est poursuivi durant plusieurs ann\u00e9es au Centre de recherche sur la Pens\u00e9e antique de l\u2019Universit\u00e9 de Paris-Sorbonne, associ\u00e9 au C.N.R.S. (Centre L\u00e9on-Robin), s\u2019efforcent d\u2019apporter des \u00e9l\u00e9ments de r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 cette grande question, qui demeure au centre des discussions contemporaines sur les rapports de la philosophie et du langage. Leur apport sp\u00e9cifique consiste dans une ex\u00e9g\u00e8se rigoureuse des analyses du trait\u00e9 aristot\u00e9licien des Cat\u00e9gories, \u00e9clair\u00e9 par les d\u00e9veloppements ult\u00e9rieurs de la doctrine, tels que nous les connaissons notamment \u00e0 travers le Commentaire du N\u00e9oplatonicien Simplicius. Certaines de ces \u00e9tudes examinent l\u2019influence ou les transformations des cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes chez les Sto\u00efciens, les grammairiens grecs de la fin de l\u2019Antiquit\u00e9, les N\u00e9oplatoniciens tardifs, les P\u00e8res de l\u2019\u00c9glise et dans la tradition latine antique et m\u00e9di\u00e9vale. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FGpf7U5Cy1dboYI","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":302,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Vrin","series":"Bibliotheque d\u2019histoire de la philosophie","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1980]}
Title | Qu'est-ce qu'une figure? Une difficulté de la doctrine aristotélicienne de la qualité (Aristote Catégories 8, 10 b 26-11 a 14) |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1980 |
Published in | Concepts et catégories dans la pensée antique |
Pages | 197-216 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Narcy, Michel |
Editor(s) | Aubenque, Pierre |
Translator(s) |
Au chapitre 8 des Catégories, consacré à la qualité (poiotes), Aristote, comme il l’a fait à propos des catégories précédentes (substance, quantité, relation), fait suivre son exposé de l’examen de deux questions : savoir si, dans l’ordre de la qualité, se trouvent contrariété (enantiótes) et accroissement ou diminution (to mallon kai to héttion). On peut noter d’ailleurs qu’à la réponse à ces deux questions se limiteront, au chapitre 9, les indications fournies au sujet des catégories de l’action et de la passion. Questions dont on a pu reconnaître qu’elles constituent comme l’application aux catégories aristotéliciennes d’un système catégorial plus ancien, provenant de l’Académie et dérivé, à travers le platonisme, du pythagorisme. Il peut paraître étrange de délimiter ici, en vue d’une étude de la catégorie de qualité, un passage d’allure adventice, où vient pour ainsi dire s’entrecroiser avec le fil de l’exposé d’Aristote, et contredire l’assurance de sa classification, une problématique qui semble d’autant moins lui appartenir en propre qu’elle contribue surtout à jeter le doute sur la cohérence de l’exposé qui précède. À chacune des deux questions, en effet, Aristote donne tout d’abord une réponse affirmative (contrariété : 10 b 12 ; accroissement et diminution : 10 b 26), mais c’est pour noter ensuite, à la règle ainsi posée, des exceptions. Ainsi, donnant comme exemple de contrariété le blanc et le noir (10 b 13), il remarque un peu plus bas que d’autres couleurs, telles que le rouge et le jaune, n’ont pas de contraires (10 b 16-17). De même, dans le passage qui va nous occuper, affirme-t-il qu’à la différence des autres qualités, la figure n’est pas susceptible de plus et de moins : exception de taille, cette fois, puisque c’est ainsi l’une des quatre subdivisions de la qualité qui se voit assigner un statut à part. Rejoignant là l’objection que fait Plotin au principe même d’une division au sein de la qualité, on ne peut éviter de se demander pourquoi la figure est rangée sous cette catégorie. Soit donc que, dans la rencontre avec le système catégorial académique, Aristote se trouve confronté à une difficulté dont il ne vient pas à bout, soit qu’il souligne ainsi l’inadéquation de la « grille » qu’il abandonne, ce passage peut sembler rien moins que central dans le chapitre. À moins que se révèlent, dans la difficulté précisément, pour autant qu’elle est comme une trace de la cassure opérée, et à moins que, pourquoi pas, dans cette cassure se constituent, la signification et la raison d’être de la catégorie aristotélicienne de la qualité, et avec elle, la doctrine des catégories. L’exception constituée par la figure, en effet, n’est pas une faiblesse qui se laisse seulement apercevoir : Aristote, au contraire, loin de la masquer ou de la mentionner sans plus, comme il fait du rouge et du jaune à propos de la contrariété, non seulement l’expose avec un soin particulier, mais produit une argumentation à l’appui. Ce qui doit d’autant plus retenir l’attention, qu’il a tout d’abord travaillé à réduire une première exception, celle que constitueraient des dispositions telles que la justice ou la santé (10 b 30-11 a 5). Le soin égal apporté, d’abord à réduire une première exception, puis à en produire une autre, donne à croire qu’à entendre au plus près la difficulté, on a chance d’y saisir une ligne de force de la doctrine. Examinons donc tout d’abord la première partie de notre passage (10 b 26-11 a 5). C’est l’affirmation que les qualités (tà poià) reçoivent « le plus et le moins » (tà mallon kai tà héttion) : « du blanc, en effet : l’un est dit plus et moins qu’un autre. Et du juste : l’un qu’un autre, plus ». [introduction p. 197-198] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/qCqUG7AShSYKtrM |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"792","_score":null,"_source":{"id":792,"authors_free":[{"id":1169,"entry_id":792,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":277,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Narcy, Michel","free_first_name":"Michel","free_last_name":"Narcy","norm_person":{"id":277,"first_name":"Michel","last_name":"Narcy","full_name":"Narcy, Michel","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/129449512","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1170,"entry_id":792,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":149,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","free_first_name":"Pierre","free_last_name":"Aubenque","norm_person":{"id":149,"first_name":"Pierre","last_name":"Aubenque","full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118919458","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Qu'est-ce qu'une figure? Une difficult\u00e9 de la doctrine aristot\u00e9licienne de la qualit\u00e9 (Aristote Cat\u00e9gories 8, 10 b 26-11 a 14)","main_title":{"title":"Qu'est-ce qu'une figure? Une difficult\u00e9 de la doctrine aristot\u00e9licienne de la qualit\u00e9 (Aristote Cat\u00e9gories 8, 10 b 26-11 a 14)"},"abstract":"Au chapitre 8 des Cat\u00e9gories, consacr\u00e9 \u00e0 la qualit\u00e9 (poiotes), Aristote, comme il l\u2019a fait \u00e0 propos des cat\u00e9gories pr\u00e9c\u00e9dentes (substance, quantit\u00e9, relation), fait suivre son expos\u00e9 de l\u2019examen de deux questions : savoir si, dans l\u2019ordre de la qualit\u00e9, se trouvent contrari\u00e9t\u00e9 (enanti\u00f3tes) et accroissement ou diminution (to mallon kai to h\u00e9ttion). On peut noter d\u2019ailleurs qu\u2019\u00e0 la r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 ces deux questions se limiteront, au chapitre 9, les indications fournies au sujet des cat\u00e9gories de l\u2019action et de la passion. Questions dont on a pu reconna\u00eetre qu\u2019elles constituent comme l\u2019application aux cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes d\u2019un syst\u00e8me cat\u00e9gorial plus ancien, provenant de l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie et d\u00e9riv\u00e9, \u00e0 travers le platonisme, du pythagorisme.\r\n\r\nIl peut para\u00eetre \u00e9trange de d\u00e9limiter ici, en vue d\u2019une \u00e9tude de la cat\u00e9gorie de qualit\u00e9, un passage d\u2019allure adventice, o\u00f9 vient pour ainsi dire s\u2019entrecroiser avec le fil de l\u2019expos\u00e9 d\u2019Aristote, et contredire l\u2019assurance de sa classification, une probl\u00e9matique qui semble d\u2019autant moins lui appartenir en propre qu\u2019elle contribue surtout \u00e0 jeter le doute sur la coh\u00e9rence de l\u2019expos\u00e9 qui pr\u00e9c\u00e8de. \u00c0 chacune des deux questions, en effet, Aristote donne tout d\u2019abord une r\u00e9ponse affirmative (contrari\u00e9t\u00e9 : 10 b 12 ; accroissement et diminution : 10 b 26), mais c\u2019est pour noter ensuite, \u00e0 la r\u00e8gle ainsi pos\u00e9e, des exceptions. Ainsi, donnant comme exemple de contrari\u00e9t\u00e9 le blanc et le noir (10 b 13), il remarque un peu plus bas que d\u2019autres couleurs, telles que le rouge et le jaune, n\u2019ont pas de contraires (10 b 16-17). De m\u00eame, dans le passage qui va nous occuper, affirme-t-il qu\u2019\u00e0 la diff\u00e9rence des autres qualit\u00e9s, la figure n\u2019est pas susceptible de plus et de moins : exception de taille, cette fois, puisque c\u2019est ainsi l\u2019une des quatre subdivisions de la qualit\u00e9 qui se voit assigner un statut \u00e0 part.\r\n\r\nRejoignant l\u00e0 l\u2019objection que fait Plotin au principe m\u00eame d\u2019une division au sein de la qualit\u00e9, on ne peut \u00e9viter de se demander pourquoi la figure est rang\u00e9e sous cette cat\u00e9gorie. Soit donc que, dans la rencontre avec le syst\u00e8me cat\u00e9gorial acad\u00e9mique, Aristote se trouve confront\u00e9 \u00e0 une difficult\u00e9 dont il ne vient pas \u00e0 bout, soit qu\u2019il souligne ainsi l\u2019inad\u00e9quation de la \u00ab grille \u00bb qu\u2019il abandonne, ce passage peut sembler rien moins que central dans le chapitre. \u00c0 moins que se r\u00e9v\u00e8lent, dans la difficult\u00e9 pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment, pour autant qu\u2019elle est comme une trace de la cassure op\u00e9r\u00e9e, et \u00e0 moins que, pourquoi pas, dans cette cassure se constituent, la signification et la raison d\u2019\u00eatre de la cat\u00e9gorie aristot\u00e9licienne de la qualit\u00e9, et avec elle, la doctrine des cat\u00e9gories.\r\n\r\nL\u2019exception constitu\u00e9e par la figure, en effet, n\u2019est pas une faiblesse qui se laisse seulement apercevoir : Aristote, au contraire, loin de la masquer ou de la mentionner sans plus, comme il fait du rouge et du jaune \u00e0 propos de la contrari\u00e9t\u00e9, non seulement l\u2019expose avec un soin particulier, mais produit une argumentation \u00e0 l\u2019appui. Ce qui doit d\u2019autant plus retenir l\u2019attention, qu\u2019il a tout d\u2019abord travaill\u00e9 \u00e0 r\u00e9duire une premi\u00e8re exception, celle que constitueraient des dispositions telles que la justice ou la sant\u00e9 (10 b 30-11 a 5). Le soin \u00e9gal apport\u00e9, d\u2019abord \u00e0 r\u00e9duire une premi\u00e8re exception, puis \u00e0 en produire une autre, donne \u00e0 croire qu\u2019\u00e0 entendre au plus pr\u00e8s la difficult\u00e9, on a chance d\u2019y saisir une ligne de force de la doctrine.\r\n\r\nExaminons donc tout d\u2019abord la premi\u00e8re partie de notre passage (10 b 26-11 a 5). C\u2019est l\u2019affirmation que les qualit\u00e9s (t\u00e0 poi\u00e0) re\u00e7oivent \u00ab le plus et le moins \u00bb (t\u00e0 mallon kai t\u00e0 h\u00e9ttion) : \u00ab du blanc, en effet : l\u2019un est dit plus et moins qu\u2019un autre. Et du juste : l\u2019un qu\u2019un autre, plus \u00bb. [introduction p. 197-198]","btype":2,"date":"1980","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/qCqUG7AShSYKtrM","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":277,"full_name":"Narcy, Michel","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":149,"full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":792,"section_of":302,"pages":"197-216","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":302,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Concepts et cat\u00e9gories dans la pens\u00e9e antique","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Aubenque1980b","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1980","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1980","abstract":"Depuis Aristote, on entend par cat\u00e9gories des concepts tr\u00e8s g\u00e9n\u00e9raux, dont la g\u00e9n\u00e9ralit\u00e9 ne d\u00e9rive pas de l\u2019exp\u00e9rience, mais en quelque sorte la pr\u00e9c\u00e8de, puisque c\u2019est eux et eux seuls qui nous permettent de l\u2019organiser et de la penser. Ces concepts \u2013 substance, quantit\u00e9, relation, qualit\u00e9, lieu, temps, action, passion, situation, avoir \u2013 sont-ils des structures universelles de toute pens\u00e9e ou bien sont-ils li\u00e9s aux particularit\u00e9s s\u00e9mantiques ou syntaxiques d\u2019un syst\u00e8me linguistique particulier, en l\u2019occurrence de la langue grecque, \u00e0 l\u2019int\u00e9rieur de laquelle ils ont \u00e9t\u00e9 pour la premi\u00e8re fois \u00e9nonc\u00e9s et rassembl\u00e9s?\r\nLes \u00e9tudes ici r\u00e9unies, issues d\u2019un s\u00e9minaire qui s\u2019est poursuivi durant plusieurs ann\u00e9es au Centre de recherche sur la Pens\u00e9e antique de l\u2019Universit\u00e9 de Paris-Sorbonne, associ\u00e9 au C.N.R.S. (Centre L\u00e9on-Robin), s\u2019efforcent d\u2019apporter des \u00e9l\u00e9ments de r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 cette grande question, qui demeure au centre des discussions contemporaines sur les rapports de la philosophie et du langage. Leur apport sp\u00e9cifique consiste dans une ex\u00e9g\u00e8se rigoureuse des analyses du trait\u00e9 aristot\u00e9licien des Cat\u00e9gories, \u00e9clair\u00e9 par les d\u00e9veloppements ult\u00e9rieurs de la doctrine, tels que nous les connaissons notamment \u00e0 travers le Commentaire du N\u00e9oplatonicien Simplicius. Certaines de ces \u00e9tudes examinent l\u2019influence ou les transformations des cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes chez les Sto\u00efciens, les grammairiens grecs de la fin de l\u2019Antiquit\u00e9, les N\u00e9oplatoniciens tardifs, les P\u00e8res de l\u2019\u00c9glise et dans la tradition latine antique et m\u00e9di\u00e9vale. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FGpf7U5Cy1dboYI","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":302,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Vrin","series":"Bibliotheque d\u2019histoire de la philosophie","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1980]}
Title | Les catégories aristotéliciennes d’action et de passion vues par Simplicius |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1980 |
Published in | Concepts et catégories dans la pensée antique |
Pages | 253-269 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Vamvoukakis, Nicolas |
Editor(s) | Aubenque, Pierre |
Translator(s) |
L’analyse du commentaire de Simplicius sur les catégories aristotéliciennes d’action et de passion (ou, plus exactement, d’«agir» et de «pâtir») est d’un intérêt multiple. Les notions mêmes sont d’une importance capitale aussi bien pour Aristote que pour le néoplatonisme tardif : en tant que catégories, elles désignent la mobilité, le dynamisme et la créativité de l’être ; en tant que réalités physiques ou métaphysiques désignées par ces mots, l’action et la passion sont directement liées à la théorie aristotélicienne de puissance, d’acte et de mouvement, et non moins à la problématique néoplatonicienne sur la Procession. L’importance du sujet fait du commentaire de Simplicius une bonne occasion pour manifester l’utilité de ce genre de commentaires pour la meilleure compréhension de la pensée aristotélicienne ; et cela d’autant plus que Simplicius consacre aux catégories d’action et de passion quarante pages de commentaire alors que le texte aristotélicien dans le traité des Catégories ne dépasse pas huit lignes. Par l’exposé exhaustif et raisonné de tous les points de vue concernant ces deux catégories, Simplicius nous offre un tableau aussi complet que possible des problèmes sur l’action et la passion qu’Aristote aurait pu ou aurait dû se poser lui-même dans son discours sur les Catégories. Ainsi l’examen portera sur les caractères principaux de l’action et de la passion, sur ce qui est le propre de chacune et justifie sa position comme une catégorie à part, sur le problème de la réductibilité de ces deux catégories aux autres ou à une seule et sur leur division en espèces. Toutes ces questions, prises dans leur généralité, sont indiscutablement conformes à l’esprit de l’auteur du traité des Catégories ; mais lorsqu’on aborde leur examen détaillé dans le commentaire de Simplicius, on est souvent étonné par l’intrusion d’éléments, surtout spéculatifs, qui, en apparence, relèvent d’un mode de pensée complètement étranger à celui d’Aristote. Mais, en fait, une étude serrée du commentaire montre qu’il est possible (et même nécessaire, si l’on veut tirer le meilleur parti de ce texte) de distinguer : les éléments purement aristotéliciens ; ceux qui, exprimés en termes néoplatoniciens, sont aisément transposables dans l’univers d’Aristote ; ceux qui prolongent la problématique aristotélicienne dans la perspective du néoplatonisme tardif. Ces prolongements ne sont pourtant pas dépourvus d’intérêt pour l’aristotélisme : en posant et en résolvant des problèmes qu’Aristote lui-même n’avait pas posés, mais qui, en dernière analyse, découlent de ses propres thèses, et auxquels on doit donc chercher une réponse même si Aristote ne l’a pas donnée, on comprend beaucoup plus à fond toutes les ramifications de sa problématique ; et de même par l’examen des réponses proposées ou en essayant de répondre soi-même à la place d’Aristote. D’où il ressort que la bonne compréhension et l’appréciation juste d’un commentaire de Simplicius sur Aristote présupposent une connaissance adéquate de la philosophie aristotélicienne ainsi qu’une certaine expérience des traits particuliers à la pensée et à la sensibilité des néoplatoniciens tardifs. Car ces commentaires ne sont pas exégétiques au sens, malheureusement si familier pour nous, de la paraphrase élaborée, mais, sans négliger les nuances, s’attaquent au cœur même des problèmes, sur lesquels ils proposent des solutions bien articulées. [introduction p. 253-254] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/O07AYBHdocDRTVL |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"455","_score":null,"_source":{"id":455,"authors_free":[{"id":611,"entry_id":455,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":344,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Vamvoukakis, Nicolas","free_first_name":"Nicolas","free_last_name":"Vamvoukakis","norm_person":{"id":344,"first_name":"Nicolas","last_name":"Vamvoukakis","full_name":"Vamvoukakis, Nicolas","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":612,"entry_id":455,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":149,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","free_first_name":"Pierre","free_last_name":"Aubenque","norm_person":{"id":149,"first_name":"Pierre","last_name":"Aubenque","full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118919458","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Les cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes d\u2019action et de passion vues par Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Les cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes d\u2019action et de passion vues par Simplicius"},"abstract":"L\u2019analyse du commentaire de Simplicius sur les cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes d\u2019action et de passion (ou, plus exactement, d\u2019\u00abagir\u00bb et de \u00abp\u00e2tir\u00bb) est d\u2019un int\u00e9r\u00eat multiple. Les notions m\u00eames sont d\u2019une importance capitale aussi bien pour Aristote que pour le n\u00e9oplatonisme tardif : en tant que cat\u00e9gories, elles d\u00e9signent la mobilit\u00e9, le dynamisme et la cr\u00e9ativit\u00e9 de l\u2019\u00eatre ; en tant que r\u00e9alit\u00e9s physiques ou m\u00e9taphysiques d\u00e9sign\u00e9es par ces mots, l\u2019action et la passion sont directement li\u00e9es \u00e0 la th\u00e9orie aristot\u00e9licienne de puissance, d\u2019acte et de mouvement, et non moins \u00e0 la probl\u00e9matique n\u00e9oplatonicienne sur la Procession.\r\n\r\nL\u2019importance du sujet fait du commentaire de Simplicius une bonne occasion pour manifester l\u2019utilit\u00e9 de ce genre de commentaires pour la meilleure compr\u00e9hension de la pens\u00e9e aristot\u00e9licienne ; et cela d\u2019autant plus que Simplicius consacre aux cat\u00e9gories d\u2019action et de passion quarante pages de commentaire alors que le texte aristot\u00e9licien dans le trait\u00e9 des Cat\u00e9gories ne d\u00e9passe pas huit lignes. Par l\u2019expos\u00e9 exhaustif et raisonn\u00e9 de tous les points de vue concernant ces deux cat\u00e9gories, Simplicius nous offre un tableau aussi complet que possible des probl\u00e8mes sur l\u2019action et la passion qu\u2019Aristote aurait pu ou aurait d\u00fb se poser lui-m\u00eame dans son discours sur les Cat\u00e9gories.\r\n\r\nAinsi l\u2019examen portera sur les caract\u00e8res principaux de l\u2019action et de la passion, sur ce qui est le propre de chacune et justifie sa position comme une cat\u00e9gorie \u00e0 part, sur le probl\u00e8me de la r\u00e9ductibilit\u00e9 de ces deux cat\u00e9gories aux autres ou \u00e0 une seule et sur leur division en esp\u00e8ces. Toutes ces questions, prises dans leur g\u00e9n\u00e9ralit\u00e9, sont indiscutablement conformes \u00e0 l\u2019esprit de l\u2019auteur du trait\u00e9 des Cat\u00e9gories ; mais lorsqu\u2019on aborde leur examen d\u00e9taill\u00e9 dans le commentaire de Simplicius, on est souvent \u00e9tonn\u00e9 par l\u2019intrusion d\u2019\u00e9l\u00e9ments, surtout sp\u00e9culatifs, qui, en apparence, rel\u00e8vent d\u2019un mode de pens\u00e9e compl\u00e8tement \u00e9tranger \u00e0 celui d\u2019Aristote.\r\n\r\nMais, en fait, une \u00e9tude serr\u00e9e du commentaire montre qu\u2019il est possible (et m\u00eame n\u00e9cessaire, si l\u2019on veut tirer le meilleur parti de ce texte) de distinguer :\r\n\r\n les \u00e9l\u00e9ments purement aristot\u00e9liciens ;\r\n ceux qui, exprim\u00e9s en termes n\u00e9oplatoniciens, sont ais\u00e9ment transposables dans l\u2019univers d\u2019Aristote ;\r\n ceux qui prolongent la probl\u00e9matique aristot\u00e9licienne dans la perspective du n\u00e9oplatonisme tardif.\r\n\r\nCes prolongements ne sont pourtant pas d\u00e9pourvus d\u2019int\u00e9r\u00eat pour l\u2019aristot\u00e9lisme : en posant et en r\u00e9solvant des probl\u00e8mes qu\u2019Aristote lui-m\u00eame n\u2019avait pas pos\u00e9s, mais qui, en derni\u00e8re analyse, d\u00e9coulent de ses propres th\u00e8ses, et auxquels on doit donc chercher une r\u00e9ponse m\u00eame si Aristote ne l\u2019a pas donn\u00e9e, on comprend beaucoup plus \u00e0 fond toutes les ramifications de sa probl\u00e9matique ; et de m\u00eame par l\u2019examen des r\u00e9ponses propos\u00e9es ou en essayant de r\u00e9pondre soi-m\u00eame \u00e0 la place d\u2019Aristote.\r\n\r\nD\u2019o\u00f9 il ressort que la bonne compr\u00e9hension et l\u2019appr\u00e9ciation juste d\u2019un commentaire de Simplicius sur Aristote pr\u00e9supposent une connaissance ad\u00e9quate de la philosophie aristot\u00e9licienne ainsi qu\u2019une certaine exp\u00e9rience des traits particuliers \u00e0 la pens\u00e9e et \u00e0 la sensibilit\u00e9 des n\u00e9oplatoniciens tardifs. Car ces commentaires ne sont pas ex\u00e9g\u00e9tiques au sens, malheureusement si familier pour nous, de la paraphrase \u00e9labor\u00e9e, mais, sans n\u00e9gliger les nuances, s\u2019attaquent au c\u0153ur m\u00eame des probl\u00e8mes, sur lesquels ils proposent des solutions bien articul\u00e9es. [introduction p. 253-254]","btype":2,"date":"1980","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/O07AYBHdocDRTVL","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":344,"full_name":"Vamvoukakis, Nicolas","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":149,"full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":455,"section_of":302,"pages":"253-269","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":302,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Concepts et cat\u00e9gories dans la pens\u00e9e antique","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Aubenque1980b","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1980","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1980","abstract":"Depuis Aristote, on entend par cat\u00e9gories des concepts tr\u00e8s g\u00e9n\u00e9raux, dont la g\u00e9n\u00e9ralit\u00e9 ne d\u00e9rive pas de l\u2019exp\u00e9rience, mais en quelque sorte la pr\u00e9c\u00e8de, puisque c\u2019est eux et eux seuls qui nous permettent de l\u2019organiser et de la penser. Ces concepts \u2013 substance, quantit\u00e9, relation, qualit\u00e9, lieu, temps, action, passion, situation, avoir \u2013 sont-ils des structures universelles de toute pens\u00e9e ou bien sont-ils li\u00e9s aux particularit\u00e9s s\u00e9mantiques ou syntaxiques d\u2019un syst\u00e8me linguistique particulier, en l\u2019occurrence de la langue grecque, \u00e0 l\u2019int\u00e9rieur de laquelle ils ont \u00e9t\u00e9 pour la premi\u00e8re fois \u00e9nonc\u00e9s et rassembl\u00e9s?\r\nLes \u00e9tudes ici r\u00e9unies, issues d\u2019un s\u00e9minaire qui s\u2019est poursuivi durant plusieurs ann\u00e9es au Centre de recherche sur la Pens\u00e9e antique de l\u2019Universit\u00e9 de Paris-Sorbonne, associ\u00e9 au C.N.R.S. (Centre L\u00e9on-Robin), s\u2019efforcent d\u2019apporter des \u00e9l\u00e9ments de r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 cette grande question, qui demeure au centre des discussions contemporaines sur les rapports de la philosophie et du langage. Leur apport sp\u00e9cifique consiste dans une ex\u00e9g\u00e8se rigoureuse des analyses du trait\u00e9 aristot\u00e9licien des Cat\u00e9gories, \u00e9clair\u00e9 par les d\u00e9veloppements ult\u00e9rieurs de la doctrine, tels que nous les connaissons notamment \u00e0 travers le Commentaire du N\u00e9oplatonicien Simplicius. Certaines de ces \u00e9tudes examinent l\u2019influence ou les transformations des cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes chez les Sto\u00efciens, les grammairiens grecs de la fin de l\u2019Antiquit\u00e9, les N\u00e9oplatoniciens tardifs, les P\u00e8res de l\u2019\u00c9glise et dans la tradition latine antique et m\u00e9di\u00e9vale. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FGpf7U5Cy1dboYI","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":302,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Vrin","series":"Bibliotheque d\u2019histoire de la philosophie","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1980]}
Title | Les catégories ΠΟΙ et ΠΟΤΕ chez Aristote et Simplicius |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1980 |
Published in | Concepts et catégories dans la pensée antique |
Pages | 217-245 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hoffmann, Philippe |
Editor(s) | Aubenque, Pierre |
Translator(s) |
L'exposé que l'on va lire ne se propose pas d'étudier les concepts de lieu ou de temps chez Aristote et son commentateur Simplicius, mais de scruter les quelques indications qu’Aristote, dans son Traité des Catégories, nous donne sur les prédicats ποῦ et ποτέ, ou que l'on peut trouver dans certains passages de Physique IV. La matière fournie par les textes aristotéliciens étant peu abondante, notre attention se portera principalement sur le Commentaire de Simplicius. Si les catégories ποῦ et ποτέ ne se confondent pas avec les concepts de lieu et de temps, c’est pourtant par rapport à eux, c'est-à-dire par différence avec eux, qu'elles prennent sens et consistance. C'est pourquoi, et bien que ce ne soit qu’à titre secondaire, la méditation sur le temps et le lieu nourrit le commentaire de Simplicius, chez qui elle fonde (ainsi d’ailleurs que chez nombre de commentateurs antérieurs) l'ordre relatif des deux catégories : selon que le temps ou le lieu est considéré comme plus « proche » de l'essence, plus « apparenté » à elle, la catégorie ποῦ (ou la catégorie ποτέ) se situera plus près de l’ousia dans la liste des catégories. Tel étant le critère du classement, l'analyse catégoriale court toujours le risque d’être remplacée par une étude « physique » du temps ou du lieu. Mais Simplicius situe la doctrine des catégories au niveau d’une étude des signifiés et des significations. Un second danger se présente alors, qui est de confondre l'analyse catégoriale et l'analyse grammaticale des « parties du discours ». En effet, les catégories ποῦ et ποτέ correspondent presque exclusivement à deux classes d’adverbes, qui sont, respectivement, les adverbes de lieu et les adverbes de temps. Nous verrons que Simplicius, analysant et classant les significations des adverbes (et compléments) de lieu, ne fait que reprendre, sur ce point, la doctrine grammaticale classique, telle qu'on la voit exposée dans la Grammaire de Denys le Thrace, dans les scholies relatives à cette grammaire, ou chez un auteur comme Apollonius Dyscole. Guidé par l'idée d’une étroite parenté entre les catégories ποῦ et ποτέ, Simplicius étudie les adverbes de temps en suivant comme modèle la doctrine grammaticale des adverbes de lieu. À la suite de Jamblique, il défend, contre les attaques de Plotin, la thèse soutenue par Aristote dans son Traité des Catégories : ποτέ et ποῦ sont des catégories distinctes et propres, tandis que temps et lieu relèvent de la quantité. Pour fonder cette distinction, Jamblique et Simplicius établissent que ποῦ signifie « la relation au lieu de ce qui est dans le lieu », et ποτέ « la relation au temps de ce qui est dans le temps ». D'autre part, ποῦ et ποτέ se différencient des relatifs, en ce que la relation constitutive de ces derniers est convertible, ce qui n’est pas le cas de la relation constitutive de ces deux catégories : il s'agit, par exemple, de la relation au lieu de ce qui est dans le lieu, et non de la relation du lieu à ce qui est en lui. [introduction p. 217-218] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/NQv0lwgedEPlhBo |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"508","_score":null,"_source":{"id":508,"authors_free":[{"id":702,"entry_id":508,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":138,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe","free_first_name":"Philippe","free_last_name":"Hoffmann","norm_person":{"id":138,"first_name":"Philippe ","last_name":"Hoffmann","full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/189361905","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":703,"entry_id":508,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":149,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","free_first_name":"Pierre","free_last_name":"Aubenque","norm_person":{"id":149,"first_name":"Pierre","last_name":"Aubenque","full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118919458","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Les cat\u00e9gories \u03a0\u039f\u0399 et \u03a0\u039f\u03a4\u0395 chez Aristote et Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Les cat\u00e9gories \u03a0\u039f\u0399 et \u03a0\u039f\u03a4\u0395 chez Aristote et Simplicius"},"abstract":"L'expos\u00e9 que l'on va lire ne se propose pas d'\u00e9tudier les concepts de lieu ou de temps chez Aristote et son commentateur Simplicius, mais de scruter les quelques indications qu\u2019Aristote, dans son Trait\u00e9 des Cat\u00e9gories, nous donne sur les pr\u00e9dicats \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 et \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad, ou que l'on peut trouver dans certains passages de Physique IV. La mati\u00e8re fournie par les textes aristot\u00e9liciens \u00e9tant peu abondante, notre attention se portera principalement sur le Commentaire de Simplicius.\r\n\r\nSi les cat\u00e9gories \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 et \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad ne se confondent pas avec les concepts de lieu et de temps, c\u2019est pourtant par rapport \u00e0 eux, c'est-\u00e0-dire par diff\u00e9rence avec eux, qu'elles prennent sens et consistance. C'est pourquoi, et bien que ce ne soit qu\u2019\u00e0 titre secondaire, la m\u00e9ditation sur le temps et le lieu nourrit le commentaire de Simplicius, chez qui elle fonde (ainsi d\u2019ailleurs que chez nombre de commentateurs ant\u00e9rieurs) l'ordre relatif des deux cat\u00e9gories : selon que le temps ou le lieu est consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme plus \u00ab proche \u00bb de l'essence, plus \u00ab apparent\u00e9 \u00bb \u00e0 elle, la cat\u00e9gorie \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 (ou la cat\u00e9gorie \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad) se situera plus pr\u00e8s de l\u2019ousia dans la liste des cat\u00e9gories.\r\n\r\nTel \u00e9tant le crit\u00e8re du classement, l'analyse cat\u00e9goriale court toujours le risque d\u2019\u00eatre remplac\u00e9e par une \u00e9tude \u00ab physique \u00bb du temps ou du lieu. Mais Simplicius situe la doctrine des cat\u00e9gories au niveau d\u2019une \u00e9tude des signifi\u00e9s et des significations. Un second danger se pr\u00e9sente alors, qui est de confondre l'analyse cat\u00e9goriale et l'analyse grammaticale des \u00ab parties du discours \u00bb. En effet, les cat\u00e9gories \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 et \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad correspondent presque exclusivement \u00e0 deux classes d\u2019adverbes, qui sont, respectivement, les adverbes de lieu et les adverbes de temps.\r\n\r\nNous verrons que Simplicius, analysant et classant les significations des adverbes (et compl\u00e9ments) de lieu, ne fait que reprendre, sur ce point, la doctrine grammaticale classique, telle qu'on la voit expos\u00e9e dans la Grammaire de Denys le Thrace, dans les scholies relatives \u00e0 cette grammaire, ou chez un auteur comme Apollonius Dyscole. Guid\u00e9 par l'id\u00e9e d\u2019une \u00e9troite parent\u00e9 entre les cat\u00e9gories \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 et \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad, Simplicius \u00e9tudie les adverbes de temps en suivant comme mod\u00e8le la doctrine grammaticale des adverbes de lieu.\r\n\r\n\u00c0 la suite de Jamblique, il d\u00e9fend, contre les attaques de Plotin, la th\u00e8se soutenue par Aristote dans son Trait\u00e9 des Cat\u00e9gories : \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad et \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 sont des cat\u00e9gories distinctes et propres, tandis que temps et lieu rel\u00e8vent de la quantit\u00e9. Pour fonder cette distinction, Jamblique et Simplicius \u00e9tablissent que \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 signifie \u00ab la relation au lieu de ce qui est dans le lieu \u00bb, et \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad \u00ab la relation au temps de ce qui est dans le temps \u00bb.\r\n\r\nD'autre part, \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 et \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad se diff\u00e9rencient des relatifs, en ce que la relation constitutive de ces derniers est convertible, ce qui n\u2019est pas le cas de la relation constitutive de ces deux cat\u00e9gories : il s'agit, par exemple, de la relation au lieu de ce qui est dans le lieu, et non de la relation du lieu \u00e0 ce qui est en lui. [introduction p. 217-218]","btype":2,"date":"1980","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/NQv0lwgedEPlhBo","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":138,"full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":149,"full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":508,"section_of":302,"pages":"217-245","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":302,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Concepts et cat\u00e9gories dans la pens\u00e9e antique","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Aubenque1980b","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1980","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1980","abstract":"Depuis Aristote, on entend par cat\u00e9gories des concepts tr\u00e8s g\u00e9n\u00e9raux, dont la g\u00e9n\u00e9ralit\u00e9 ne d\u00e9rive pas de l\u2019exp\u00e9rience, mais en quelque sorte la pr\u00e9c\u00e8de, puisque c\u2019est eux et eux seuls qui nous permettent de l\u2019organiser et de la penser. Ces concepts \u2013 substance, quantit\u00e9, relation, qualit\u00e9, lieu, temps, action, passion, situation, avoir \u2013 sont-ils des structures universelles de toute pens\u00e9e ou bien sont-ils li\u00e9s aux particularit\u00e9s s\u00e9mantiques ou syntaxiques d\u2019un syst\u00e8me linguistique particulier, en l\u2019occurrence de la langue grecque, \u00e0 l\u2019int\u00e9rieur de laquelle ils ont \u00e9t\u00e9 pour la premi\u00e8re fois \u00e9nonc\u00e9s et rassembl\u00e9s?\r\nLes \u00e9tudes ici r\u00e9unies, issues d\u2019un s\u00e9minaire qui s\u2019est poursuivi durant plusieurs ann\u00e9es au Centre de recherche sur la Pens\u00e9e antique de l\u2019Universit\u00e9 de Paris-Sorbonne, associ\u00e9 au C.N.R.S. (Centre L\u00e9on-Robin), s\u2019efforcent d\u2019apporter des \u00e9l\u00e9ments de r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 cette grande question, qui demeure au centre des discussions contemporaines sur les rapports de la philosophie et du langage. Leur apport sp\u00e9cifique consiste dans une ex\u00e9g\u00e8se rigoureuse des analyses du trait\u00e9 aristot\u00e9licien des Cat\u00e9gories, \u00e9clair\u00e9 par les d\u00e9veloppements ult\u00e9rieurs de la doctrine, tels que nous les connaissons notamment \u00e0 travers le Commentaire du N\u00e9oplatonicien Simplicius. Certaines de ces \u00e9tudes examinent l\u2019influence ou les transformations des cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes chez les Sto\u00efciens, les grammairiens grecs de la fin de l\u2019Antiquit\u00e9, les N\u00e9oplatoniciens tardifs, les P\u00e8res de l\u2019\u00c9glise et dans la tradition latine antique et m\u00e9di\u00e9vale. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FGpf7U5Cy1dboYI","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":302,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Vrin","series":"Bibliotheque d\u2019histoire de la philosophie","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1980]}
Title | Simplicius: Corollarium de loco |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1979 |
Published in | L'Astronomie dans l'antiquité classique. Actes du Colloque tenu à l'Université de Toulouse-le-Mirail, 21–23 Octobre, 1977 |
Pages | 143-161 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hoffmann, Philippe |
Editor(s) | Aujac, Germaine , Soubiran, Jean |
Translator(s) |
En conclusion : La définition aristotélicienne du lieu comme « première limite immobile de l'enveloppant » tente de concilier deux exigences contradictoires : le lieu est une enveloppe et il est immobile. Aristote est contraint de dire que le Monde n'est pas en un lieu, puisqu'il n'est enveloppé par rien : s'il n'est nulle part, il ne peut non plus se mouvoir localement, ce qui est en contradiction avec l'« expérience » et avec d’autres exigences du système (la dignité du mouvement circulaire uniforme et éternel convient à la substance céleste). Proclus, sur la base de la problématique aristotélicienne, interprète l'enveloppement par le lieu du corps situé en lui comme une compénétration totale de l’un et de l'autre. Sa solution est plus physique et plus cosmologique que celle de Damascius : le lieu est une sphère corporelle de lumière pure en coïncidence parfaite avec la sphère cosmique. Le lieu est immobile, tandis que l'Univers se meut en lui. Damascius propose une solution plus métaphysique : le lieu est la mesure (incorporelle, quoique sensible) de la position. L'Univers a un lieu fixe, son lieu essentiel, d'où procèdent les lieux successifs qui sont les siens au cours de son mouvement. Proclus et Damascius, chacun à leur manière, établissent donc : que le Monde a un lieu (fixe) ; que le Monde se meut localement. Ils triomphent ainsi des apories dans lesquelles s'engageait la pensée d'Aristote. [conclusion p. 161] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/2CpsO1R1mVMqjay |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"510","_score":null,"_source":{"id":510,"authors_free":[{"id":707,"entry_id":510,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":138,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe","free_first_name":"Philippe","free_last_name":"Hoffmann","norm_person":{"id":138,"first_name":"Philippe ","last_name":"Hoffmann","full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/189361905","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":708,"entry_id":510,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":183,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Aujac, Germaine","free_first_name":"Germaine","free_last_name":"Aujac","norm_person":{"id":183,"first_name":"Germaine","last_name":"Aujac","full_name":"Aujac, Germaine","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/132761629","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":709,"entry_id":510,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":184,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Soubiran, Jean","free_first_name":"Jean","free_last_name":"Soubiran","norm_person":{"id":184,"first_name":"Jean","last_name":"Soubiran","full_name":"Soubiran, Jean","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/124279694","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius: Corollarium de loco","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius: Corollarium de loco"},"abstract":"En conclusion : La d\u00e9finition aristot\u00e9licienne du lieu comme \u00ab premi\u00e8re limite immobile de l'enveloppant \u00bb tente de concilier deux exigences contradictoires : le lieu est une enveloppe et il est immobile. Aristote est contraint de dire que le Monde n'est pas en un lieu, puisqu'il n'est envelopp\u00e9 par rien : s'il n'est nulle part, il ne peut non plus se mouvoir localement, ce qui est en contradiction avec l'\u00ab exp\u00e9rience \u00bb et avec d\u2019autres exigences du syst\u00e8me (la dignit\u00e9 du mouvement circulaire uniforme et \u00e9ternel convient \u00e0 la substance c\u00e9leste).\r\n\r\n Proclus, sur la base de la probl\u00e9matique aristot\u00e9licienne, interpr\u00e8te l'enveloppement par le lieu du corps situ\u00e9 en lui comme une comp\u00e9n\u00e9tration totale de l\u2019un et de l'autre. Sa solution est plus physique et plus cosmologique que celle de Damascius : le lieu est une sph\u00e8re corporelle de lumi\u00e8re pure en co\u00efncidence parfaite avec la sph\u00e8re cosmique. Le lieu est immobile, tandis que l'Univers se meut en lui.\r\n\r\n Damascius propose une solution plus m\u00e9taphysique : le lieu est la mesure (incorporelle, quoique sensible) de la position. L'Univers a un lieu fixe, son lieu essentiel, d'o\u00f9 proc\u00e8dent les lieux successifs qui sont les siens au cours de son mouvement.\r\n\r\nProclus et Damascius, chacun \u00e0 leur mani\u00e8re, \u00e9tablissent donc :\r\n\r\n que le Monde a un lieu (fixe) ;\r\n que le Monde se meut localement.\r\n\r\nIls triomphent ainsi des apories dans lesquelles s'engageait la pens\u00e9e d'Aristote. [conclusion p. 161]","btype":2,"date":"1979","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/2CpsO1R1mVMqjay","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":138,"full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":183,"full_name":"Aujac, Germaine","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":184,"full_name":"Soubiran, Jean","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":510,"section_of":140,"pages":"143-161","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":140,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"L'Astronomie dans l'antiquit\u00e9 classique. Actes du Colloque tenu \u00e0 l'Universit\u00e9 de Toulouse-le-Mirail, 21\u201323 Octobre, 1977","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Aujac\/Soubiran1979","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1979","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1979","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/TPeLfUa6KvbM1BN","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":140,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Les Belles Lettres","series":"Collection d'\u00c9tudes Anciennes","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1979]}
Title | "Simplikios" |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1975 |
Published in | Der kleine Pauly, Band 5 |
Pages | 205 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Dörrie, Heinrich |
Editor(s) | Konrat Ziegler |
Translator(s) |
Simplikios (Σιμπλίκιος), Neuplatoniker, Schüler des Ammonios, Sohnes des Hermeias. Simplikios muss von Alexandria nach Athen übergesiedelt sein. Als das Schließungsedikt von 529 erging, war er Mitglied der Akademie. Mit anderen Akademikern versuchte er, im persischen Reich, vermutlich zu Ktesiphon am Hofe des Königs Chosroes I., eine neue Stätte für philosophische Forschung und Lehre zu begründen. Das schlug fehl; 533 kehrte Simplikios mit seinen Kollegen ins Römische Reich zurück, wo es ihm untersagt war, eine Lehrtätigkeit auszuüben. Alle Schriften von Simplikios, die erhalten sind, wurden nach 533 verfasst. Er war der letzte Platoniker, der in seinen Schriften das Christentum angriff. Seine Werke sind durchweg Kommentare, allerdings ist kein Kommentar von ihm zu einem Dialog Platons bekannt; vermutlich erschien es ihm als zwecklos, mit den Kommentaren des Proklos in Wettstreit zu treten. Verloren ist sein Hauptwerk, der Kommentar zu Aristoteles’ Metaphysik. In Handschriften erhalten, aber noch nicht ediert, sind ein Kommentar zu Hermogenes’ τέχνη und zu Iamblichos’ περί τής Πυθαγόρου αἱρέσεως. Erhalten und sämtlich in den Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca ediert sind folgende Kommentare: De caelo, ed. J. L. Heiberg, 1894 (CAG VII). Categoriae, ed. C. Kalbfleisch, 1907 (CAG VIII). Physica, ed. H. Diels, 1882, 1895 (CAG IX und X). De anima, ed. M. Hayduck, 1882 (CAG XI). Das ungewöhnlichste Werk von Simplikios ist sein Kommentar zum Ἐγχειρίδιον des Epiktet. Die dringend notwendige Neuausgabe wird von Frau Dr. I. Hadot vorbereitet. Viele Kommentare anderer Platoniker sind aus Vorlesungen für Anfänger hervorgegangen. Im Vergleich dazu stehen die Kommentare von Simplikios auf einem weit höheren Niveau. Ihm, der nicht mehr lehren durfte, ging es darum, für künftige Gelehrte zu schreiben. „Gerade seine nüchternere Weise macht ihn im Verein mit seiner großen Gelehrsamkeit zu einem höchst achtenswerten Kommentator.“ (K. Praechter). In engem Zusammenhang damit steht, dass Simplikios vor allem im Kommentar zur Physik Zitate aus vorsokratischen Philosophen in beträchtlichem Umfang in seinen Text aufgenommen hat (Stellenverzeichnis bei Diels Vorsokratiker³, 638–640). Dass Empedokles und Parmenides für uns mehr sind als nur Namen, ist einzig Simplikios zu verdanken. Die Beweisführung von Simplikios tendiert dahin, dass aus allen Philosophen die gleiche σοφία und der gleiche λόγος spricht wie aus Platon. Das gilt für die Vorsokratiker ebenso wie für Aristoteles: Wo dieser Platon widerspricht, handelt es sich nur um eine Diskrepanz in Worten. So wird seine riesige Arbeit zu einer imposanten Apologie der Lehre, dass alle Philosophen – selbstverständlich auch Epiktet – immer nur die eine, stets sich selbst gleiche, unwandelbare Wahrheit verkündet haben. Außer dem RE-Artikel von K. Praechter gibt es keine zusammenfassende Würdigung von Simplikios. [the entire text] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/kSQQwhdCGL94DDh |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1292","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1292,"authors_free":[{"id":1881,"entry_id":1292,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":69,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"D\u00f6rrie, Heinrich ","free_first_name":"Heinrich ","free_last_name":"D\u00f6rrie","norm_person":{"id":69,"first_name":"Heinrich ","last_name":"D\u00f6rrie","full_name":"D\u00f6rrie, Heinrich ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118526375","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2697,"entry_id":1292,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Konrat Ziegler","free_first_name":"Konrat","free_last_name":"Ziegler","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"\"Simplikios\"","main_title":{"title":"\"Simplikios\""},"abstract":"Simplikios (\u03a3\u03b9\u03bc\u03c0\u03bb\u03af\u03ba\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2), Neuplatoniker, Sch\u00fcler des Ammonios, Sohnes des Hermeias. Simplikios muss von Alexandria nach Athen \u00fcbergesiedelt sein. Als das Schlie\u00dfungsedikt von 529 erging, war er Mitglied der Akademie. Mit anderen Akademikern versuchte er, im persischen Reich, vermutlich zu Ktesiphon am Hofe des K\u00f6nigs Chosroes I., eine neue St\u00e4tte f\u00fcr philosophische Forschung und Lehre zu begr\u00fcnden. Das schlug fehl; 533 kehrte Simplikios mit seinen Kollegen ins R\u00f6mische Reich zur\u00fcck, wo es ihm untersagt war, eine Lehrt\u00e4tigkeit auszu\u00fcben.\r\n\r\nAlle Schriften von Simplikios, die erhalten sind, wurden nach 533 verfasst. Er war der letzte Platoniker, der in seinen Schriften das Christentum angriff. Seine Werke sind durchweg Kommentare, allerdings ist kein Kommentar von ihm zu einem Dialog Platons bekannt; vermutlich erschien es ihm als zwecklos, mit den Kommentaren des Proklos in Wettstreit zu treten.\r\n\r\nVerloren ist sein Hauptwerk, der Kommentar zu Aristoteles\u2019 Metaphysik. In Handschriften erhalten, aber noch nicht ediert, sind ein Kommentar zu Hermogenes\u2019 \u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 und zu Iamblichos\u2019 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af \u03c4\u03ae\u03c2 \u03a0\u03c5\u03b8\u03b1\u03b3\u03cc\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b1\u1f31\u03c1\u03ad\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2. Erhalten und s\u00e4mtlich in den Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca ediert sind folgende Kommentare:\r\n\r\n De caelo, ed. J. L. Heiberg, 1894 (CAG VII).\r\n Categoriae, ed. C. Kalbfleisch, 1907 (CAG VIII).\r\n Physica, ed. H. Diels, 1882, 1895 (CAG IX und X).\r\n De anima, ed. M. Hayduck, 1882 (CAG XI).\r\n\r\nDas ungew\u00f6hnlichste Werk von Simplikios ist sein Kommentar zum \u1f18\u03b3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd des Epiktet. Die dringend notwendige Neuausgabe wird von Frau Dr. I. Hadot vorbereitet.\r\n\r\nViele Kommentare anderer Platoniker sind aus Vorlesungen f\u00fcr Anf\u00e4nger hervorgegangen. Im Vergleich dazu stehen die Kommentare von Simplikios auf einem weit h\u00f6heren Niveau. Ihm, der nicht mehr lehren durfte, ging es darum, f\u00fcr k\u00fcnftige Gelehrte zu schreiben. \u201eGerade seine n\u00fcchternere Weise macht ihn im Verein mit seiner gro\u00dfen Gelehrsamkeit zu einem h\u00f6chst achtenswerten Kommentator.\u201c (K. Praechter).\r\n\r\nIn engem Zusammenhang damit steht, dass Simplikios vor allem im Kommentar zur Physik Zitate aus vorsokratischen Philosophen in betr\u00e4chtlichem Umfang in seinen Text aufgenommen hat (Stellenverzeichnis bei Diels Vorsokratiker\u00b3, 638\u2013640). Dass Empedokles und Parmenides f\u00fcr uns mehr sind als nur Namen, ist einzig Simplikios zu verdanken.\r\n\r\nDie Beweisf\u00fchrung von Simplikios tendiert dahin, dass aus allen Philosophen die gleiche \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1 und der gleiche \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 spricht wie aus Platon. Das gilt f\u00fcr die Vorsokratiker ebenso wie f\u00fcr Aristoteles: Wo dieser Platon widerspricht, handelt es sich nur um eine Diskrepanz in Worten. So wird seine riesige Arbeit zu einer imposanten Apologie der Lehre, dass alle Philosophen \u2013 selbstverst\u00e4ndlich auch Epiktet \u2013 immer nur die eine, stets sich selbst gleiche, unwandelbare Wahrheit verk\u00fcndet haben.\r\n\r\nAu\u00dfer dem RE-Artikel von K. Praechter gibt es keine zusammenfassende W\u00fcrdigung von Simplikios. [the entire text]","btype":2,"date":"1975","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/kSQQwhdCGL94DDh","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":69,"full_name":"D\u00f6rrie, Heinrich ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1292,"section_of":264,"pages":"205","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":264,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Der kleine Pauly, Band 5","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sontheimer1975","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1975","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1975","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/nT4V3xwm4Jp1gS4","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":264,"pubplace":"M\u00fcnchen","publisher":"Druckenm\u00fcller","series":"Der Kleine Pauly. Lexikon der Antike","volume":"5","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1975]}
Title | Simplicius |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1975 |
Published in | Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Volume XII: IBN RUSHD - JEAN-SERVAIS STAS |
Pages | 440-443 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Verbeke, Gérard |
Editor(s) | Gillispie, Charles Coulston |
Translator(s) |
Simplicius was one of the most famous representatives of Neoplatonism in the sixth century. An outstanding scholar, he was the author of extensive commentaries on Aristotle that contain much valuable information on previous Greek philosophy, including the pre-Socratics. Very little is known of his life. According to Agathias (History, 11,30,3), he was born in Cilicia. He received his first philosophical education in Alexandria at the school of Ammonius Hermiae, the author of a large commentary on the Peri Hermeneias and on some other logical, physical, and metaphysical treatises of Aristotle. These works strongly influenced not only the commentaries of Simplicius but also those written by the philosophers of the Alexandrian School: Asclepius, Philoponus, and Olympiodorus. Simplicius also studied philosophy at Athens in the school of Damascius, the author of Problems and Solutions About the First Principles, known for his doctrine of the Ineffable First Principle. According to Damascius, no name is capable of expressing adequately the nature of that Principle, not even the Plotinian name of "the One." Damascius was the last pagan Neoplatonist in the unbroken succession of the Athenian school, where he was teaching when Justinian closed it in 529. Simplicius, who at that time was a member of Damascius’ circle, left Athens with him and five other philosophers and moved to Persia (531-532). Their exile was only temporary, for they returned to the empire after the treaty of peace between the Byzantines and the Persians (533). According to Agathias (History, 11,31,4), the terms of the treaty would have guaranteed to the philosophers full security in their own environment: they were not to be compelled to accept anything against their personal conviction, and they were never to be prevented from living according to their own philosophical doctrine. There are grounds for supposing that Simplicius settled in Athens after returning from Persia. Presumably, he was not allowed to deliver public lectures and thus could devote all his time to research and writing. Hence his commentaries are not related to any teaching activity; rather, they show the character of written expositions that carefully analyze the Aristotelian text and interpret it in the light of the whole history of Greek philosophy. Simplicius always endeavored to harmonize and reconcile Plato and Aristotle by reducing the differences between them to a question of vocabulary, point of view, or even misunderstanding of some Platonic theories by the Stagirite. Simplicius was not the first to take this approach. According to W. Jaeger, this trend can be traced to Posidonius and to Neoplatonic philosophy in general. The same method was certainly used by Ammonius, who always attempted to reduce the opposition between Plato and Aristotle to different viewpoints. For example, in dealing with Aristotle’s criticism of the theory of Ideas, Ammonius believed this criticism to concern not the authentic doctrine of Plato, but rather the opinion of some philosophers who attributed to the Ideas an independent subsistence, separate from the Intellect of the Demiurge (Asclepius, In Metaphysicorum, 69,24-27; 73,27). Apparently, Simplicius was persuaded that this approach was in agreement with the attitude of the philopatheis and that it uncovered the true meaning of philosophical doctrines. At first glance, he said, some theories seem to be quite contradictory, but a more accurate inquiry shows them to be reconcilable (In de Caelo, 159,3-9). Moreover, in explaining a philosophical text, one should not be biased for or against its author. Hence Simplicius opposed the method of Alexander, who from the beginning is suspicious of Plato in the same way that others are inspired with prejudice against Aristotle (In de Caelo, 297,1-4). Since agreement on an opinion, even a prephilosophical one, has often been considered a criterion of truth, Aristotle and the Stoics frequently used the argument of universal agreement. Therefore, having to cope with the increasing influence of Christianity, late Neoplatonic philosophers wanted to argue against the presumed disaccord between the main representatives of Greek philosophy, Plato and Aristotle, in order to enhance their own doctrine. As a Christian, Philoponus did not have the same motives for harmonizing Plato and Aristotle; he firmly opposed attempts to reconcile them and called this interpretation a kind of mythology. Aristotle, he held, did not argue against those who misunderstood Plato but against the authentic Platonic doctrine. As a commentator, Simplicius did not overestimate his own contributions but was quite aware of his debt to other philosophers, especially to Alexander, Iamblichus, and Porphyry (In Categorias, 3,10-13). He did not hesitate to call his own commentaries a mere introduction to the writings of these famous masters (In Categorias, 3,13-17), nor did he cling fanatically to his own interpretations; he was happy to exchange them for better explanations (In Categorias, 350,8-9). On the other hand, the work of a commentator is far from being a neutral undertaking or a question of mere erudition; it is chiefly an opportunity to become more familiar with the text under consideration and to elucidate some intricate passages (In Enchiridion, Praefatio, 2,24-29; In de Caelo, 102,15; 166,14-16; In Categorias, 3,4-6). Hence Simplicius’ constant concern to obtain reliable documents and to check the historical value of this information, as when he verified the information provided by Alexander about the squaring of the circle according to Hippocrates of Chios (In Physicorum, 60,22-68, 32). Simplicius adhered to the Aristotelian doctrine of the eternity of the world, as a theory that fits perfectly into the Neoplatonic ontology insofar as the eternal movement of the heavens is a necessary link between the pure eternity of the intelligible reality and the temporal character of material beings. With respect to this question, Simplicius strongly opposed Philoponus, who asserted the beginning of the world through divine creation. Philoponus, however, did not argue as a Christian, nor did he base his refutation of the Aristotelian doctrine on arguments drawn from his Christian faith. According to him, God is the principle of whatever exists: if time is infinite, nothing may ever come to be, because an infinite number of conditions of possibility are to be fulfilled before anything could begin to exist—which is clearly impossible. Simplicius’ notion of “infinite” is different; it does not mean an infinity existing at once, but a possibility of transcending any boundary. Consequently, the conception of time exposed by both authors is not the same. Simplicius professed a cyclical conception; Philoponus adhered to a linear view without regular return of the same events. Philoponus also substantiated divine creation in time, without preexisting matter; whereas Simplicius maintained that although heaven, the first and highest corporeal reality, is totally dependent upon God, it has never come to exist; it must be eternal because it springs immediately from God. [introduction p. 440-441] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/dKqS8TkSYL9fWNO |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1393","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1393,"authors_free":[{"id":2163,"entry_id":1393,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2165,"entry_id":1393,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":354,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Gillispie, Charles Coulston","free_first_name":"Charles Coulston","free_last_name":"Gillispie","norm_person":{"id":354,"first_name":"Charles Coulston","last_name":"Gillispie","full_name":"Gillispie, Charles Coulston","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117710539","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius"},"abstract":"Simplicius was one of the most famous representatives of Neoplatonism in the sixth century. An outstanding scholar, he was the author of extensive commentaries on Aristotle that contain much valuable information on previous Greek philosophy, including the pre-Socratics.\r\n\r\nVery little is known of his life. According to Agathias (History, 11,30,3), he was born in Cilicia. He received his first philosophical education in Alexandria at the school of Ammonius Hermiae, the author of a large commentary on the Peri Hermeneias and on some other logical, physical, and metaphysical treatises of Aristotle. These works strongly influenced not only the commentaries of Simplicius but also those written by the philosophers of the Alexandrian School: Asclepius, Philoponus, and Olympiodorus.\r\n\r\nSimplicius also studied philosophy at Athens in the school of Damascius, the author of Problems and Solutions About the First Principles, known for his doctrine of the Ineffable First Principle. According to Damascius, no name is capable of expressing adequately the nature of that Principle, not even the Plotinian name of \"the One.\" Damascius was the last pagan Neoplatonist in the unbroken succession of the Athenian school, where he was teaching when Justinian closed it in 529. Simplicius, who at that time was a member of Damascius\u2019 circle, left Athens with him and five other philosophers and moved to Persia (531-532). Their exile was only temporary, for they returned to the empire after the treaty of peace between the Byzantines and the Persians (533). According to Agathias (History, 11,31,4), the terms of the treaty would have guaranteed to the philosophers full security in their own environment: they were not to be compelled to accept anything against their personal conviction, and they were never to be prevented from living according to their own philosophical doctrine.\r\n\r\nThere are grounds for supposing that Simplicius settled in Athens after returning from Persia. Presumably, he was not allowed to deliver public lectures and thus could devote all his time to research and writing. Hence his commentaries are not related to any teaching activity; rather, they show the character of written expositions that carefully analyze the Aristotelian text and interpret it in the light of the whole history of Greek philosophy. Simplicius always endeavored to harmonize and reconcile Plato and Aristotle by reducing the differences between them to a question of vocabulary, point of view, or even misunderstanding of some Platonic theories by the Stagirite.\r\n\r\nSimplicius was not the first to take this approach. According to W. Jaeger, this trend can be traced to Posidonius and to Neoplatonic philosophy in general. The same method was certainly used by Ammonius, who always attempted to reduce the opposition between Plato and Aristotle to different viewpoints. For example, in dealing with Aristotle\u2019s criticism of the theory of Ideas, Ammonius believed this criticism to concern not the authentic doctrine of Plato, but rather the opinion of some philosophers who attributed to the Ideas an independent subsistence, separate from the Intellect of the Demiurge (Asclepius, In Metaphysicorum, 69,24-27; 73,27).\r\n\r\nApparently, Simplicius was persuaded that this approach was in agreement with the attitude of the philopatheis and that it uncovered the true meaning of philosophical doctrines. At first glance, he said, some theories seem to be quite contradictory, but a more accurate inquiry shows them to be reconcilable (In de Caelo, 159,3-9). Moreover, in explaining a philosophical text, one should not be biased for or against its author. Hence Simplicius opposed the method of Alexander, who from the beginning is suspicious of Plato in the same way that others are inspired with prejudice against Aristotle (In de Caelo, 297,1-4). Since agreement on an opinion, even a prephilosophical one, has often been considered a criterion of truth, Aristotle and the Stoics frequently used the argument of universal agreement. Therefore, having to cope with the increasing influence of Christianity, late Neoplatonic philosophers wanted to argue against the presumed disaccord between the main representatives of Greek philosophy, Plato and Aristotle, in order to enhance their own doctrine. As a Christian, Philoponus did not have the same motives for harmonizing Plato and Aristotle; he firmly opposed attempts to reconcile them and called this interpretation a kind of mythology. Aristotle, he held, did not argue against those who misunderstood Plato but against the authentic Platonic doctrine.\r\n\r\nAs a commentator, Simplicius did not overestimate his own contributions but was quite aware of his debt to other philosophers, especially to Alexander, Iamblichus, and Porphyry (In Categorias, 3,10-13). He did not hesitate to call his own commentaries a mere introduction to the writings of these famous masters (In Categorias, 3,13-17), nor did he cling fanatically to his own interpretations; he was happy to exchange them for better explanations (In Categorias, 350,8-9). On the other hand, the work of a commentator is far from being a neutral undertaking or a question of mere erudition; it is chiefly an opportunity to become more familiar with the text under consideration and to elucidate some intricate passages (In Enchiridion, Praefatio, 2,24-29; In de Caelo, 102,15; 166,14-16; In Categorias, 3,4-6). Hence Simplicius\u2019 constant concern to obtain reliable documents and to check the historical value of this information, as when he verified the information provided by Alexander about the squaring of the circle according to Hippocrates of Chios (In Physicorum, 60,22-68, 32).\r\n\r\nSimplicius adhered to the Aristotelian doctrine of the eternity of the world, as a theory that fits perfectly into the Neoplatonic ontology insofar as the eternal movement of the heavens is a necessary link between the pure eternity of the intelligible reality and the temporal character of material beings. With respect to this question, Simplicius strongly opposed Philoponus, who asserted the beginning of the world through divine creation. Philoponus, however, did not argue as a Christian, nor did he base his refutation of the Aristotelian doctrine on arguments drawn from his Christian faith. According to him, God is the principle of whatever exists: if time is infinite, nothing may ever come to be, because an infinite number of conditions of possibility are to be fulfilled before anything could begin to exist\u2014which is clearly impossible. Simplicius\u2019 notion of \u201cinfinite\u201d is different; it does not mean an infinity existing at once, but a possibility of transcending any boundary. Consequently, the conception of time exposed by both authors is not the same. Simplicius professed a cyclical conception; Philoponus adhered to a linear view without regular return of the same events. Philoponus also substantiated divine creation in time, without preexisting matter; whereas Simplicius maintained that although heaven, the first and highest corporeal reality, is totally dependent upon God, it has never come to exist; it must be eternal because it springs immediately from God. [introduction p. 440-441]","btype":2,"date":"1975","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/dKqS8TkSYL9fWNO","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":354,"full_name":"Gillispie, Charles Coulston","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1393,"section_of":1394,"pages":"440-443","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1394,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Volume XII: IBN RUSHD - JEAN-SERVAIS STAS","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1975","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Pt8Q1J4Rc3TbiFs","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1394,"pubplace":"New York","publisher":"Charles Scriber\u2019s Sons","series":"","volume":"XII","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1975]}
Title | La critique d’authenticite chez les commentateurs grecs d’Aristote |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1974 |
Published in | Mansel’e Armağan. Mélanges Mansel, vol. I |
Pages | 265-288 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Moraux, Paul |
Editor(s) | Akurgal, Ekrem , Alkım, Uluğ Bahadır , Mansel, Arif Müfid |
Translator(s) |
Tout comme l’archéologie, la numismatique ou l’épigraphie, l’histoire littéraire est parfois amenée à se demander si les matériaux sur lesquels elle travaille sont bien authentiques. Dans la transmission des textes antiques, en effet, les erreurs fortuites d’attribution devaient se produire plus aisément que de nos jours. Par ailleurs, la notion de propriété littéraire était assez flottante ; un auteur plus récent ne se faisait aucun scrupule à reproduire, parfois littéralement, ce qu’un auteur plus ancien avait écrit sur le même sujet. Enfin, pour les raisons les plus diverses, il y a eu parfois fraude délibérée, le faussaire lançant sous un autre nom, souvent un nom illustre, un ouvrage de son cru. Il est remarquable que, dans les derniers siècles de l’Antiquité grecque, les commentateurs d’Aristote se soient posé la question de savoir si tel ou tel écrit dont ils avaient à s’occuper était bien l’œuvre d’Aristote. Divers témoignages nous apprennent même que le problème de l’authenticité était l’un de ceux que le commentateur devait aborder dans son introduction, avant de s’attaquer à l’analyse et à l’interprétation du texte proprement dit. On se rappellera que dans une sorte d’introduction générale à la lecture d’Aristote, Ammonius et plusieurs autres commentateurs issus de son école s’arrêtaient aux dix questions suivantes : D’où les diverses écoles philosophiques tirent-elles leur nom ? Comment faut-il classer les ouvrages d’Aristote ? Par quelle discipline doit-on commencer l’étude de la philosophie aristotélicienne ? Quel est le but de cette philosophie ? Par quels moyens peut-on arriver à ce but ? Quels sont les caractères de l’exposé ou du style d’Aristote ? Comment justifier l’obscurité d’Aristote ? Quelles sont les qualités requises de l’interprète d’Aristote ? Quelles sont les qualités requises de l’étudiant qui aborde la philosophie d’Aristote ? Quelles questions convient-il d’examiner avant d’étudier chaque traité en particulier ? Nous n’avons pas à nous étendre ici sur le problème, assez controversé, de l’origine de ce schéma. Disons simplement que, même si sa forme stéréotypée est assez récente, certains de ses éléments sont à coup sûr bien antérieurs à Ammonius, chez qui le schéma apparaît pour la première fois. C’est le dixième point qui doit retenir ici notre attention. De l’avis des commentateurs, il convient, en effet, avant d’expliquer chaque traité, de répondre dans l’introduction aux six questions suivantes : Quel est le but du traité en question ? Quelle est son utilité ? Quelle est sa place dans l’œuvre d’Aristote ? Comment expliquer son titre ? Le traité est-il authentique ? Quelles en sont les grandes divisions ? Bien sûr, toutes ces questions ne se posent pas dans tous les cas avec la même acuité : il peut arriver, par exemple, que l’utilité de l’ouvrage soit évidente, ou que son titre soit clair, ou encore que son authenticité saute aux yeux et n’ait jamais été contestée ; alors, le commentateur n’aura pas à s’étendre sur ces questions. Quoi qu’il en soit, il est intéressant de noter que le problème de l’authenticité faisait partie des sujets habituellement abordés par les commentateurs dans leurs introductions aux divers ouvrages d’Aristote. Nous nous proposons d’examiner, dans les pages qui suivent, les quelques traces de cette critique d’authenticité qui ont survécu dans les commentaires arrivés jusqu’à nous. Plusieurs commentateurs néoplatoniciens indiquent pour quelles raisons et à la suite de quelles circonstances il a pu se faire que l’on attribue au Stagirite des ouvrages n’émanant pas de lui. En gros, ils citent les motifs suivants : Certains rois payaient bien les textes qu’ils acquéraient pour les bibliothèques qu’ils avaient créées ; cela ne pouvait qu’inciter les faussaires au travail. Par ailleurs, la similitude de certains noms d’auteurs ou de certains titres a pu provoquer des confusions ou des erreurs d’attribution. Enfin, partant de bonnes intentions, certains disciples ont fait à leur maître l’honneur de lui attribuer leurs propres productions. Ces indications des commentateurs sur les causes des attributions erronées viennent de faire l’objet d’une bonne étude ; nous n’y reviendrons donc pas. En revanche, nous croyons utile d’examiner plus en détail les déclarations des commentateurs relatives à l’authenticité de certains traités du corpus aristotelicum. Cela nous permettra de voir quels arguments étaient utilisés pour établir ou contester l’authenticité d’un ouvrage, et aussi de mesurer la valeur des jugements portés dans les différents cas. Les traités ou parties de traités sur lesquels nous possédons, à cet égard, des renseignements concrets sont : les Catégories, les Postprédicaments (chapitres 10-15 des Catégories), le De interpretatione, les Analytiques, la Physique, les Météorologiques, et les deux premiers livres de la Métaphysique. [introduction p. 265-267] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/0K9jPcuuBUt3j54 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"956","_score":null,"_source":{"id":956,"authors_free":[{"id":1434,"entry_id":956,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":137,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Moraux, Paul","free_first_name":"Paul","free_last_name":"Moraux","norm_person":{"id":137,"first_name":"Paul ","last_name":"Moraux","full_name":"Moraux, Paul ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117755591","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2111,"entry_id":956,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":262,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Akurgal, Ekrem","free_first_name":"Ekrem","free_last_name":"Akurgal","norm_person":{"id":262,"first_name":"Ekrem","last_name":"Akurgal","full_name":"Akurgal, Ekrem","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118859358","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2112,"entry_id":956,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":261,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Alk\u0131m, Ulu\u011f Bahad\u0131r","free_first_name":"Ulu\u011f Bahad\u0131r","free_last_name":"Alk\u0131m","norm_person":{"id":261,"first_name":"Ulu\u011f Bahad\u0131r","last_name":"Alk\u0131m","full_name":"Alk\u0131m, Ulu\u011f Bahad\u0131r","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118859137","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2410,"entry_id":956,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":260,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Mansel, Arif M\u00fcfid","free_first_name":"Arif M\u00fcfid","free_last_name":"Mansel","norm_person":{"id":260,"first_name":"Arif M\u00fcfid","last_name":"Mansel","full_name":"Mansel, Arif M\u00fcfid","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119020068","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"La critique d\u2019authenticite chez les commentateurs grecs d\u2019Aristote","main_title":{"title":"La critique d\u2019authenticite chez les commentateurs grecs d\u2019Aristote"},"abstract":"Tout comme l\u2019arch\u00e9ologie, la numismatique ou l\u2019\u00e9pigraphie, l\u2019histoire litt\u00e9raire est parfois amen\u00e9e \u00e0 se demander si les mat\u00e9riaux sur lesquels elle travaille sont bien authentiques. Dans la transmission des textes antiques, en effet, les erreurs fortuites d\u2019attribution devaient se produire plus ais\u00e9ment que de nos jours. Par ailleurs, la notion de propri\u00e9t\u00e9 litt\u00e9raire \u00e9tait assez flottante\u202f; un auteur plus r\u00e9cent ne se faisait aucun scrupule \u00e0 reproduire, parfois litt\u00e9ralement, ce qu\u2019un auteur plus ancien avait \u00e9crit sur le m\u00eame sujet. Enfin, pour les raisons les plus diverses, il y a eu parfois fraude d\u00e9lib\u00e9r\u00e9e, le faussaire lan\u00e7ant sous un autre nom, souvent un nom illustre, un ouvrage de son cru.\r\n\r\nIl est remarquable que, dans les derniers si\u00e8cles de l\u2019Antiquit\u00e9 grecque, les commentateurs d\u2019Aristote se soient pos\u00e9 la question de savoir si tel ou tel \u00e9crit dont ils avaient \u00e0 s\u2019occuper \u00e9tait bien l\u2019\u0153uvre d\u2019Aristote. Divers t\u00e9moignages nous apprennent m\u00eame que le probl\u00e8me de l\u2019authenticit\u00e9 \u00e9tait l\u2019un de ceux que le commentateur devait aborder dans son introduction, avant de s\u2019attaquer \u00e0 l\u2019analyse et \u00e0 l\u2019interpr\u00e9tation du texte proprement dit. On se rappellera que dans une sorte d\u2019introduction g\u00e9n\u00e9rale \u00e0 la lecture d\u2019Aristote, Ammonius et plusieurs autres commentateurs issus de son \u00e9cole s\u2019arr\u00eataient aux dix questions suivantes :\r\n\r\n D\u2019o\u00f9 les diverses \u00e9coles philosophiques tirent-elles leur nom ?\r\n Comment faut-il classer les ouvrages d\u2019Aristote ?\r\n Par quelle discipline doit-on commencer l\u2019\u00e9tude de la philosophie aristot\u00e9licienne ?\r\n Quel est le but de cette philosophie ?\r\n Par quels moyens peut-on arriver \u00e0 ce but ?\r\n Quels sont les caract\u00e8res de l\u2019expos\u00e9 ou du style d\u2019Aristote ?\r\n Comment justifier l\u2019obscurit\u00e9 d\u2019Aristote ?\r\n Quelles sont les qualit\u00e9s requises de l\u2019interpr\u00e8te d\u2019Aristote ?\r\n Quelles sont les qualit\u00e9s requises de l\u2019\u00e9tudiant qui aborde la philosophie d\u2019Aristote ?\r\n Quelles questions convient-il d\u2019examiner avant d\u2019\u00e9tudier chaque trait\u00e9 en particulier ?\r\n\r\nNous n\u2019avons pas \u00e0 nous \u00e9tendre ici sur le probl\u00e8me, assez controvers\u00e9, de l\u2019origine de ce sch\u00e9ma. Disons simplement que, m\u00eame si sa forme st\u00e9r\u00e9otyp\u00e9e est assez r\u00e9cente, certains de ses \u00e9l\u00e9ments sont \u00e0 coup s\u00fbr bien ant\u00e9rieurs \u00e0 Ammonius, chez qui le sch\u00e9ma appara\u00eet pour la premi\u00e8re fois. C\u2019est le dixi\u00e8me point qui doit retenir ici notre attention. De l\u2019avis des commentateurs, il convient, en effet, avant d\u2019expliquer chaque trait\u00e9, de r\u00e9pondre dans l\u2019introduction aux six questions suivantes :\r\n\r\n Quel est le but du trait\u00e9 en question ?\r\n Quelle est son utilit\u00e9 ?\r\n Quelle est sa place dans l\u2019\u0153uvre d\u2019Aristote ?\r\n Comment expliquer son titre ?\r\n Le trait\u00e9 est-il authentique ?\r\n Quelles en sont les grandes divisions ?\r\n\r\nBien s\u00fbr, toutes ces questions ne se posent pas dans tous les cas avec la m\u00eame acuit\u00e9\u202f: il peut arriver, par exemple, que l\u2019utilit\u00e9 de l\u2019ouvrage soit \u00e9vidente, ou que son titre soit clair, ou encore que son authenticit\u00e9 saute aux yeux et n\u2019ait jamais \u00e9t\u00e9 contest\u00e9e\u202f; alors, le commentateur n\u2019aura pas \u00e0 s\u2019\u00e9tendre sur ces questions. Quoi qu\u2019il en soit, il est int\u00e9ressant de noter que le probl\u00e8me de l\u2019authenticit\u00e9 faisait partie des sujets habituellement abord\u00e9s par les commentateurs dans leurs introductions aux divers ouvrages d\u2019Aristote.\r\n\r\nNous nous proposons d\u2019examiner, dans les pages qui suivent, les quelques traces de cette critique d\u2019authenticit\u00e9 qui ont surv\u00e9cu dans les commentaires arriv\u00e9s jusqu\u2019\u00e0 nous. Plusieurs commentateurs n\u00e9oplatoniciens indiquent pour quelles raisons et \u00e0 la suite de quelles circonstances il a pu se faire que l\u2019on attribue au Stagirite des ouvrages n\u2019\u00e9manant pas de lui. En gros, ils citent les motifs suivants :\r\n\r\n Certains rois payaient bien les textes qu\u2019ils acqu\u00e9raient pour les biblioth\u00e8ques qu\u2019ils avaient cr\u00e9\u00e9es\u202f; cela ne pouvait qu\u2019inciter les faussaires au travail.\r\n Par ailleurs, la similitude de certains noms d\u2019auteurs ou de certains titres a pu provoquer des confusions ou des erreurs d\u2019attribution.\r\n Enfin, partant de bonnes intentions, certains disciples ont fait \u00e0 leur ma\u00eetre l\u2019honneur de lui attribuer leurs propres productions.\r\n\r\nCes indications des commentateurs sur les causes des attributions erron\u00e9es viennent de faire l\u2019objet d\u2019une bonne \u00e9tude\u202f; nous n\u2019y reviendrons donc pas. En revanche, nous croyons utile d\u2019examiner plus en d\u00e9tail les d\u00e9clarations des commentateurs relatives \u00e0 l\u2019authenticit\u00e9 de certains trait\u00e9s du corpus aristotelicum. Cela nous permettra de voir quels arguments \u00e9taient utilis\u00e9s pour \u00e9tablir ou contester l\u2019authenticit\u00e9 d\u2019un ouvrage, et aussi de mesurer la valeur des jugements port\u00e9s dans les diff\u00e9rents cas.\r\n\r\nLes trait\u00e9s ou parties de trait\u00e9s sur lesquels nous poss\u00e9dons, \u00e0 cet \u00e9gard, des renseignements concrets sont :\r\n\r\n les Cat\u00e9gories,\r\n les Postpr\u00e9dicaments (chapitres 10-15 des Cat\u00e9gories),\r\n le De interpretatione,\r\n les Analytiques,\r\n la Physique,\r\n les M\u00e9t\u00e9orologiques,\r\n et les deux premiers livres de la M\u00e9taphysique. [introduction p. 265-267]","btype":2,"date":"1974","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/0K9jPcuuBUt3j54","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":137,"full_name":"Moraux, Paul ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":262,"full_name":"Akurgal, Ekrem","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":261,"full_name":"Alk\u0131m, Ulu\u011f Bahad\u0131r","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":260,"full_name":"Mansel, Arif M\u00fcfid","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":956,"section_of":296,"pages":"265-288","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":296,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Mansel\u2019e Arma\u011fan. M\u00e9langes Mansel, vol. I","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Mansel1974","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1974","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1974","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ySvGVCjObmF3lEv","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":296,"pubplace":"Ankara","publisher":"T\u00fcrk Tarih Kurumu Bas\u0131mevi","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1974]}
Title | Vorschläge zur Lösung des Problems der Xenophanesberichte von MXG und Simplikios |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1974 |
Published in | PS.-Aristoteles, MXG : Der historische Wert des Xenophanesreferats. Beiträge zur Geschichte des Eleatismus |
Pages | 261-319 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
Zwischen den Xenophanesreferaten von MXG und Simplikios besteht keine völlige Parallelität, weshalb inXG als Quelle von Simplikios ausscheidet. Denn während die MXG-Prädikate 1, 2, 3, 6 (977 a 14-36, 977 b 3-18; und Simpl.Phys. 22,31- 23,9 einer gemeinsamen Vorlage ent stammen, die wir wegen gewisser Eigenheiten als "spät- eleatische Quelle" bezeichneten, hat MXG zusätzlich einen Mittelteil (977 a 37- 977 b 2; mit formal vom Rest abweichenden (kürzere und einfachere Aussage ohne Dichotomie) und zu diesem teilweise widersprüchlichen Prädikaten (Unvereinbarkeit Kugel - Grenzantinomie;. Prädikate dieses MXG-Mittelteils findet Simplikios Phys. 23,16 ff. bei Alexander und greift sie an; da aber auch der zuverlässige Theophrastexzerptor hippolytos sie in gleicher Polge wie Alexander innerhalb einer Prädikat reihe für den Gott des Xenophanes nennt (Ref. I 14,2), geht also der Mittelteil des MXG-Referats auf dieselben Ausführungen des Eresiers zurück.Doch auch Simplikios gibt über das mit MXG Gemeinsame hinaus Auszüge aus Theophrast (dessen Dame Phys. 22,28- 29), die unverkennbar Elemente aus Aristoteles Metaphys. 986 b 10 ff. enthalten. [conclusion p. 319] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/tEjo8iqE5bxx49Z |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"433","_score":null,"_source":{"id":433,"authors_free":[{"id":583,"entry_id":433,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2170,"entry_id":433,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Vorschl\u00e4ge zur L\u00f6sung des Problems der Xenophanesberichte von MXG und Simplikios","main_title":{"title":"Vorschl\u00e4ge zur L\u00f6sung des Problems der Xenophanesberichte von MXG und Simplikios"},"abstract":"Zwischen den Xenophanesreferaten von MXG und Simplikios \r\nbesteht keine v\u00f6llige Parallelit\u00e4t, weshalb inXG als \r\nQuelle von Simplikios ausscheidet. Denn w\u00e4hrend die \r\nMXG-Pr\u00e4dikate 1, 2, 3, 6 (977 a 14-36, 977 b 3-18; und \r\nSimpl.Phys. 22,31- 23,9 einer gemeinsamen Vorlage ent\u00ad\r\nstammen, die wir wegen gewisser Eigenheiten als \"sp\u00e4t- \r\neleatische Quelle\" bezeichneten, hat MXG zus\u00e4tzlich \r\neinen Mittelteil (977 a 37- 977 b 2; mit formal vom \r\nRest abweichenden (k\u00fcrzere und einfachere Aussage ohne \r\nDichotomie) und zu diesem teilweise widerspr\u00fcchlichen \r\nPr\u00e4dikaten (Unvereinbarkeit Kugel - Grenzantinomie;. \r\nPr\u00e4dikate dieses MXG-Mittelteils findet Simplikios Phys. \r\n23,16 ff. bei Alexander und greift sie an; da aber auch \r\nder zuverl\u00e4ssige Theophrastexzerptor hippolytos sie in \r\ngleicher Polge wie Alexander innerhalb einer Pr\u00e4dikat\u00ad\r\nreihe f\u00fcr den Gott des Xenophanes nennt (Ref. I 14,2), \r\ngeht also der Mittelteil des MXG-Referats auf dieselben \r\nAusf\u00fchrungen des Eresiers zur\u00fcck.Doch auch Simplikios gibt \u00fcber das mit MXG Gemeinsame \r\nhinaus Ausz\u00fcge aus Theophrast (dessen Dame Phys. 22,28- \r\n29), die unverkennbar Elemente aus Aristoteles Metaphys. \r\n986 b 10 ff. enthalten. [conclusion p. 319]","btype":2,"date":"1974","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/tEjo8iqE5bxx49Z","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":433,"section_of":2,"pages":"261-319","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":2,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":1,"language":"de","title":"PS.-Aristoteles, MXG : Der historische Wert des Xenophanesreferats. Beitr\u00e4ge zur Geschichte des Eleatismus","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner1974a","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1974","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1974","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wvYIPOcDKdaOGFN","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":2,"pubplace":"Amsterdam","publisher":"Hakkert","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1974]}
Title | Das Xenophanesreferat von MXG - Eine Wiedergabe Theophrasts? Zur These von Peter Steinmetz: 1. Theophrast als Autor der antinomischen Prädikate (MXG 977 b 3-18, Simpl.Phys. 23, 4-14)? |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1974 |
Published in | PS.-Aristoteles, MXG : Der historische Wert des Xenophanesreferats. Beiträge zur Geschichte des Eleatismus |
Pages | 208-229 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
Ziel dieses Kapitels war es zunächst, die Rückführbarkeit des Xenophanes-Referates von Simplikios und MXG auf Theophrast anhand eines Beispiels zu überprüfen. Wenn dabei die These von Steinmetz an einem entscheidenden Punkt erschüttert worden ist, da MXG mit den antinomischen Prädikaten ebensowenig eine zuverlässige Wiedergabe des Eresiers sein kann wie Simplikios, stellt sich die Frage: Was wird aus seiner Herleitung der beiden Parallelberichte teils aus den φυσικαὶ δόξαι, teils aus der Physik? [conclusion p. 229] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/3Dxf4dLb8SNzbok |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"434","_score":null,"_source":{"id":434,"authors_free":[{"id":584,"entry_id":434,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2169,"entry_id":434,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Das Xenophanesreferat von MXG - Eine Wiedergabe Theophrasts? Zur These von Peter Steinmetz: 1. Theophrast als Autor der antinomischen Pr\u00e4dikate (MXG 977 b 3-18, Simpl.Phys. 23, 4-14)?","main_title":{"title":"Das Xenophanesreferat von MXG - Eine Wiedergabe Theophrasts? Zur These von Peter Steinmetz: 1. Theophrast als Autor der antinomischen Pr\u00e4dikate (MXG 977 b 3-18, Simpl.Phys. 23, 4-14)?"},"abstract":"Ziel dieses Kapitels war es zun\u00e4chst, die R\u00fcckf\u00fchrbarkeit des Xenophanes-Referates von Simplikios und MXG auf Theophrast anhand eines Beispiels zu \u00fcberpr\u00fcfen. Wenn dabei die These von Steinmetz an einem entscheidenden Punkt ersch\u00fcttert worden ist, da MXG mit den antinomischen Pr\u00e4dikaten ebensowenig eine zuverl\u00e4ssige Wiedergabe des Eresiers sein kann wie Simplikios, stellt sich die Frage: Was wird aus seiner Herleitung der beiden Parallelberichte teils aus den \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1\u03b9, teils aus der Physik? [conclusion p. 229]","btype":2,"date":"1974","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/3Dxf4dLb8SNzbok","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":434,"section_of":2,"pages":"208-229","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":2,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":1,"language":"de","title":"PS.-Aristoteles, MXG : Der historische Wert des Xenophanesreferats. Beitr\u00e4ge zur Geschichte des Eleatismus","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner1974a","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1974","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1974","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wvYIPOcDKdaOGFN","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":2,"pubplace":"Amsterdam","publisher":"Hakkert","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1974]}
Title | Die Beweise für die Unbewegtheit und Unveränderlichkeit des Seienden (MXG 974 a 14 - b 8) |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1974 |
Published in | PS.-Aristoteles, MXG : Der historische Wert des Xenophanesreferats. Beiträge zur Geschichte des Eleatismus |
Pages | 99-164 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
Wie nach der Diskussion aller textlichen Prägen völlig eindeutig ist, erwähnt der MXG-Autor in 976a12 Körperlichkeit des Einen für Melissos: hôs autos legei meint diesen Eleaten ebenso wie das spätere kai autos houtô g' einai axioi in 976a23. Die Stelle ist zur Beurteilung der Zuverlässigkeit des Autors von Wert, wie immer man sie erklären mag, weil Kenntnis des Originals auf jeden Fall ausscheidet. Wenn (a) kai touto sôma, wie es den Anschein hat, noch zu dem Zitat hôs autos legei gehört, kann diese Angabe nur aus einer Sekundärquelle geschöpft sein; aber auch falls (b) hôs autos legei, wie Apelt annimmt, allein auf ev zu beziehen ist und kai touto sôma bereits ein eigenständiger Zusatz des MXG-Autors ist, kann diesem die Aussage des Originals kaum bekannt gewesen sein. Denn in seiner Stellungnahme geht der Anonymus, selbst wenn er z.T. inadäquate Ausdeutungen daran anknüpft (z.B. homoion als homoimeres), prinzipiell von den ihm bekannten Thesen des Melissos aus. Die Annahme von sôma und mere für den Eleaten kann daher eigentlich nur bedeuten, dass dessen wirkliche Ansichten dem Autor nicht vorlagen, ihm also offenbar keine über das Referat hinausgehenden Positionen des Melissos verfügbar waren. Gegen das Zeugnis des Simplikios lassen sich somit die Angaben von MXG, wie es Zeller wollte, nicht ausspielen. Der Neuplatoniker sagt mit Recht Unkörperlichkeit für das melisseische Seiende aus; wenn er von diesem als ideellem, vollkommenem im Gegensatz zum körperlichen, kontingenten Seienden spricht (Simpl. Phys. 650,5) und in der Paraphrase den Terminus to haplôs on anwendet (Phys. 103,18-19), darf der Abstand zu dem ideellen Seienden des mit Platon einsetzenden Dualismus natürlich nicht übersehen werden. Die Eleaten verbleiben auf der Ebene dieses Seins, wie es Aristoteles (Cael. I 1, 298b21 ff.) sehr deutlich formuliert: Sie hätten nichts außer den tôn aisthetôn ousia angenommen, auf die sie die für die Existenz von Wissen notwendigen, von ihnen zuerst erkannten Charakteristika des eigentlichen Seins übertragen hätten. Melissos ist dabei radikaler als Parmenides verfahren: Dieser hatte – stets unter Bezug auf dieses Sein – nach einem Aufriss gemäß den Forderungen des Denkens dann in der Doxa-Lehre den geläufigen Anschauungen in gewisser Weise Rechnung getragen; demgegenüber betrachtet Melissos dieses Sein allein unter dem Gesichtspunkt der deduzierten Prädikate. Einen mit Parmenides vergleichbaren Doxateil, wie es Reinhardt annehmen wollte, gibt es bei ihm nicht; wohl aber gibt es, wie die voraufgehenden Untersuchungen gezeigt haben, einen zweiten Teil der Schrift des Melissos, in dem pluralistische Konzeptionen wie Vielheit und Mischung am eleatischen Einen und seinen Eigenschaften gemessen und abgelehnt wurden. In diesen Zusammenhang ließ sich auch das umstrittene fr. B9 einordnen, dessen sprachliche Formulierung enge Berührungen mit B8 aufweist: ei ... eiê bezieht sich auf die gegnerische Konzeption (B9 wie B8,6), die im Falle einer wirklichen Existenz dem Kriterium des eleatischen Einen genügen müsste (dei-Satz in B9, kei-Sätze in B8,6; B8,2). Wenn nun, wie es in B9 weiter heißt, sôma und pachos Teile implizieren, musste Melissos für das Seiende eine solche Körperlichkeit ausschließen. [conclusion p. 163-164] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/rdmGYdcJSPKrtIL |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"435","_score":null,"_source":{"id":435,"authors_free":[{"id":585,"entry_id":435,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2168,"entry_id":435,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Die Beweise f\u00fcr die Unbewegtheit und Unver\u00e4nderlichkeit des Seienden (MXG 974 a 14 - b 8)","main_title":{"title":"Die Beweise f\u00fcr die Unbewegtheit und Unver\u00e4nderlichkeit des Seienden (MXG 974 a 14 - b 8)"},"abstract":"Wie nach der Diskussion aller textlichen Pr\u00e4gen v\u00f6llig eindeutig ist, erw\u00e4hnt der MXG-Autor in 976a12 K\u00f6rperlichkeit des Einen f\u00fcr Melissos: h\u00f4s autos legei meint diesen Eleaten ebenso wie das sp\u00e4tere kai autos hout\u00f4 g' einai axioi in 976a23. Die Stelle ist zur Beurteilung der Zuverl\u00e4ssigkeit des Autors von Wert, wie immer man sie erkl\u00e4ren mag, weil Kenntnis des Originals auf jeden Fall ausscheidet.\r\n\r\nWenn (a) kai touto s\u00f4ma, wie es den Anschein hat, noch zu dem Zitat h\u00f4s autos legei geh\u00f6rt, kann diese Angabe nur aus einer Sekund\u00e4rquelle gesch\u00f6pft sein; aber auch falls (b) h\u00f4s autos legei, wie Apelt annimmt, allein auf ev zu beziehen ist und kai touto s\u00f4ma bereits ein eigenst\u00e4ndiger Zusatz des MXG-Autors ist, kann diesem die Aussage des Originals kaum bekannt gewesen sein. Denn in seiner Stellungnahme geht der Anonymus, selbst wenn er z.T. inad\u00e4quate Ausdeutungen daran ankn\u00fcpft (z.B. homoion als homoimeres), prinzipiell von den ihm bekannten Thesen des Melissos aus. Die Annahme von s\u00f4ma und mere f\u00fcr den Eleaten kann daher eigentlich nur bedeuten, dass dessen wirkliche Ansichten dem Autor nicht vorlagen, ihm also offenbar keine \u00fcber das Referat hinausgehenden Positionen des Melissos verf\u00fcgbar waren.\r\n\r\nGegen das Zeugnis des Simplikios lassen sich somit die Angaben von MXG, wie es Zeller wollte, nicht ausspielen. Der Neuplatoniker sagt mit Recht Unk\u00f6rperlichkeit f\u00fcr das melisseische Seiende aus; wenn er von diesem als ideellem, vollkommenem im Gegensatz zum k\u00f6rperlichen, kontingenten Seienden spricht (Simpl. Phys. 650,5) und in der Paraphrase den Terminus to hapl\u00f4s on anwendet (Phys. 103,18-19), darf der Abstand zu dem ideellen Seienden des mit Platon einsetzenden Dualismus nat\u00fcrlich nicht \u00fcbersehen werden. Die Eleaten verbleiben auf der Ebene dieses Seins, wie es Aristoteles (Cael. I 1, 298b21 ff.) sehr deutlich formuliert: Sie h\u00e4tten nichts au\u00dfer den t\u00f4n aisthet\u00f4n ousia angenommen, auf die sie die f\u00fcr die Existenz von Wissen notwendigen, von ihnen zuerst erkannten Charakteristika des eigentlichen Seins \u00fcbertragen h\u00e4tten.\r\n\r\nMelissos ist dabei radikaler als Parmenides verfahren: Dieser hatte \u2013 stets unter Bezug auf dieses Sein \u2013 nach einem Aufriss gem\u00e4\u00df den Forderungen des Denkens dann in der Doxa-Lehre den gel\u00e4ufigen Anschauungen in gewisser Weise Rechnung getragen; demgegen\u00fcber betrachtet Melissos dieses Sein allein unter dem Gesichtspunkt der deduzierten Pr\u00e4dikate. Einen mit Parmenides vergleichbaren Doxateil, wie es Reinhardt annehmen wollte, gibt es bei ihm nicht; wohl aber gibt es, wie die voraufgehenden Untersuchungen gezeigt haben, einen zweiten Teil der Schrift des Melissos, in dem pluralistische Konzeptionen wie Vielheit und Mischung am eleatischen Einen und seinen Eigenschaften gemessen und abgelehnt wurden.\r\n\r\nIn diesen Zusammenhang lie\u00df sich auch das umstrittene fr. B9 einordnen, dessen sprachliche Formulierung enge Ber\u00fchrungen mit B8 aufweist: ei ... ei\u00ea bezieht sich auf die gegnerische Konzeption (B9 wie B8,6), die im Falle einer wirklichen Existenz dem Kriterium des eleatischen Einen gen\u00fcgen m\u00fcsste (dei-Satz in B9, kei-S\u00e4tze in B8,6; B8,2). Wenn nun, wie es in B9 weiter hei\u00dft, s\u00f4ma und pachos Teile implizieren, musste Melissos f\u00fcr das Seiende eine solche K\u00f6rperlichkeit ausschlie\u00dfen. [conclusion p. 163-164]","btype":2,"date":"1974","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/rdmGYdcJSPKrtIL","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":435,"section_of":2,"pages":"99-164","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":2,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":1,"language":"de","title":"PS.-Aristoteles, MXG : Der historische Wert des Xenophanesreferats. Beitr\u00e4ge zur Geschichte des Eleatismus","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner1974a","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1974","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1974","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wvYIPOcDKdaOGFN","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":2,"pubplace":"Amsterdam","publisher":"Hakkert","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1974]}
Title | Die Schrift De Melisso Xenophane Gorgia in der neueren Forschung |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1974 |
Published in | PS.-Aristoteles, MXG : Der historische Wert des Xenophanesreferats. Beiträge zur Geschichte des Eleatismus |
Pages | 17-41 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
Von den drei Referaten der Schrift MXG bestehen für den Melissos-Abschnitt die besten Vergleichsmöglichkeiten, da Simplikios bekanntlich umfangreiche Auszüge aus der Schrift des Melissos exzerpiert hat und daneben eine Paraphrase für den Teil der Schrift bietet, der die Prädikate des Seienden behandelt. Obwohl die Quellenlage also weit günstiger ist als im Falle des Xenophanes, finden sich doch divergierende Ansichten über den Grad der Authentizität des Melissos-Referats: Reinhardt hält den Bericht für zuverlässig, da jede spätere Dialektik fehle, mehrfach noch der Wortlaut des Originals durchscheine und die entscheidenden Prädikate des Seienden exakt beibehalten seien. Gigon nennt den Abschnitt zwar "bedeutend schlechter" als das Gorgias-Referat, doch blicke der Text des Melissos unverkennbar durch. Calogero stellt das Nebeneinander von wörtlicher Nähe zum Original und von Unexaktheiten fest, die sich in der falschen Abfolge einzelner Prädikate und der Hinzufügung von Theorien (Mischungslehre) äußerten, und denkt daher an eine Wiedergabe der Melissos-Schrift aus dem Gedächtnis. Untersteiner schreibt einige dialektische Ausarbeitungen und die Hinzufügung der Mischungslehre dem Megariker zu. Während bei diesen Forschern der Melissos-Abschnitt als im Ganzen wertvoll bezeichnet wird, hat Loenen ein völlig negatives Urteil abgegeben: Der Bericht enthalte einerseits Hinzufügungen aller Art, vor allem Unterscheidungen von im Original nicht vorhandenen Möglichkeiten (Entstehung von allem oder nicht allem 974a3-9, Bewegung ins Volle oder ins Leere 974a16-18, Mischungslehre 974a21-b2), andererseits Auslassungen, z.B. fehle die Erklärung wichtiger Termini wie etwa des homoeomeries-Begriffs. Dem Bericht könne deshalb historischer Wert nicht zuerkannt werden. Es soll nun der Melissos-Abschnitt mit dem Original verglichen werden, um den Grad der Authentizität und die Art eventueller Zusätze genau zu ermitteln. Dies bedeutet zugleich den Versuch, bei einem Abschnitt mit günstiger Vergleichslage Kriterien für die Beurteilung des umstrittenen, quellenmäßig weit weniger gesicherten Xenophanes-Referats zu gewinnen. [conclusion p. 40-41] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/dnhawLwLUUqppPb |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"436","_score":null,"_source":{"id":436,"authors_free":[{"id":586,"entry_id":436,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2167,"entry_id":436,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Die Schrift De Melisso Xenophane Gorgia in der neueren Forschung","main_title":{"title":"Die Schrift De Melisso Xenophane Gorgia in der neueren Forschung"},"abstract":"Von den drei Referaten der Schrift MXG bestehen f\u00fcr den Melissos-Abschnitt die besten Vergleichsm\u00f6glichkeiten, da Simplikios bekanntlich umfangreiche Ausz\u00fcge aus der Schrift des Melissos exzerpiert hat und daneben eine Paraphrase f\u00fcr den Teil der Schrift bietet, der die Pr\u00e4dikate des Seienden behandelt. Obwohl die Quellenlage also weit g\u00fcnstiger ist als im Falle des Xenophanes, finden sich doch divergierende Ansichten \u00fcber den Grad der Authentizit\u00e4t des Melissos-Referats: Reinhardt h\u00e4lt den Bericht f\u00fcr zuverl\u00e4ssig, da jede sp\u00e4tere Dialektik fehle, mehrfach noch der Wortlaut des Originals durchscheine und die entscheidenden Pr\u00e4dikate des Seienden exakt beibehalten seien.\r\n\r\nGigon nennt den Abschnitt zwar \"bedeutend schlechter\" als das Gorgias-Referat, doch blicke der Text des Melissos unverkennbar durch. Calogero stellt das Nebeneinander von w\u00f6rtlicher N\u00e4he zum Original und von Unexaktheiten fest, die sich in der falschen Abfolge einzelner Pr\u00e4dikate und der Hinzuf\u00fcgung von Theorien (Mischungslehre) \u00e4u\u00dferten, und denkt daher an eine Wiedergabe der Melissos-Schrift aus dem Ged\u00e4chtnis. Untersteiner schreibt einige dialektische Ausarbeitungen und die Hinzuf\u00fcgung der Mischungslehre dem Megariker zu.\r\n\r\nW\u00e4hrend bei diesen Forschern der Melissos-Abschnitt als im Ganzen wertvoll bezeichnet wird, hat Loenen ein v\u00f6llig negatives Urteil abgegeben: Der Bericht enthalte einerseits Hinzuf\u00fcgungen aller Art, vor allem Unterscheidungen von im Original nicht vorhandenen M\u00f6glichkeiten (Entstehung von allem oder nicht allem 974a3-9, Bewegung ins Volle oder ins Leere 974a16-18, Mischungslehre 974a21-b2), andererseits Auslassungen, z.B. fehle die Erkl\u00e4rung wichtiger Termini wie etwa des homoeomeries-Begriffs. Dem Bericht k\u00f6nne deshalb historischer Wert nicht zuerkannt werden.\r\n\r\nEs soll nun der Melissos-Abschnitt mit dem Original verglichen werden, um den Grad der Authentizit\u00e4t und die Art eventueller Zus\u00e4tze genau zu ermitteln. Dies bedeutet zugleich den Versuch, bei einem Abschnitt mit g\u00fcnstiger Vergleichslage Kriterien f\u00fcr die Beurteilung des umstrittenen, quellenm\u00e4\u00dfig weit weniger gesicherten Xenophanes-Referats zu gewinnen. [conclusion p. 40-41]","btype":2,"date":"1974","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/dnhawLwLUUqppPb","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":436,"section_of":2,"pages":"17-41","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":2,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":1,"language":"de","title":"PS.-Aristoteles, MXG : Der historische Wert des Xenophanesreferats. Beitr\u00e4ge zur Geschichte des Eleatismus","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner1974a","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1974","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1974","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wvYIPOcDKdaOGFN","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":2,"pubplace":"Amsterdam","publisher":"Hakkert","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1974]}
Title | The Commentators on Aristotle's Categories and on Porphyry's Isagoge |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1973 |
Published in | Studies in Byzantine Rhetoric |
Pages | 101-126 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Kustas, George L. |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
Among the works edited in the Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca are a number of analyses of the Categories, Aristotle’s basic treatise on formal logic, as well as commentaries on Porphyry’s introduction to philosophy, the Isagoge, which is concerned with basic philosophical principles. Those which concern us belong to the fifth/sixth century and are the product of the Alexandrian school of Neoplatonism. The authors are Ammonius, son of Hermeias; his students, John Philoponus and Olympiodorus; and Olympiodorus’ students, Elias and David. To this list we may add Simplicius, who attended Ammonius’ lectures before emigrating to Athens. We are dealing with a common tradition of exegesis. The standard arrangement is several pages of prolegomena, in which the author lays out his purpose and defines his terms, followed by extensive scholia on individual passages. The commentators consistently make the claim that they are clearing up obscurities in the text. Hence the term dodelex appears often in their pages. Our interest, however, lies not here but in their analysis of what they regard as Aristotle’s deliberate use of obscurity as a quality of style designed with a specific end in view. We have therefore to examine in some detail what they say. [introduction p. 101] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/czKsHr75gQ60Xo4 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1514","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1514,"authors_free":[{"id":2630,"entry_id":1514,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":562,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Kustas, George L. ","free_first_name":"George L.","free_last_name":"Kustas","norm_person":{"id":562,"first_name":"George L. ","last_name":"Kustas","full_name":"Kustas, George L. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Commentators on Aristotle's Categories and on Porphyry's Isagoge","main_title":{"title":"The Commentators on Aristotle's Categories and on Porphyry's Isagoge"},"abstract":"Among the works edited in the Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca are a number of analyses of the Categories, Aristotle\u2019s basic treatise on formal logic, as well as commentaries on Porphyry\u2019s introduction to philosophy, the Isagoge, which is concerned with basic philosophical principles. Those which concern us belong to the fifth\/sixth century and are the product of the Alexandrian school of Neoplatonism. The authors are Ammonius, son of Hermeias; his students, John Philoponus and Olympiodorus; and Olympiodorus\u2019 students, Elias and David. To this list we may add Simplicius, who attended Ammonius\u2019 lectures before emigrating to Athens.\r\n\r\nWe are dealing with a common tradition of exegesis. The standard arrangement is several pages of prolegomena, in which the author lays out his purpose and defines his terms, followed by extensive scholia on individual passages. The commentators consistently make the claim that they are clearing up obscurities in the text. Hence the term dodelex appears often in their pages. Our interest, however, lies not here but in their analysis of what they regard as Aristotle\u2019s deliberate use of obscurity as a quality of style designed with a specific end in view. We have therefore to examine in some detail what they say. [introduction p. 101]","btype":2,"date":"1973","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/czKsHr75gQ60Xo4","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":562,"full_name":"Kustas, George L. ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1514,"section_of":1515,"pages":"101-126","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1515,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":1,"language":"en","title":"Studies in Byzantine Rhetoric","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Kustas_1973","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1973","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/rxJfkOyETAdcjhw","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1515,"pubplace":"Thessalonike ","publisher":"Patriarchikon Idruma Paterikon Meleton","series":"Analekta Vlatado\u0304n","volume":"17","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":{"id":1514,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Studies in Byzantine Rhetoric","volume":"","issue":"","pages":"101-126"}},"sort":[1973]}
Title | La fin de l'Acádemie |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1971 |
Published in | Le Néoplatonisme: Actes du Colloque International sur le Néoplatonisme organisé dans le cadre des Colloques Internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique à Royaumont du 9 au 13 juin 1969 |
Pages | 281-290 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Cameron, Alan |
Editor(s) | Schuhl, Pierre-Maxime , Hadot, Pierre |
Translator(s) |
Avec la mort de Proclus en 485, l’Académie tomba dans un déclin rapide. Trois générations durant, les meilleurs philosophes avaient été formés à Athènes par Plutarque, Syrianus et Proclus. Au contraire, les meilleurs philosophes de la génération suivante, Asclépius, Damascius, Eutocius, Olympiodore, Philopon et Simplicius, furent tous élèves d’Ammonius à Alexandrie. Ammonius lui-même avait été élève de Proclus. Nous connaissons les noms de tous les successeurs de Proclus à Athènes, mais ils ne sont guère pour nous que des noms. Même Damascius, qui était scolarque en l’année fatidique de 529, admet que la philosophie à Athènes n’était jamais tombée aussi bas que juste avant son accession à la chaire. Tout cela est hors de conteste. Pourtant, les savants modernes ont généralement considéré que ce déclin a continué sans interruption jusqu’en 529 et qu’en 529, lorsque Justinien a publié son illustre édit fermant l’Académie, elle était déjà sur son lit de mort. Autrement dit, ils considèrent que l’acte de Justinien fut plutôt de l’euthanasie qu’un assassinat. La dernière étude sur la fermeture de l’Académie admet sans discussion qu’en 529, la philosophie païenne d’Athènes avait déjà succombé sous les coups de la philosophie christianisée d’Alexandrie et de Gaza, que les étudiants, sauvés des griffes de l’impie Damascius, pouvaient désormais être guidés sur les chemins de la vérité par des chrétiens comme Philopon et Procope de Gaza. Hélas ! Cette image édifiante n’a rien à voir avec l’histoire. Il est douteux qu’il y ait jamais eu une école chrétienne de philosophie à Gaza. Énée et Procope étaient tous deux professeurs de rhétorique, et leurs plus fameux disciples furent aussi des rhéteurs (Épiphanius, Choricius). En tous cas, en 529, tous deux étaient morts. En ce qui concerne Alexandrie, contrairement à une opinion largement répandue, Philopon ne succéda pas à la chaire d’Ammonius. Pour des raisons que nous ne connaissons pas, il est resté, semble-t-il, toute sa vie grammaticus, professeur de littérature. Et vers la fin de sa vie, il se tourna de plus en plus de la philosophie vers la théologie — et vers l’hérésie. En outre, l’influence de la tradition scolaire était si forte, même dans le cas de philosophes chrétiens, que les écrits de Philopon ont exercé une influence étonnamment faible sur l’enseignement à Alexandrie. Olympiodore, qui enseignait encore à Alexandrie dans les années 560, était en effet païen, et ses successeurs, Élie, David, Étienne, bien que chrétiens, continuèrent à enseigner des doctrines comme l’éternité du monde et la divinité des corps célestes, qui avaient été déjà depuis longtemps réfutées par Philopon. Nous ne découvrons certainement pas ce qui est quelquefois évoqué en termes grandiloquents comme une synthèse de l’aristotélisme et du christianisme. Dès lors, il ne saurait être question de la vitalité supérieure d’une philosophie chrétienne écrasant les faibles survivants du paganisme sur leur propre terrain. De fait, si l’on compare le travail qui se fait à Athènes et à Alexandrie dans la première moitié du VIe siècle — en négligeant la production des dernières années de Philopon, comme étrangère à la tradition universitaire proprement dite —, il est clair que Damascius et Simplicius surpassent de beaucoup leurs rivaux alexandrins. Quant à la réputation de Damascius comme professeur (et la compétence scientifique a autant d’importance que l’habileté pédagogique), elle est établie par la liste de ses élèves en 529, qui comprenait des philosophes originaires de Cilicie, de Phrygie, de Lydie, de Phénicie et de Gaza : un véritable recrutement international. Assez étrangement, on a voulu tirer argument du caractère international de l’école de Damascius pour prouver la décadence de l’Académie. Athènes elle-même, dit-on, ne pouvait plus produire des Athéniens pour cultiver l’héritage de Platon. C’est ignorer le caractère international de la vie universitaire à la fin de l’Antiquité, caractère bien mis en évidence par la Vie d’Isidore écrite par Damascius et par Eunape dans les Vies des sophistes. En cet âge d’or de la rhétorique que fut le IVe siècle, à Athènes, les grands noms étaient Julien de Cappadoce, Himérius de Bithynie, Prohairesius d’Arménie. À peu près aucun Athénien parmi eux. Proclus lui-même était lycien, Syrianus, alexandrin. C’est plutôt un signe de la santé de ses institutions qu’Athènes pût encore attirer des étrangers de valeur ! Je voudrais suggérer, en effet, que bien loin que ce fût l’Académie qui fût sur son lit de mort en 529, c’était l’école d’Alexandrie qui était en déclin après la mort d’Ammonius, alors que l’Académie reprenait vie. Les successeurs d’Ammonius à Alexandrie furent Eutocius le mathématicien et Olympiodore, philosophes, ni l’un ni l’autre de grande envergure. Tandis que vers 529, l’énergique et habile Damascius avait repris en main l’Académie et s’était entouré d’une équipe de disciples dévoués — dévoués, car nous savons qu’ils le suivirent en Perse après la fermeture de l’Académie. Une illustration frappante de ce changement de relation entre Athènes et Alexandrie est le fait que, alors que dans ses premiers commentaires Olympiodore dépendait essentiellement d’Ammonius, dans ses dernières œuvres, il s’appuie de plus en plus sur Damascius. Nous saisissons, là encore, Alexandrie se tournant vers Athènes. Il se peut que Justinien n’ait pas fermé l’Académie par mépris, parce qu’elle était moribonde, mais — et c’est une raison plus naturelle et plus plausible — par crainte, parce qu’elle reprenait vie. [introduction p. 281-283] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/WEx2IgLff0lYEzl |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1258","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1258,"authors_free":[{"id":1837,"entry_id":1258,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"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":2334,"entry_id":1258,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":23,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Schuhl, Pierre-Maxime","free_first_name":"Pierre-Maxime","free_last_name":"Schuhl","norm_person":{"id":23,"first_name":"Pierre-Maxime","last_name":"Schuhl","full_name":"Schuhl, Pierre-Maxime ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117559718X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2335,"entry_id":1258,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":158,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Hadot, Pierre","free_first_name":"Pierre","free_last_name":"Hadot","norm_person":{"id":158,"first_name":"Pierre","last_name":"Hadot","full_name":"Hadot, Pierre","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115663517","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"La fin de l'Ac\u00e1demie","main_title":{"title":"La fin de l'Ac\u00e1demie"},"abstract":"Avec la mort de Proclus en 485, l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie tomba dans un d\u00e9clin rapide. Trois g\u00e9n\u00e9rations durant, les meilleurs philosophes avaient \u00e9t\u00e9 form\u00e9s \u00e0 Ath\u00e8nes par Plutarque, Syrianus et Proclus. Au contraire, les meilleurs philosophes de la g\u00e9n\u00e9ration suivante, Ascl\u00e9pius, Damascius, Eutocius, Olympiodore, Philopon et Simplicius, furent tous \u00e9l\u00e8ves d\u2019Ammonius \u00e0 Alexandrie. Ammonius lui-m\u00eame avait \u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e9l\u00e8ve de Proclus.\r\n\r\nNous connaissons les noms de tous les successeurs de Proclus \u00e0 Ath\u00e8nes, mais ils ne sont gu\u00e8re pour nous que des noms. M\u00eame Damascius, qui \u00e9tait scolarque en l\u2019ann\u00e9e fatidique de 529, admet que la philosophie \u00e0 Ath\u00e8nes n\u2019\u00e9tait jamais tomb\u00e9e aussi bas que juste avant son accession \u00e0 la chaire.\r\n\r\nTout cela est hors de conteste. Pourtant, les savants modernes ont g\u00e9n\u00e9ralement consid\u00e9r\u00e9 que ce d\u00e9clin a continu\u00e9 sans interruption jusqu\u2019en 529 et qu\u2019en 529, lorsque Justinien a publi\u00e9 son illustre \u00e9dit fermant l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie, elle \u00e9tait d\u00e9j\u00e0 sur son lit de mort. Autrement dit, ils consid\u00e8rent que l\u2019acte de Justinien fut plut\u00f4t de l\u2019euthanasie qu\u2019un assassinat.\r\n\r\nLa derni\u00e8re \u00e9tude sur la fermeture de l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie admet sans discussion qu\u2019en 529, la philosophie pa\u00efenne d\u2019Ath\u00e8nes avait d\u00e9j\u00e0 succomb\u00e9 sous les coups de la philosophie christianis\u00e9e d\u2019Alexandrie et de Gaza, que les \u00e9tudiants, sauv\u00e9s des griffes de l\u2019impie Damascius, pouvaient d\u00e9sormais \u00eatre guid\u00e9s sur les chemins de la v\u00e9rit\u00e9 par des chr\u00e9tiens comme Philopon et Procope de Gaza. H\u00e9las ! Cette image \u00e9difiante n\u2019a rien \u00e0 voir avec l\u2019histoire.\r\n\r\nIl est douteux qu\u2019il y ait jamais eu une \u00e9cole chr\u00e9tienne de philosophie \u00e0 Gaza. \u00c9n\u00e9e et Procope \u00e9taient tous deux professeurs de rh\u00e9torique, et leurs plus fameux disciples furent aussi des rh\u00e9teurs (\u00c9piphanius, Choricius). En tous cas, en 529, tous deux \u00e9taient morts.\r\n\r\nEn ce qui concerne Alexandrie, contrairement \u00e0 une opinion largement r\u00e9pandue, Philopon ne succ\u00e9da pas \u00e0 la chaire d\u2019Ammonius. Pour des raisons que nous ne connaissons pas, il est rest\u00e9, semble-t-il, toute sa vie grammaticus, professeur de litt\u00e9rature. Et vers la fin de sa vie, il se tourna de plus en plus de la philosophie vers la th\u00e9ologie \u2014 et vers l\u2019h\u00e9r\u00e9sie.\r\n\r\nEn outre, l\u2019influence de la tradition scolaire \u00e9tait si forte, m\u00eame dans le cas de philosophes chr\u00e9tiens, que les \u00e9crits de Philopon ont exerc\u00e9 une influence \u00e9tonnamment faible sur l\u2019enseignement \u00e0 Alexandrie. Olympiodore, qui enseignait encore \u00e0 Alexandrie dans les ann\u00e9es 560, \u00e9tait en effet pa\u00efen, et ses successeurs, \u00c9lie, David, \u00c9tienne, bien que chr\u00e9tiens, continu\u00e8rent \u00e0 enseigner des doctrines comme l\u2019\u00e9ternit\u00e9 du monde et la divinit\u00e9 des corps c\u00e9lestes, qui avaient \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9j\u00e0 depuis longtemps r\u00e9fut\u00e9es par Philopon.\r\n\r\nNous ne d\u00e9couvrons certainement pas ce qui est quelquefois \u00e9voqu\u00e9 en termes grandiloquents comme une synth\u00e8se de l\u2019aristot\u00e9lisme et du christianisme.\r\n\r\nD\u00e8s lors, il ne saurait \u00eatre question de la vitalit\u00e9 sup\u00e9rieure d\u2019une philosophie chr\u00e9tienne \u00e9crasant les faibles survivants du paganisme sur leur propre terrain. De fait, si l\u2019on compare le travail qui se fait \u00e0 Ath\u00e8nes et \u00e0 Alexandrie dans la premi\u00e8re moiti\u00e9 du VIe si\u00e8cle \u2014 en n\u00e9gligeant la production des derni\u00e8res ann\u00e9es de Philopon, comme \u00e9trang\u00e8re \u00e0 la tradition universitaire proprement dite \u2014, il est clair que Damascius et Simplicius surpassent de beaucoup leurs rivaux alexandrins.\r\n\r\nQuant \u00e0 la r\u00e9putation de Damascius comme professeur (et la comp\u00e9tence scientifique a autant d\u2019importance que l\u2019habilet\u00e9 p\u00e9dagogique), elle est \u00e9tablie par la liste de ses \u00e9l\u00e8ves en 529, qui comprenait des philosophes originaires de Cilicie, de Phrygie, de Lydie, de Ph\u00e9nicie et de Gaza : un v\u00e9ritable recrutement international.\r\n\r\nAssez \u00e9trangement, on a voulu tirer argument du caract\u00e8re international de l\u2019\u00e9cole de Damascius pour prouver la d\u00e9cadence de l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie. Ath\u00e8nes elle-m\u00eame, dit-on, ne pouvait plus produire des Ath\u00e9niens pour cultiver l\u2019h\u00e9ritage de Platon. C\u2019est ignorer le caract\u00e8re international de la vie universitaire \u00e0 la fin de l\u2019Antiquit\u00e9, caract\u00e8re bien mis en \u00e9vidence par la Vie d\u2019Isidore \u00e9crite par Damascius et par Eunape dans les Vies des sophistes.\r\n\r\nEn cet \u00e2ge d\u2019or de la rh\u00e9torique que fut le IVe si\u00e8cle, \u00e0 Ath\u00e8nes, les grands noms \u00e9taient Julien de Cappadoce, Him\u00e9rius de Bithynie, Prohairesius d\u2019Arm\u00e9nie. \u00c0 peu pr\u00e8s aucun Ath\u00e9nien parmi eux. Proclus lui-m\u00eame \u00e9tait lycien, Syrianus, alexandrin. C\u2019est plut\u00f4t un signe de la sant\u00e9 de ses institutions qu\u2019Ath\u00e8nes p\u00fbt encore attirer des \u00e9trangers de valeur !\r\n\r\nJe voudrais sugg\u00e9rer, en effet, que bien loin que ce f\u00fbt l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie qui f\u00fbt sur son lit de mort en 529, c\u2019\u00e9tait l\u2019\u00e9cole d\u2019Alexandrie qui \u00e9tait en d\u00e9clin apr\u00e8s la mort d\u2019Ammonius, alors que l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie reprenait vie.\r\n\r\nLes successeurs d\u2019Ammonius \u00e0 Alexandrie furent Eutocius le math\u00e9maticien et Olympiodore, philosophes, ni l\u2019un ni l\u2019autre de grande envergure. Tandis que vers 529, l\u2019\u00e9nergique et habile Damascius avait repris en main l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie et s\u2019\u00e9tait entour\u00e9 d\u2019une \u00e9quipe de disciples d\u00e9vou\u00e9s \u2014 d\u00e9vou\u00e9s, car nous savons qu\u2019ils le suivirent en Perse apr\u00e8s la fermeture de l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie.\r\n\r\nUne illustration frappante de ce changement de relation entre Ath\u00e8nes et Alexandrie est le fait que, alors que dans ses premiers commentaires Olympiodore d\u00e9pendait essentiellement d\u2019Ammonius, dans ses derni\u00e8res \u0153uvres, il s\u2019appuie de plus en plus sur Damascius. Nous saisissons, l\u00e0 encore, Alexandrie se tournant vers Ath\u00e8nes.\r\n\r\nIl se peut que Justinien n\u2019ait pas ferm\u00e9 l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie par m\u00e9pris, parce qu\u2019elle \u00e9tait moribonde, mais \u2014 et c\u2019est une raison plus naturelle et plus plausible \u2014 par crainte, parce qu\u2019elle reprenait vie. [introduction p. 281-283]","btype":2,"date":"1971","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/WEx2IgLff0lYEzl","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":20,"full_name":"Cameron, Alan ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":23,"full_name":"Schuhl, Pierre-Maxime ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":158,"full_name":"Hadot, Pierre","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1258,"section_of":1257,"pages":"281-290","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1257,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Le N\u00e9oplatonisme: Actes du Colloque International sur le N\u00e9oplatonisme organis\u00e9 dans le cadre des Colloques Internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique \u00e0 Royaumont du 9 au 13 juin 1969","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Schuhl_Hadot1971","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1971","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"The book is a valuable resource for scholars and students of Neoplatonism, providing a comprehensive overview of the history and development of this important philosophical tradition. It is divided into three main sections. The first section focuses on the historical development of Neoplatonism, tracing its origins in the philosophy of Plato and its development through the works of Plotinus, Proclus, and other Neoplatonic thinkers. The second section explores the relationship between Neoplatonism and other philosophical traditions, such as Aristotelianism, Stoicism, and Epicureanism. The third section examines the influence of Neoplatonism on literature and Christianity. [introduction]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/3Ys5KdoaAlOHE6L","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1257,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1971]}
Title | Parmenides, Fr. 8, 5 |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1971 |
Published in | God Time Being: Two Studies in the Transcendental Tradition in Greek Philosophy |
Pages | 16-32 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Whittaker, John H. |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
I would conclude that no knowledge of the teaching of the historical Parmenides can be safely derived from the versions of fr. 8, 5 which have survived. One can, however, assert with complete conviction, as was shown at the outset, that the doctrine of non-durational eternity, which Neoplatonists associated with both versions of the line, was not taught by the historical Parmenides. [conclusion p. 24] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/otytaZVpHsVfMmh |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"439","_score":null,"_source":{"id":439,"authors_free":[{"id":589,"entry_id":439,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":411,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Whittaker, John H.","free_first_name":"John H.","free_last_name":"Whittaker","norm_person":{"id":411,"first_name":"John H.","last_name":"Whittaker","full_name":"Whittaker, John H.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/124441203","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Parmenides, Fr. 8, 5","main_title":{"title":"Parmenides, Fr. 8, 5"},"abstract":"I would conclude that no knowledge of the teaching of the historical \r\nParmenides can be safely derived from the versions of fr. 8, 5 which \r\nhave survived. One can, however, assert with complete conviction, as \r\nwas shown at the outset, that the doctrine of non-durational eternity, \r\nwhich Neoplatonists associated with both versions of the line, was not \r\ntaught by the historical Parmenides. [conclusion p. 24]","btype":2,"date":"1971","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/otytaZVpHsVfMmh","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":411,"full_name":"Whittaker, John H.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":439,"section_of":144,"pages":"16-32","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":144,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":1,"language":"en","title":"God Time Being: Two Studies in the Transcendental Tradition in Greek Philosophy","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Whittaker1971b","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1971","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1971","abstract":"Es geht um die im Platonismus entwickelte Vorstellung einer Gottheit eigenen\r\nzeitlosen, zeit3berlegenen Ewigkeit, die von Plotin aus (Enneaden III 7) die abend-\r\nlindische Theologie und Mystik stark beeinfluf3t hat. Zugrunde liegt Platons\r\nSpekulation 3ber Aion und Chronos, Timaios 73 c-38 c; ausformuliert ist die\r\nThese vom ewigen Jetzt fur unsere Kenntnis erstmals im mittleren Platonismus\r\n(Plutarch, De E ap. Delph. 393 A-C). Doch hat sie der Neuplatonismus - sicher-\r\nlich zu Unrecht - bereits in ein beruhmtes Parmenides-Fragment (8, 5 D.-Kr., wo\r\nes vom Sein heift, dag ,alles jetzt zusammen ist\", nach U. Hoelscher) hinein-\r\ngelesen. Der Verf., der diese Oberlieferungsverhiltnisse klarend darlegt, unterzieht\r\ndas Fragment im ersten Teil seiner Arbeit einer scharfsinnigen, reich dokumen-\r\ntierten Analyse. Dabei wird die Ansicht begrundet, dai3 die Texte unserer spht-\r\nantiken Zeugen (Simplikios einerseits, die vier alexandrinischen Ausleger andrer-\r\nseits) nicht iber jeden Zweifel erhaben sind. Es k6nnte sein, daf3 bei Simplikios\r\n- dem die modernen Ausgaben zu folgen pflegen - eine neuplatonische Adaption\r\ndes parmenideischen Wortlauts vorliegt, so daf die uberlieferte Form von Parm.\r\n8, 5 fur die Ermittlung der Lehre des grof3enEleaten ausscheiden muf3te - ein fur\r\ndie Vorsokratikerforschung recht erhebliches Ergebnis. - In einer zweiten Unter-\r\nsuchung geht der Verf. dem gleichen Motiv (,Gottes ewiges Heute': der Leser der\r\naugustinischen Confessionen hat es aus dem grofartigen Lobpreis XI 13 in Erinne-\r\nrung) bei Philon von Alexandria nach, wobei sich ein belehrender Einblick in die\r\nplatonistisdhe Tradition ergibt (verwunderlich, daf3 Clemens von Alexandria nach\r\nMigne's Patrologie, Maximos von Tyros nach der alten Dibner'sdlen Ausgabe\r\nzitiert werden). Auch aristotelische und stoische Einflusse werden gepruft. W. stellt\r\nfest, daf3 die meisten Philonstellen, die man bisher im Sinn der neuplatonischen\r\nLehre von einer zeit\u00fcberlegenen Ewigkeit gedeutet hatte, anders zu erklaren\r\nsind; eine Ausnahme scheint in einer allegorischen Auslegung des Alten Testaments\r\n(zu Levit. 2, 14) vorzuliegen (de sacrif. 76). Es bleibt dabei, daf3 das weitreidiende\r\nThema in voller Klarheit erstmals in Plutarchs ob. gen. Dialog angesprochen wird;\r\ner hangt sicher mit dem seit Ende des 1. Jh. v. Chr. wieder rege gewordenen\r\nStudium des platonischen Timaios zusammen, welches in dem Kommentar des\r\nAlexandriners Eudoros, eines pythagoreisierenden Platonikers, moglicherweiseeine\r\nQuelle Plutarchs hervorgebracht hat (hier ware auf eine den Problemen des mitt-\r\nleren Platonismus gewidmete Arbeit H. Dbrrie's hinzuweisen gewesen, in: Les\r\nSourdes de Plotin, Entresiens sur L'Antiquite Classique, t. V, 1957 193 it).\" (Review, H. Strohm)","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/gmCTvOKY6YxDRe4","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":144,"pubplace":"Oslo","publisher":"Universitetsforlaget","series":"Symbolae Osloenses","volume":"23","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[1971]}
Title | "Simplikios" |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1975 |
Published in | Der kleine Pauly, Band 5 |
Pages | 205 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Dörrie, Heinrich |
Editor(s) | Konrat Ziegler |
Translator(s) |
Simplikios (Σιμπλίκιος), Neuplatoniker, Schüler des Ammonios, Sohnes des Hermeias. Simplikios muss von Alexandria nach Athen übergesiedelt sein. Als das Schließungsedikt von 529 erging, war er Mitglied der Akademie. Mit anderen Akademikern versuchte er, im persischen Reich, vermutlich zu Ktesiphon am Hofe des Königs Chosroes I., eine neue Stätte für philosophische Forschung und Lehre zu begründen. Das schlug fehl; 533 kehrte Simplikios mit seinen Kollegen ins Römische Reich zurück, wo es ihm untersagt war, eine Lehrtätigkeit auszuüben. Alle Schriften von Simplikios, die erhalten sind, wurden nach 533 verfasst. Er war der letzte Platoniker, der in seinen Schriften das Christentum angriff. Seine Werke sind durchweg Kommentare, allerdings ist kein Kommentar von ihm zu einem Dialog Platons bekannt; vermutlich erschien es ihm als zwecklos, mit den Kommentaren des Proklos in Wettstreit zu treten. Verloren ist sein Hauptwerk, der Kommentar zu Aristoteles’ Metaphysik. In Handschriften erhalten, aber noch nicht ediert, sind ein Kommentar zu Hermogenes’ τέχνη und zu Iamblichos’ περί τής Πυθαγόρου αἱρέσεως. Erhalten und sämtlich in den Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca ediert sind folgende Kommentare: De caelo, ed. J. L. Heiberg, 1894 (CAG VII). Categoriae, ed. C. Kalbfleisch, 1907 (CAG VIII). Physica, ed. H. Diels, 1882, 1895 (CAG IX und X). De anima, ed. M. Hayduck, 1882 (CAG XI). Das ungewöhnlichste Werk von Simplikios ist sein Kommentar zum Ἐγχειρίδιον des Epiktet. Die dringend notwendige Neuausgabe wird von Frau Dr. I. Hadot vorbereitet. Viele Kommentare anderer Platoniker sind aus Vorlesungen für Anfänger hervorgegangen. Im Vergleich dazu stehen die Kommentare von Simplikios auf einem weit höheren Niveau. Ihm, der nicht mehr lehren durfte, ging es darum, für künftige Gelehrte zu schreiben. „Gerade seine nüchternere Weise macht ihn im Verein mit seiner großen Gelehrsamkeit zu einem höchst achtenswerten Kommentator.“ (K. Praechter). In engem Zusammenhang damit steht, dass Simplikios vor allem im Kommentar zur Physik Zitate aus vorsokratischen Philosophen in beträchtlichem Umfang in seinen Text aufgenommen hat (Stellenverzeichnis bei Diels Vorsokratiker³, 638–640). Dass Empedokles und Parmenides für uns mehr sind als nur Namen, ist einzig Simplikios zu verdanken. Die Beweisführung von Simplikios tendiert dahin, dass aus allen Philosophen die gleiche σοφία und der gleiche λόγος spricht wie aus Platon. Das gilt für die Vorsokratiker ebenso wie für Aristoteles: Wo dieser Platon widerspricht, handelt es sich nur um eine Diskrepanz in Worten. So wird seine riesige Arbeit zu einer imposanten Apologie der Lehre, dass alle Philosophen – selbstverständlich auch Epiktet – immer nur die eine, stets sich selbst gleiche, unwandelbare Wahrheit verkündet haben. Außer dem RE-Artikel von K. Praechter gibt es keine zusammenfassende Würdigung von Simplikios. [the entire text] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/kSQQwhdCGL94DDh |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1292","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1292,"authors_free":[{"id":1881,"entry_id":1292,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":69,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"D\u00f6rrie, Heinrich ","free_first_name":"Heinrich ","free_last_name":"D\u00f6rrie","norm_person":{"id":69,"first_name":"Heinrich ","last_name":"D\u00f6rrie","full_name":"D\u00f6rrie, Heinrich ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118526375","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2697,"entry_id":1292,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Konrat Ziegler","free_first_name":"Konrat","free_last_name":"Ziegler","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"\"Simplikios\"","main_title":{"title":"\"Simplikios\""},"abstract":"Simplikios (\u03a3\u03b9\u03bc\u03c0\u03bb\u03af\u03ba\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2), Neuplatoniker, Sch\u00fcler des Ammonios, Sohnes des Hermeias. Simplikios muss von Alexandria nach Athen \u00fcbergesiedelt sein. Als das Schlie\u00dfungsedikt von 529 erging, war er Mitglied der Akademie. Mit anderen Akademikern versuchte er, im persischen Reich, vermutlich zu Ktesiphon am Hofe des K\u00f6nigs Chosroes I., eine neue St\u00e4tte f\u00fcr philosophische Forschung und Lehre zu begr\u00fcnden. Das schlug fehl; 533 kehrte Simplikios mit seinen Kollegen ins R\u00f6mische Reich zur\u00fcck, wo es ihm untersagt war, eine Lehrt\u00e4tigkeit auszu\u00fcben.\r\n\r\nAlle Schriften von Simplikios, die erhalten sind, wurden nach 533 verfasst. Er war der letzte Platoniker, der in seinen Schriften das Christentum angriff. Seine Werke sind durchweg Kommentare, allerdings ist kein Kommentar von ihm zu einem Dialog Platons bekannt; vermutlich erschien es ihm als zwecklos, mit den Kommentaren des Proklos in Wettstreit zu treten.\r\n\r\nVerloren ist sein Hauptwerk, der Kommentar zu Aristoteles\u2019 Metaphysik. In Handschriften erhalten, aber noch nicht ediert, sind ein Kommentar zu Hermogenes\u2019 \u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 und zu Iamblichos\u2019 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af \u03c4\u03ae\u03c2 \u03a0\u03c5\u03b8\u03b1\u03b3\u03cc\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b1\u1f31\u03c1\u03ad\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2. Erhalten und s\u00e4mtlich in den Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca ediert sind folgende Kommentare:\r\n\r\n De caelo, ed. J. L. Heiberg, 1894 (CAG VII).\r\n Categoriae, ed. C. Kalbfleisch, 1907 (CAG VIII).\r\n Physica, ed. H. Diels, 1882, 1895 (CAG IX und X).\r\n De anima, ed. M. Hayduck, 1882 (CAG XI).\r\n\r\nDas ungew\u00f6hnlichste Werk von Simplikios ist sein Kommentar zum \u1f18\u03b3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd des Epiktet. Die dringend notwendige Neuausgabe wird von Frau Dr. I. Hadot vorbereitet.\r\n\r\nViele Kommentare anderer Platoniker sind aus Vorlesungen f\u00fcr Anf\u00e4nger hervorgegangen. Im Vergleich dazu stehen die Kommentare von Simplikios auf einem weit h\u00f6heren Niveau. Ihm, der nicht mehr lehren durfte, ging es darum, f\u00fcr k\u00fcnftige Gelehrte zu schreiben. \u201eGerade seine n\u00fcchternere Weise macht ihn im Verein mit seiner gro\u00dfen Gelehrsamkeit zu einem h\u00f6chst achtenswerten Kommentator.\u201c (K. Praechter).\r\n\r\nIn engem Zusammenhang damit steht, dass Simplikios vor allem im Kommentar zur Physik Zitate aus vorsokratischen Philosophen in betr\u00e4chtlichem Umfang in seinen Text aufgenommen hat (Stellenverzeichnis bei Diels Vorsokratiker\u00b3, 638\u2013640). Dass Empedokles und Parmenides f\u00fcr uns mehr sind als nur Namen, ist einzig Simplikios zu verdanken.\r\n\r\nDie Beweisf\u00fchrung von Simplikios tendiert dahin, dass aus allen Philosophen die gleiche \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1 und der gleiche \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 spricht wie aus Platon. Das gilt f\u00fcr die Vorsokratiker ebenso wie f\u00fcr Aristoteles: Wo dieser Platon widerspricht, handelt es sich nur um eine Diskrepanz in Worten. So wird seine riesige Arbeit zu einer imposanten Apologie der Lehre, dass alle Philosophen \u2013 selbstverst\u00e4ndlich auch Epiktet \u2013 immer nur die eine, stets sich selbst gleiche, unwandelbare Wahrheit verk\u00fcndet haben.\r\n\r\nAu\u00dfer dem RE-Artikel von K. Praechter gibt es keine zusammenfassende W\u00fcrdigung von Simplikios. [the entire text]","btype":2,"date":"1975","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/kSQQwhdCGL94DDh","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":69,"full_name":"D\u00f6rrie, Heinrich ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1292,"section_of":264,"pages":"205","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":264,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Der kleine Pauly, Band 5","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sontheimer1975","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1975","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1975","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/nT4V3xwm4Jp1gS4","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":264,"pubplace":"M\u00fcnchen","publisher":"Druckenm\u00fcller","series":"Der Kleine Pauly. Lexikon der Antike","volume":"5","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["\"Simplikios\""]}
Title | Alexander of Aphrodisias in the later Greek commentaries on Aristotle’s De Anima |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, Überlieferung, Nachleben |
Pages | 90-106 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Blumenthal, Henry J. |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
These are a few examples of how the Neoplatonist commenta tors confronted Alexander on matters where differences could hardly fail to arise. What happens is clear enough. But it would be wrong to think that these principles of interpretation are not applied at other points in the work. Let us take an apparently innocuous issue like the section where Aristotle discusses locomotion under the stimulus of the appetitive faculty (433 b 8sqq.). Alexander, giving a clearly Aristotelian explanation, said that the faculty was moved accidentally. Plutarch differed, and said that the activity of the appetitive faculty is movement: this Simplicius describes as a Pla tonic explanation, and prefers it (302,23-30).44 On the other hand, a few pages below Simplicius prefers Alexander to Plutarch on the question whether moving but ungenerated entities have sense-per ception (320,33-34): we have already looked at his and Stephanus’ account of this passage.45 As we indicated, Stephanus there quotes Alexander only to disagree with him, and here we have at least one piece of evidence to show that Neoplatonist commentators could take a different view of the same passage. If we had more examples of texts where Alexander’s views of the De anima were discussed by more than one of his successors, we should be able to form a clearer picture of how far the different commentators were prepared to accept them, and thus incidentally of the precise differences between these commentators themselves on the points at issue. [conclusion p. 105-106] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/yyFedFSkP8qo8dn |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"805","_score":null,"_source":{"id":805,"authors_free":[{"id":1191,"entry_id":805,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Alexander of Aphrodisias in the later Greek commentaries on Aristotle\u2019s De Anima","main_title":{"title":"Alexander of Aphrodisias in the later Greek commentaries on Aristotle\u2019s De Anima"},"abstract":"These are a few examples of how the Neoplatonist commenta\u00ad\r\ntors confronted Alexander on matters where differences could \r\nhardly fail to arise. What happens is clear enough. But it would be \r\nwrong to think that these principles of interpretation are not applied \r\nat other points in the work. Let us take an apparently innocuous \r\nissue like the section where Aristotle discusses locomotion under the \r\nstimulus of the appetitive faculty (433 b 8sqq.). Alexander, giving a \r\nclearly Aristotelian explanation, said that the faculty was moved \r\naccidentally. Plutarch differed, and said that the activity of the \r\nappetitive faculty is movement: this Simplicius describes as a Pla\u00ad\r\ntonic explanation, and prefers it (302,23-30).44 On the other hand, a \r\nfew pages below Simplicius prefers Alexander to Plutarch on the \r\nquestion whether moving but ungenerated entities have sense-per\u00ad\r\nception (320,33-34): we have already looked at his and Stephanus\u2019 account of this passage.45 As we indicated, Stephanus there quotes \r\nAlexander only to disagree with him, and here we have at least one \r\npiece of evidence to show that Neoplatonist commentators could \r\ntake a different view of the same passage. If we had more examples \r\nof texts where Alexander\u2019s views of the De anima were discussed by \r\nmore than one of his successors, we should be able to form a clearer \r\npicture of how far the different commentators were prepared to \r\naccept them, and thus incidentally of the precise differences between \r\nthese commentators themselves on the points at issue. [conclusion p. 105-106]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/yyFedFSkP8qo8dn","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":805,"section_of":189,"pages":"90-106","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":189,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, \u00dcberlieferung, Nachleben","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Lulofs\/Kollesch\/Nutton1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Kommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles sind das Thema dieses Bandes. Mit der Aristotelesrenaissance des 1. Jh. v.Chr. einsetzend, vermitteln die Beitr\u00e4ge, unter acht Hauptkapiteln zusammengefa\u00dft, ein eindrucksvolles Bild von der Rezeption zweier Jahrtausende. D a \u00df diese Rezeption kontinuierlich in ihren wichtigen Phasen illustriert werden kann, ist - wie schon im ersten Band - der freundlichen Kooperation der beteiligten Autoren zu verdanken. Als besonderer Gl\u00fccksfall mag gelten, da\u00df einige Beitr\u00e4ge sich in idealer Weise erg\u00e4nzen. So wird der Leser in zwei auf einanderfolgenden Artikeln die Interpretationsgeschichte der zentralen Kapitel Metaphysik \u039b 7 und 9 von Plotin und Themistios \u00fcber Maimonides und Gersonides bis Hegel verfolgen k\u00f6nnen. Dieses Bem\u00fchen um Aristoteles von der Antike bis in die Neuzeit ist etwa f\u00fcr De anima bei Alexander von Aphrodisias und Leibniz, f\u00fcr die \r\nKategorien bei Plotin und Peirce dokumentiert, wobei die Erstver\u00f6ffentlichung der Ubersetzung von Cat. 1 - 4 durch den bedeutenden amerikanischen Philosophen mit besonderer Freude angezeigt werden darf. \r\nVon den Autoren dieses Bandes weilen Paul Henry und Charles B. Schmitt nicht mehr unter uns. In ein Buch \u00fcber Plotins Entretiens sollte der hier ver\u00f6ffentlichte Beitrag von Paul Henry sp\u00e4ter einmal integriert werden; daraus erkl\u00e4ren sich gelegentliche Hinweise auf geplante Teile dieses nun nicht mehr vollendeten Werkes. Die Studie von Charles B.Schmitt \u00fcber die Aristoteles-Florilegien der Renaissance bietet die erste Gesamtdarstellung zu diesem Thema und enth\u00e4lt im Anhang ein Verzeichnis mit wichtigen Erg\u00e4nzungen zu seiner grundlegenden \u201eBibliography of Aristotle Editions, 1501-1600\". [Vorwort p. V-VI]\r\n","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Q1P6OhIp8zaE99c","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":189,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet","volume":"2","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Alexander of Aphrodisias in the later Greek commentaries on Aristotle\u2019s De Anima"]}
Title | Apories orales de Plotin sur les Catégories d’Aristote |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, Überlieferung, Nachleben |
Pages | 120-156 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Henry, Paul |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
Les premières apories que Dexippe attribue explicitement à Plotin traitent du nombre des catégories, mais plus précisément sous l’aspect du rapport des catégories du monde intelligible à celles du monde sensible. Chez Simplicius aussi ces apories sont explicitement attribuées à Plotin. D’un monde à l’autre, les catégories sont-elles les mêmes ou différentes, ou bien les unes sont-elles les mêmes, les autres différentes ? Sont-elles en nombre égal, plus nombreuses, moins nombreuses ? C’est le problème préliminaire qu’examine Plotin au chapitre 1 de son premier traité VI 1, au début du chapitre 2 sur la substance et, une troisième fois, au début du chapitre 5 de son troisième traité, VI 3. Nos textes de base sont donc : VI 1,1,19-30 ; VI 1,2,1-8 ; VI 3,5,1-7, mais aussi VI 2,16,1-2 et VI 3,27,1-4. S’y réfèrent trois apories de Dexippe, mais l’une sous trois formes différentes – ce qui nous donne cinq petits textes – et deux longues pages de Simplicius, qui correspondent pour une part aux Ennéades, pour une part aux textes de Dexippe, mais qui toutes deux associent le nom de Plotin à celui de ses prédécesseurs. En outre, deux textes anonymes, l’un de Dexippe, l’autre de Simplicius. Les relations entre tous ces textes étant fort compliquées, il est utile de les énumérer ici, avec les sigles que je leur attribue, et dans l’ordre où je les étudie : 01 = Simpl. p. 73,15-28 (Plotin, Lucius et Nicostrate) 01b* = Dex. II 1 sommaire et aporie (anonymes) = Simpl. p. 73,15-16 (Plotin) 02 = Simpl. p. 73,25-27 (Plotin) 01a* = Dex. II 4 sommaire et aporie (Plotin) F1 = Simpl. p. 76,13-22 (Plotin et Nicostrate) F1 = Dex. II 2 aporie (dans le corps de l’ouvrage) (Plotin) 01c = Dex. II 2 sommaire (Plotin) 01e = Dex. II 2 solution (Plotin), cf. Simpl. 76,22-77,4 F2 = Dex. 138 solution (anonyme) = Simpl. p. 66,30-31 (anonyme) Bien que, au début, ces distinctions paraissent compliquées, la suite montrera qu’elles aident à clarifier les questions. Je signale tout de suite que le grand texte attribué au « très divin Plotin » par Simpl. p. 73,15-28 contient aussi ce que contiennent Dex. II 1, Dex. II 2 somm., et de nombreuses correspondances avec Dex. II 4. Nous finirons notre chapitre par un texte très court relatif au problème de l’opposé du mouvement, le repos, auquel font allusion Enn. VI 3,27,4-5, ainsi que Dex. I 38 sol., p. 34,17-19 (τις) et Simpl. p. 66,30-31 (τις), et qui, faisant partie d’une source composite, justifiera le sigle F2. Le tout est un chassé-croisé de références, un enchevêtrement de textes, de correspondances et de non-correspondances entre l’écrit, l’oral, les sources, à peu près inextricable, un des ensembles les plus complexes auxquels nous ayons jamais eu affaire. Dans ce fouillis, je vais m’efforcer d’introduire un peu d’ordre et de clarté. Patiemment, car il s’agit bien d’un jeu de patience, je répartirai de mon mieux ces fragments, qui chevauchent les uns sur les autres, entre deux séries, celle des reportata de l’enseignement oral (O) et celle des sources (F). Avec des coefficients variables de certitude ou de probabilité, je compte récupérer de la sorte deux fragments certains de l’oral, deux fragments très probables, un fragment simplement probable, enfin deux sources certaines. Dès les premiers textes, nous affrontons les trois principaux problèmes qui nous intéressent et cela, on l’a dit, dans une complexité plus grande qu’ailleurs. Le problème fondamental des rapports de l’écrit et de l’oral. Les limites entre l’un et l’autre sont parfois indécises, incertaines. Ce qui est sûr, c’est que l’oral, quand oral il y a, éclaire considérablement l’écrit, sorte de commentaire ou de résumé anticipé. Le problème de l’indépendance mutuelle de Dexippe et de Simplicius et de leur complémentarité. La question essentielle, souvent insoluble, est de savoir lequel des deux est le plus fidèle à la formulation de l’aporie orale ou de la source telle que les transmettait Porphyre, voire même le seul Jamblique. Le lecteur avisé s’apercevra sans peine que Simplicius ne peut vraiment dépendre de Dexippe ; il paraît ne jamais l’utiliser dans le corps de son ouvrage ; le nom n’apparaît qu’une seule fois, et cela dans la Préface, p. 2,25, où Simplicius énumère les commentateurs des Catégories, alors qu’ailleurs il n’a pas honte de citer fidèlement ses sources, notamment Porphyre et Jamblique. Enfin, le problème des sources de Plotin. Sources de l’oral ou de l’écrit ou de l’un et de l’autre. Ici même, par deux fois, un texte attribué par Simplicius à Plotin est attribué aussi, par lui, aux prédécesseurs de Plotin. Chez Dexippe, ce n’est pas le cas ici et ce sera toujours beaucoup plus rare. Les deux seuls points vraiment fermes et solides – ce ne sera pas toujours le cas – sont : primo, que les apories sont nettement authentifiées, citées sous le nom de Plotin, tant par Dexippe que par Simplicius, lequel souvent, ailleurs, se contente d’écrire « quelques-uns », là même où nous savons pertinemment qu’il s’agit de Plotin. Secundo, qu’une partie au moins des apories, tout en étant sûrement plotiniennes, n’ont aucun parallèle dans les Ennéades et proviennent donc de l’oral. [introduction p. 120-122] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/kSddLNtzgHnzFEv |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"799","_score":null,"_source":{"id":799,"authors_free":[{"id":1179,"entry_id":799,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":175,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Henry, Paul","free_first_name":"Paul","free_last_name":"Henry","norm_person":{"id":175,"first_name":"Paul","last_name":"Henry","full_name":"Henry, Paul","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1180,"entry_id":799,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Apories orales de Plotin sur les Cat\u00e9gories d\u2019Aristote","main_title":{"title":"Apories orales de Plotin sur les Cat\u00e9gories d\u2019Aristote"},"abstract":"Les premi\u00e8res apories que Dexippe attribue explicitement \u00e0 Plotin traitent du nombre des cat\u00e9gories, mais plus pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment sous l\u2019aspect du rapport des cat\u00e9gories du monde intelligible \u00e0 celles du monde sensible. Chez Simplicius aussi ces apories sont explicitement attribu\u00e9es \u00e0 Plotin. D\u2019un monde \u00e0 l\u2019autre, les cat\u00e9gories sont-elles les m\u00eames ou diff\u00e9rentes, ou bien les unes sont-elles les m\u00eames, les autres diff\u00e9rentes ? Sont-elles en nombre \u00e9gal, plus nombreuses, moins nombreuses ? C\u2019est le probl\u00e8me pr\u00e9liminaire qu\u2019examine Plotin au chapitre 1 de son premier trait\u00e9 VI 1, au d\u00e9but du chapitre 2 sur la substance et, une troisi\u00e8me fois, au d\u00e9but du chapitre 5 de son troisi\u00e8me trait\u00e9, VI 3. Nos textes de base sont donc : VI 1,1,19-30 ; VI 1,2,1-8 ; VI 3,5,1-7, mais aussi VI 2,16,1-2 et VI 3,27,1-4.\r\n\r\nS\u2019y r\u00e9f\u00e8rent trois apories de Dexippe, mais l\u2019une sous trois formes diff\u00e9rentes \u2013 ce qui nous donne cinq petits textes \u2013 et deux longues pages de Simplicius, qui correspondent pour une part aux Enn\u00e9ades, pour une part aux textes de Dexippe, mais qui toutes deux associent le nom de Plotin \u00e0 celui de ses pr\u00e9d\u00e9cesseurs. En outre, deux textes anonymes, l\u2019un de Dexippe, l\u2019autre de Simplicius.\r\n\r\nLes relations entre tous ces textes \u00e9tant fort compliqu\u00e9es, il est utile de les \u00e9num\u00e9rer ici, avec les sigles que je leur attribue, et dans l\u2019ordre o\u00f9 je les \u00e9tudie :\r\n\r\n 01 = Simpl. p. 73,15-28 (Plotin, Lucius et Nicostrate)\r\n 01b* = Dex. II 1 sommaire et aporie (anonymes) = Simpl. p. 73,15-16 (Plotin)\r\n 02 = Simpl. p. 73,25-27 (Plotin)\r\n 01a* = Dex. II 4 sommaire et aporie (Plotin)\r\n F1 = Simpl. p. 76,13-22 (Plotin et Nicostrate)\r\n F1 = Dex. II 2 aporie (dans le corps de l\u2019ouvrage) (Plotin)\r\n 01c = Dex. II 2 sommaire (Plotin)\r\n 01e = Dex. II 2 solution (Plotin), cf. Simpl. 76,22-77,4\r\n F2 = Dex. 138 solution (anonyme) = Simpl. p. 66,30-31 (anonyme)\r\n\r\nBien que, au d\u00e9but, ces distinctions paraissent compliqu\u00e9es, la suite montrera qu\u2019elles aident \u00e0 clarifier les questions.\r\n\r\nJe signale tout de suite que le grand texte attribu\u00e9 au \u00ab tr\u00e8s divin Plotin \u00bb par Simpl. p. 73,15-28 contient aussi ce que contiennent Dex. II 1, Dex. II 2 somm., et de nombreuses correspondances avec Dex. II 4.\r\n\r\nNous finirons notre chapitre par un texte tr\u00e8s court relatif au probl\u00e8me de l\u2019oppos\u00e9 du mouvement, le repos, auquel font allusion Enn. VI 3,27,4-5, ainsi que Dex. I 38 sol., p. 34,17-19 (\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2) et Simpl. p. 66,30-31 (\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2), et qui, faisant partie d\u2019une source composite, justifiera le sigle F2.\r\n\r\nLe tout est un chass\u00e9-crois\u00e9 de r\u00e9f\u00e9rences, un enchev\u00eatrement de textes, de correspondances et de non-correspondances entre l\u2019\u00e9crit, l\u2019oral, les sources, \u00e0 peu pr\u00e8s inextricable, un des ensembles les plus complexes auxquels nous ayons jamais eu affaire.\r\n\r\nDans ce fouillis, je vais m\u2019efforcer d\u2019introduire un peu d\u2019ordre et de clart\u00e9. Patiemment, car il s\u2019agit bien d\u2019un jeu de patience, je r\u00e9partirai de mon mieux ces fragments, qui chevauchent les uns sur les autres, entre deux s\u00e9ries, celle des reportata de l\u2019enseignement oral (O) et celle des sources (F).\r\n\r\nAvec des coefficients variables de certitude ou de probabilit\u00e9, je compte r\u00e9cup\u00e9rer de la sorte deux fragments certains de l\u2019oral, deux fragments tr\u00e8s probables, un fragment simplement probable, enfin deux sources certaines.\r\n\r\nD\u00e8s les premiers textes, nous affrontons les trois principaux probl\u00e8mes qui nous int\u00e9ressent et cela, on l\u2019a dit, dans une complexit\u00e9 plus grande qu\u2019ailleurs.\r\n\r\n Le probl\u00e8me fondamental des rapports de l\u2019\u00e9crit et de l\u2019oral. Les limites entre l\u2019un et l\u2019autre sont parfois ind\u00e9cises, incertaines. Ce qui est s\u00fbr, c\u2019est que l\u2019oral, quand oral il y a, \u00e9claire consid\u00e9rablement l\u2019\u00e9crit, sorte de commentaire ou de r\u00e9sum\u00e9 anticip\u00e9.\r\n Le probl\u00e8me de l\u2019ind\u00e9pendance mutuelle de Dexippe et de Simplicius et de leur compl\u00e9mentarit\u00e9. La question essentielle, souvent insoluble, est de savoir lequel des deux est le plus fid\u00e8le \u00e0 la formulation de l\u2019aporie orale ou de la source telle que les transmettait Porphyre, voire m\u00eame le seul Jamblique. Le lecteur avis\u00e9 s\u2019apercevra sans peine que Simplicius ne peut vraiment d\u00e9pendre de Dexippe ; il para\u00eet ne jamais l\u2019utiliser dans le corps de son ouvrage ; le nom n\u2019appara\u00eet qu\u2019une seule fois, et cela dans la Pr\u00e9face, p. 2,25, o\u00f9 Simplicius \u00e9num\u00e8re les commentateurs des Cat\u00e9gories, alors qu\u2019ailleurs il n\u2019a pas honte de citer fid\u00e8lement ses sources, notamment Porphyre et Jamblique.\r\n Enfin, le probl\u00e8me des sources de Plotin. Sources de l\u2019oral ou de l\u2019\u00e9crit ou de l\u2019un et de l\u2019autre. Ici m\u00eame, par deux fois, un texte attribu\u00e9 par Simplicius \u00e0 Plotin est attribu\u00e9 aussi, par lui, aux pr\u00e9d\u00e9cesseurs de Plotin. Chez Dexippe, ce n\u2019est pas le cas ici et ce sera toujours beaucoup plus rare.\r\n\r\nLes deux seuls points vraiment fermes et solides \u2013 ce ne sera pas toujours le cas \u2013 sont : primo, que les apories sont nettement authentifi\u00e9es, cit\u00e9es sous le nom de Plotin, tant par Dexippe que par Simplicius, lequel souvent, ailleurs, se contente d\u2019\u00e9crire \u00ab quelques-uns \u00bb, l\u00e0 m\u00eame o\u00f9 nous savons pertinemment qu\u2019il s\u2019agit de Plotin. Secundo, qu\u2019une partie au moins des apories, tout en \u00e9tant s\u00fbrement plotiniennes, n\u2019ont aucun parall\u00e8le dans les Enn\u00e9ades et proviennent donc de l\u2019oral. [introduction p. 120-122]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/kSddLNtzgHnzFEv","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":175,"full_name":"Henry, Paul","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":799,"section_of":189,"pages":"120-156","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":189,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, \u00dcberlieferung, Nachleben","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Lulofs\/Kollesch\/Nutton1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Kommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles sind das Thema dieses Bandes. Mit der Aristotelesrenaissance des 1. Jh. v.Chr. einsetzend, vermitteln die Beitr\u00e4ge, unter acht Hauptkapiteln zusammengefa\u00dft, ein eindrucksvolles Bild von der Rezeption zweier Jahrtausende. D a \u00df diese Rezeption kontinuierlich in ihren wichtigen Phasen illustriert werden kann, ist - wie schon im ersten Band - der freundlichen Kooperation der beteiligten Autoren zu verdanken. Als besonderer Gl\u00fccksfall mag gelten, da\u00df einige Beitr\u00e4ge sich in idealer Weise erg\u00e4nzen. So wird der Leser in zwei auf einanderfolgenden Artikeln die Interpretationsgeschichte der zentralen Kapitel Metaphysik \u039b 7 und 9 von Plotin und Themistios \u00fcber Maimonides und Gersonides bis Hegel verfolgen k\u00f6nnen. Dieses Bem\u00fchen um Aristoteles von der Antike bis in die Neuzeit ist etwa f\u00fcr De anima bei Alexander von Aphrodisias und Leibniz, f\u00fcr die \r\nKategorien bei Plotin und Peirce dokumentiert, wobei die Erstver\u00f6ffentlichung der Ubersetzung von Cat. 1 - 4 durch den bedeutenden amerikanischen Philosophen mit besonderer Freude angezeigt werden darf. \r\nVon den Autoren dieses Bandes weilen Paul Henry und Charles B. Schmitt nicht mehr unter uns. In ein Buch \u00fcber Plotins Entretiens sollte der hier ver\u00f6ffentlichte Beitrag von Paul Henry sp\u00e4ter einmal integriert werden; daraus erkl\u00e4ren sich gelegentliche Hinweise auf geplante Teile dieses nun nicht mehr vollendeten Werkes. Die Studie von Charles B.Schmitt \u00fcber die Aristoteles-Florilegien der Renaissance bietet die erste Gesamtdarstellung zu diesem Thema und enth\u00e4lt im Anhang ein Verzeichnis mit wichtigen Erg\u00e4nzungen zu seiner grundlegenden \u201eBibliography of Aristotle Editions, 1501-1600\". [Vorwort p. V-VI]\r\n","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Q1P6OhIp8zaE99c","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":189,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet","volume":"2","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Apories orales de Plotin sur les Cat\u00e9gories d\u2019Aristote"]}
Title | Aristote: quantité et contrariété. Une critique de l’école d’Oxford |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1980 |
Published in | Concepts et catégories dans la pensée antique |
Pages | 89-165 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | O'Brien, Denis |
Editor(s) | Aubenque, Pierre |
Translator(s) |
Avant-propos L’école d’Oxford et le commentaire du Professeur J. L. Ackrill sur les Catégories d’Aristote. Les divisions du texte — un point de repère. Objet de l’argument (5b11-15) Distinction entre propriétés et possesseurs de propriétés. Distinction entre l’aire et la surface, le volume et le corps. Distinction entre quantités déterminées et quantités indéterminées. Le premier argument (5b15-29) La grandeur relative et la grandeur en soi. Les nombreux et les peu nombreux : motif de la double comparaison. Commentaire de Simplicius : les deux formes du paradoxe. Commentaire de Simplicius : la grandeur relative et la grandeur absolue. Le doublet (5b26-29). Le deuxième argument (5b30-33) Rubrique liminaire : une même chose peut-elle se rencontrer dans plus d’une catégorie ? Les relatifs peuvent-ils avoir des contraires ? Les deux groupes de relatifs : ceux qui peuvent avoir un contraire, ceux qui ne peuvent pas avoir de contraire. Relation et contrariété : la prémisse sous-jacente de l’argument. Le troisième argument (5b33-6a11) Introduction à l’argument (5b33-35). Première partie de l’argument : une chose admettra deux contraires à la fois (5b35-6a4). Seconde partie de l’argument : les choses contraires seront, à elles-mêmes, contraires (6a4-8). Conclusion de l’argument (6a8-11). Traduction-Paraphrase du chapitre six des Catégories (4b20-6a35) [structure by the author] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/fSSFgeHBQMgQH3p |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1099","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1099,"authors_free":[{"id":1661,"entry_id":1099,"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\u2019Brien","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}},{"id":1662,"entry_id":1099,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":149,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","free_first_name":"Pierre","free_last_name":"Aubenque","norm_person":{"id":149,"first_name":"Pierre","last_name":"Aubenque","full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118919458","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aristote: quantit\u00e9 et contrari\u00e9t\u00e9. Une critique de l\u2019\u00e9cole d\u2019Oxford","main_title":{"title":"Aristote: quantit\u00e9 et contrari\u00e9t\u00e9. Une critique de l\u2019\u00e9cole d\u2019Oxford"},"abstract":"Avant-propos\r\nL\u2019\u00e9cole d\u2019Oxford et le commentaire du Professeur J. L. Ackrill sur les Cat\u00e9gories d\u2019Aristote.\r\nLes divisions du texte \u2014 un point de rep\u00e8re.\r\nObjet de l\u2019argument (5b11-15)\r\n\r\n Distinction entre propri\u00e9t\u00e9s et possesseurs de propri\u00e9t\u00e9s.\r\n Distinction entre l\u2019aire et la surface, le volume et le corps.\r\n Distinction entre quantit\u00e9s d\u00e9termin\u00e9es et quantit\u00e9s ind\u00e9termin\u00e9es.\r\n\r\nLe premier argument (5b15-29)\r\n\r\n La grandeur relative et la grandeur en soi.\r\n Les nombreux et les peu nombreux : motif de la double comparaison.\r\n Commentaire de Simplicius : les deux formes du paradoxe.\r\n Commentaire de Simplicius : la grandeur relative et la grandeur absolue.\r\n Le doublet (5b26-29).\r\n\r\nLe deuxi\u00e8me argument (5b30-33)\r\n\r\n Rubrique liminaire : une m\u00eame chose peut-elle se rencontrer dans plus d\u2019une cat\u00e9gorie ?\r\n Les relatifs peuvent-ils avoir des contraires ?\r\n Les deux groupes de relatifs : ceux qui peuvent avoir un contraire, ceux qui ne peuvent pas avoir de contraire.\r\n Relation et contrari\u00e9t\u00e9 : la pr\u00e9misse sous-jacente de l\u2019argument.\r\n\r\nLe troisi\u00e8me argument (5b33-6a11)\r\n\r\n Introduction \u00e0 l\u2019argument (5b33-35).\r\n Premi\u00e8re partie de l\u2019argument : une chose admettra deux contraires \u00e0 la fois (5b35-6a4).\r\n Seconde partie de l\u2019argument : les choses contraires seront, \u00e0 elles-m\u00eames, contraires (6a4-8).\r\n Conclusion de l\u2019argument (6a8-11).\r\n\r\nTraduction-Paraphrase du chapitre six des Cat\u00e9gories (4b20-6a35) [structure by the author]","btype":2,"date":"1980","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/fSSFgeHBQMgQH3p","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":144,"full_name":"O'Brien, Denis","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":149,"full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1099,"section_of":302,"pages":"89-165","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":302,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Concepts et cat\u00e9gories dans la pens\u00e9e antique","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Aubenque1980b","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1980","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1980","abstract":"Depuis Aristote, on entend par cat\u00e9gories des concepts tr\u00e8s g\u00e9n\u00e9raux, dont la g\u00e9n\u00e9ralit\u00e9 ne d\u00e9rive pas de l\u2019exp\u00e9rience, mais en quelque sorte la pr\u00e9c\u00e8de, puisque c\u2019est eux et eux seuls qui nous permettent de l\u2019organiser et de la penser. Ces concepts \u2013 substance, quantit\u00e9, relation, qualit\u00e9, lieu, temps, action, passion, situation, avoir \u2013 sont-ils des structures universelles de toute pens\u00e9e ou bien sont-ils li\u00e9s aux particularit\u00e9s s\u00e9mantiques ou syntaxiques d\u2019un syst\u00e8me linguistique particulier, en l\u2019occurrence de la langue grecque, \u00e0 l\u2019int\u00e9rieur de laquelle ils ont \u00e9t\u00e9 pour la premi\u00e8re fois \u00e9nonc\u00e9s et rassembl\u00e9s?\r\nLes \u00e9tudes ici r\u00e9unies, issues d\u2019un s\u00e9minaire qui s\u2019est poursuivi durant plusieurs ann\u00e9es au Centre de recherche sur la Pens\u00e9e antique de l\u2019Universit\u00e9 de Paris-Sorbonne, associ\u00e9 au C.N.R.S. (Centre L\u00e9on-Robin), s\u2019efforcent d\u2019apporter des \u00e9l\u00e9ments de r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 cette grande question, qui demeure au centre des discussions contemporaines sur les rapports de la philosophie et du langage. Leur apport sp\u00e9cifique consiste dans une ex\u00e9g\u00e8se rigoureuse des analyses du trait\u00e9 aristot\u00e9licien des Cat\u00e9gories, \u00e9clair\u00e9 par les d\u00e9veloppements ult\u00e9rieurs de la doctrine, tels que nous les connaissons notamment \u00e0 travers le Commentaire du N\u00e9oplatonicien Simplicius. Certaines de ces \u00e9tudes examinent l\u2019influence ou les transformations des cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes chez les Sto\u00efciens, les grammairiens grecs de la fin de l\u2019Antiquit\u00e9, les N\u00e9oplatoniciens tardifs, les P\u00e8res de l\u2019\u00c9glise et dans la tradition latine antique et m\u00e9di\u00e9vale. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FGpf7U5Cy1dboYI","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":302,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Vrin","series":"Bibliotheque d\u2019histoire de la philosophie","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Aristote: quantit\u00e9 et contrari\u00e9t\u00e9. Une critique de l\u2019\u00e9cole d\u2019Oxford"]}
Title | Aristotelian philosophy in the Roman world from the time of Cicero to the end of the second century AD |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. 2. Teilband: Philosophie |
Pages | 1079-1174 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Gottschalk, Hans B. |
Editor(s) | Haase, Wolfgang , Temporini, Hildegard |
Translator(s) |
It is time to place our findings in a wider perspective. The propagation of Aristotelianism in the first two centuries AD seems to have taken place at several levels. For the committed student, there was the study and exposition of Aristotle’s school treatises. Much sound and lasting work was done in this field, but it seems to have been confined to a fairly restricted circle, although some contributions were made by members of other schools or by those, like Galen, who did not tie themselves to any school at all, as well as by professed Aristotelians. For a wider audience, there were compilations and handbooks purveying Aristotle’s doctrines in a more accessible form and the 'exoteric’ writings of Aristotle and his pupils, which continued to circulate in this period; the impression sometimes given that they were driven out of circulation as soon as Andronicus made the school treatises available is seriously misleading. Lastly, there was an immense production of sub-philosophical tracts, like the pseudo-Pythagorean writings, which might include some Aristotelian ideas but always diluted and heavily contaminated with others of a different origin. We may ignore the third of these, which contributed little or nothing to the development of Aristotelianism as such. Historians naturally concentrate on the first, which so profoundly influenced the subsequent tradition, but it would be a mistake to neglect the second entirely. The eminent men of affairs who professed themselves followers of Aristotle will not have been motivated by a passionate belief in the priority of the categorical over the hypothetical syllogism or the eternity of the physical universe. What Aristotelianism had to offer them was a view of the world and a reasoned set of ethical beliefs that avoided the mechanism and hedonism of the Epicureans, the determinism and rigorism of the Stoics, and the other-worldliness of Platonism; and this is more or less what we find in the popular writings influenced by Aristotle’s philosophy, whether composed by members of the school or by outsiders like Plutarch. However we rate the philosophical value of this side of the school’s activity, it undoubtedly helped to establish its position in society and the claim of its members to publicly funded teaching posts and the other privileges accorded to philosophers. This dualism entered into the popular image of the school and was believed to go back to its very beginnings. Lucian, in a well-known passage, describes the Peripatetic as the thinker with two philosophies, the 'exoteric’ and the 'esoteric,’ to offer, and according to Aulus Gellius, Aristotle used to give rigorous courses for specialists in the morning and more popular ones in the afternoon. The diffusion of this view in the literature of the second century AD suggests that it accurately reflected the conditions of the time, but this does not mean that we need doubt its historical truth. Gellius’ source was probably Andronicus, who is quoted later in the same chapter; the distinction between 'esoteric’ (or 'acroamatic’) and 'exoteric’ writings is already found in Cicero, who probably had it from Antiochus of Ascalon, and Aristotle himself refers to the 'exoteric’ works in the extant treatises. The history of the Hellenistic Peripatos is, to a large extent, one of the tension between these tendencies in the work of the school. The same continuity is found in the school’s teaching, especially at the popular level. The dialogues and handbooks read in the Hellenistic age continued in use, and the opinions about the school and its beliefs current among outsiders in the first two centuries AD hardly differed from those of the Ciceronian age. At the more specialized level, Andronicus’ edition made a new start in the study of Aristotle’s writings, but his way of presenting Aristotle’s philosophy was a legitimate extension of the work of Theophrastus and Eudemus. Even the freedom with which he and his immediate followers suggested the need for changes in details imitated the practice of the first generation of Peripatetics. There is one difference, however. The early Peripatetics not only expounded Aristotle’s philosophy but tried to extend its scope by independent study of the natural world and human behavior. The absence of this element from the work of Andronicus and those who came after him resulted in the growth of the book-centered scholasticism we meet in the Imperial age. All this is not to say that the popular and scholarly traditions were isolated from one another. The popular books and lectures of professed Peripatetics were meant to give a true outline of the philosophy developed fully in the school treatises, and even some of the pseudo-Pythagorean books contain material clearly derived from the extant pragmateiai, at however many removes; a few of them, notably the pseudo-Archytean reworkings of the Categories, reflect a stage in their understanding that can be clearly defined and connected with the names of known commentators. On the other hand, some of the commentaries on Aristotle’s pragmateiai seem to have originated in elementary lecture courses, and this may account for the superficiality of some of their contents. The specialized work of the school was based on the exegesis of Aristotle’s writings. In this field, its members developed a high degree of competence, and its influence is not exhausted even today, but the thrust of their interpretation was very different from that of the modern historian of philosophy. Their aim was to present Aristotle’s philosophy as a system and to elucidate his doctrines; they were less interested in the character of his arguments and not at all in the origin and growth of his ideas. New developments of his teaching took one of two directions. On the one hand, real or apparent discrepancies in Aristotle’s writings had to be explained. This was part of exegesis and subordinated to the systematic tendency of the school (we find no genetic explanations); some of the difficulties raised were of a kind that would only be felt by elementary students, and clearly much attention was paid to their needs. But there are real loose ends in Aristotle’s work, which his followers tried to tie up as best they could. Secondly, new problems had arisen in the course of philosophical debate in the period since Aristotle’s death, which Aristotle had not discussed or only in a marginal way; the question of Fate and Providence is the most notable instance. Here there was a constant tension between the implications of the problem and the requirements of orthodoxy, and progress was limited. On the whole, orthodoxy prevailed, backed up by polemics against rival viewpoints. At this point, we can observe a rigidity that inhibited the further development of Aristotelianism and may explain its failure to resist the encroachment of Platonism. We have already seen that many Aristotelian ideas, including the whole of his logic and a good part of his metaphysics, natural philosophy, and ethics, were taken over by Platonists from the first century onwards. In spite of some opposition, from Plotinus as well as lesser figures, this process continued until all Aristotelian doctrines that could be brought into conformity with Platonic principles were incorporated into the developed Neoplatonic systems. As this happened, Aristotelianism ceased to exist as an independent philosophy. There is a Protean quality about Platonism that has allowed it at various times to absorb alien ideas without losing its essential character, perhaps precisely because its fundamental insights were not tied to a fixed system. Aristotelianism, in the systematic form it had acquired, lacked this flexibility. It was well suited to the enlightened atmosphere of the first two centuries AD but could no longer meet the needs, especially the religious aspirations, of the centuries that followed. But it could offer the Platonists something they lacked—a ready-made set of components for building their own system. Many of the parts proved more durable than the whole; they constituted the Erkenntnisse, in N. Hartmann’s sense of the word, of Aristotle’s thinking. Within the new framework, Aristotle’s leading ideas retained their vigor, and Aristotle became what, by and large, he has remained ever since: the philosopher’s philosopher. [conclusion p. 1172-1174] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/FPwm868kRTy5Ier |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1332","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1332,"authors_free":[{"id":1965,"entry_id":1332,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":135,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Gottschalk, Hans B.","free_first_name":"Hans B.","free_last_name":"Gottschalk","norm_person":{"id":135,"first_name":"Hans B.","last_name":"Gottschalk","full_name":"Gottschalk, Hans B.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1161498559","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2382,"entry_id":1332,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":325,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Haase, Wolfgang","free_first_name":"Wolfgang","free_last_name":"Haase","norm_person":{"id":325,"first_name":"Wolfgang","last_name":"Haase","full_name":"Haase, Wolfgang","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117757527","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2383,"entry_id":1332,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":453,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Temporini, Hildegard","free_first_name":"Hildegard","free_last_name":"Temporini","norm_person":{"id":453,"first_name":"Hildegard","last_name":"Temporini","full_name":"Temporini, Hildegard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117754013","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aristotelian philosophy in the Roman world from the time of Cicero to the end of the second century AD","main_title":{"title":"Aristotelian philosophy in the Roman world from the time of Cicero to the end of the second century AD"},"abstract":"It is time to place our findings in a wider perspective. The propagation of Aristotelianism in the first two centuries AD seems to have taken place at several levels. For the committed student, there was the study and exposition of Aristotle\u2019s school treatises. Much sound and lasting work was done in this field, but it seems to have been confined to a fairly restricted circle, although some contributions were made by members of other schools or by those, like Galen, who did not tie themselves to any school at all, as well as by professed Aristotelians. For a wider audience, there were compilations and handbooks purveying Aristotle\u2019s doctrines in a more accessible form and the 'exoteric\u2019 writings of Aristotle and his pupils, which continued to circulate in this period; the impression sometimes given that they were driven out of circulation as soon as Andronicus made the school treatises available is seriously misleading. Lastly, there was an immense production of sub-philosophical tracts, like the pseudo-Pythagorean writings, which might include some Aristotelian ideas but always diluted and heavily contaminated with others of a different origin.\r\n\r\nWe may ignore the third of these, which contributed little or nothing to the development of Aristotelianism as such. Historians naturally concentrate on the first, which so profoundly influenced the subsequent tradition, but it would be a mistake to neglect the second entirely. The eminent men of affairs who professed themselves followers of Aristotle will not have been motivated by a passionate belief in the priority of the categorical over the hypothetical syllogism or the eternity of the physical universe. What Aristotelianism had to offer them was a view of the world and a reasoned set of ethical beliefs that avoided the mechanism and hedonism of the Epicureans, the determinism and rigorism of the Stoics, and the other-worldliness of Platonism; and this is more or less what we find in the popular writings influenced by Aristotle\u2019s philosophy, whether composed by members of the school or by outsiders like Plutarch. However we rate the philosophical value of this side of the school\u2019s activity, it undoubtedly helped to establish its position in society and the claim of its members to publicly funded teaching posts and the other privileges accorded to philosophers.\r\n\r\nThis dualism entered into the popular image of the school and was believed to go back to its very beginnings. Lucian, in a well-known passage, describes the Peripatetic as the thinker with two philosophies, the 'exoteric\u2019 and the 'esoteric,\u2019 to offer, and according to Aulus Gellius, Aristotle used to give rigorous courses for specialists in the morning and more popular ones in the afternoon. The diffusion of this view in the literature of the second century AD suggests that it accurately reflected the conditions of the time, but this does not mean that we need doubt its historical truth. Gellius\u2019 source was probably Andronicus, who is quoted later in the same chapter; the distinction between 'esoteric\u2019 (or 'acroamatic\u2019) and 'exoteric\u2019 writings is already found in Cicero, who probably had it from Antiochus of Ascalon, and Aristotle himself refers to the 'exoteric\u2019 works in the extant treatises. The history of the Hellenistic Peripatos is, to a large extent, one of the tension between these tendencies in the work of the school.\r\n\r\nThe same continuity is found in the school\u2019s teaching, especially at the popular level. The dialogues and handbooks read in the Hellenistic age continued in use, and the opinions about the school and its beliefs current among outsiders in the first two centuries AD hardly differed from those of the Ciceronian age. At the more specialized level, Andronicus\u2019 edition made a new start in the study of Aristotle\u2019s writings, but his way of presenting Aristotle\u2019s philosophy was a legitimate extension of the work of Theophrastus and Eudemus. Even the freedom with which he and his immediate followers suggested the need for changes in details imitated the practice of the first generation of Peripatetics.\r\n\r\nThere is one difference, however. The early Peripatetics not only expounded Aristotle\u2019s philosophy but tried to extend its scope by independent study of the natural world and human behavior. The absence of this element from the work of Andronicus and those who came after him resulted in the growth of the book-centered scholasticism we meet in the Imperial age.\r\n\r\nAll this is not to say that the popular and scholarly traditions were isolated from one another. The popular books and lectures of professed Peripatetics were meant to give a true outline of the philosophy developed fully in the school treatises, and even some of the pseudo-Pythagorean books contain material clearly derived from the extant pragmateiai, at however many removes; a few of them, notably the pseudo-Archytean reworkings of the Categories, reflect a stage in their understanding that can be clearly defined and connected with the names of known commentators. On the other hand, some of the commentaries on Aristotle\u2019s pragmateiai seem to have originated in elementary lecture courses, and this may account for the superficiality of some of their contents.\r\n\r\nThe specialized work of the school was based on the exegesis of Aristotle\u2019s writings. In this field, its members developed a high degree of competence, and its influence is not exhausted even today, but the thrust of their interpretation was very different from that of the modern historian of philosophy. Their aim was to present Aristotle\u2019s philosophy as a system and to elucidate his doctrines; they were less interested in the character of his arguments and not at all in the origin and growth of his ideas.\r\n\r\nNew developments of his teaching took one of two directions. On the one hand, real or apparent discrepancies in Aristotle\u2019s writings had to be explained. This was part of exegesis and subordinated to the systematic tendency of the school (we find no genetic explanations); some of the difficulties raised were of a kind that would only be felt by elementary students, and clearly much attention was paid to their needs. But there are real loose ends in Aristotle\u2019s work, which his followers tried to tie up as best they could. Secondly, new problems had arisen in the course of philosophical debate in the period since Aristotle\u2019s death, which Aristotle had not discussed or only in a marginal way; the question of Fate and Providence is the most notable instance. Here there was a constant tension between the implications of the problem and the requirements of orthodoxy, and progress was limited. On the whole, orthodoxy prevailed, backed up by polemics against rival viewpoints.\r\n\r\nAt this point, we can observe a rigidity that inhibited the further development of Aristotelianism and may explain its failure to resist the encroachment of Platonism. We have already seen that many Aristotelian ideas, including the whole of his logic and a good part of his metaphysics, natural philosophy, and ethics, were taken over by Platonists from the first century onwards. In spite of some opposition, from Plotinus as well as lesser figures, this process continued until all Aristotelian doctrines that could be brought into conformity with Platonic principles were incorporated into the developed Neoplatonic systems. As this happened, Aristotelianism ceased to exist as an independent philosophy.\r\n\r\nThere is a Protean quality about Platonism that has allowed it at various times to absorb alien ideas without losing its essential character, perhaps precisely because its fundamental insights were not tied to a fixed system. Aristotelianism, in the systematic form it had acquired, lacked this flexibility. It was well suited to the enlightened atmosphere of the first two centuries AD but could no longer meet the needs, especially the religious aspirations, of the centuries that followed. But it could offer the Platonists something they lacked\u2014a ready-made set of components for building their own system. Many of the parts proved more durable than the whole; they constituted the Erkenntnisse, in N. Hartmann\u2019s sense of the word, of Aristotle\u2019s thinking. Within the new framework, Aristotle\u2019s leading ideas retained their vigor, and Aristotle became what, by and large, he has remained ever since: the philosopher\u2019s philosopher.\r\n[conclusion p. 1172-1174]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FPwm868kRTy5Ier","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":135,"full_name":"Gottschalk, Hans B.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":325,"full_name":"Haase, Wolfgang","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":453,"full_name":"Temporini, Hildegard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1332,"section_of":335,"pages":"1079-1174","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":335,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aufstieg und Niedergang der r\u00f6mischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. 2. Teilband: Philosophie","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Haase1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"AUFSTIEG UND NIEDERGANG DER R\u00d6MISCHEN WELT (ANRW) ist ein internationales Gemeinschaftswerk historischer Wissenschaften. Seine Aufgabe besteht darin, alle wichtigen Aspekte der antiken r\u00f6mischen Welt sowie ihres Fortwirkens und Nachlebens in Mittelalter und Neuzeit nach dem gegenw\u00e4rtigen Stand der Forschung in Einzelbeitr\u00e4gen zu behandeln. Das Werk ist in 3 Teile gegliedert:\r\nI. Von den Anf\u00e4ngen Roms bis zum Ausgang der Republik\r\nII. Principat\r\nIII. Sp\u00e4tantike\r\nJeder der drei Teile umfa\u00dft sechs systematische Rubriken, zwischen denen es vielfache \u00dcberschneidungen gibt: 1. Politische Geschichte, 2. Recht, 3. Religion, 4. Sprache und Literatur, 5. Philosophie und Wissenschaften, 6. K\u00fcnste.\r\n\r\nANRW ist ein handbuchartiges \u00dcbersichtswerk zu den r\u00f6mischen Studien im weitesten Sinne, mit Einschlu\u00df der Rezeptions- und Wirkungsgeschichte bis in die Gegenwart. Bei den Beitr\u00e4gen handelt es sich entweder um zusammenfassende Darstellungen mit Bibliographie oder um Problem- und Forschungsberichte bzw. thematisch breit angelegte exemplarische Untersuchungen. Die Artikel erscheinen in deutscher, englischer, franz\u00f6sischer oder italienischer Sprache.\r\n\r\nZum Mitarbeiterstab geh\u00f6ren rund 1000 Gelehrte aus 35 L\u00e4ndern. Der Vielfalt der Themen entsprechend geh\u00f6ren die Autoren haupts\u00e4chlich folgenden Fachrichtungen an: Alte, Mittelalterliche und Neue Geschichte; Byzantinistik, Slavistik; Klassische, Mittellateinische, Romanische und Orientalische Philologie; Klassische, Orientalische und Christliche Arch\u00e4ologie und Kunstgeschichte; Rechtswissenschaft; Religionswissenschaft und Theologie, besonders Kirchengeschichte und Patristik.\r\n\r\nIn Vorbereitung sind:\r\nTeil II, Bd. 26,4: Religion - Vorkonstantinisches Christentum: Neues Testament - Sachthemen, Fortsetzung\r\nTeil II, Bd. 37,4: Wissenschaften: Medizin und Biologie, Fortsetzung. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/vkva8h1vt1Po53c","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":335,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"De Gruyter","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Aristotelian philosophy in the Roman world from the time of Cicero to the end of the second century AD"]}
Title | Aristotle and Simplicius on Mathematical Infinity |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1981 |
Published in | Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Thessaloniki August 7-14 1978 |
Pages | 179-182 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Mueller, Ian |
Editor(s) | Theodōrakopulos, Iōannēs Nikolaou |
Translator(s) |
Aristotle was the first not only to distinguish between potential and actual infinity but also to insist that potential infinity alone is enough for mathematics thus initiating an issue still central to the philosophy of mathematics. Modern scholarship, however, has attacked Aristotle's thesis because, according to the received doctrine, it does not square with Euclidean geometry and it also seems to contravene Aristotle's belief in the finitude of the physical universe. This monograph, the first thorough study of the issue, puts Aristotle's views on infinity in the proper perspective. Through a close study of the relevant Aristotelian passages it shows that the Stagirite's theory of infinity forms a well argued philosophical position which does not bear on his belief in a finite cosmos and does not undermine the Euclidean nature of geometry. The monograph draws a much more positive picture of Aristotle's views and reaffirms his disputed stature as a serious philosopher of mathematics. This innovative and stimulating contribution will be essential reading to a wide range of scholars, including classicists, philosophers of science and mathematics as well as historians of ideas. [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/XpR1jO7FPHTJmR4 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"63","_score":null,"_source":{"id":63,"authors_free":[{"id":71,"entry_id":63,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":270,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mueller, Ian","free_first_name":"Ian","free_last_name":"Mueller","norm_person":{"id":270,"first_name":"Ian","last_name":"Mueller","full_name":"Mueller, Ian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2505,"entry_id":63,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":514,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Theod\u014drakopulos, I\u014dann\u0113s Nikolaou","free_first_name":"I\u014dann\u0113s Nikolaou","free_last_name":"Theod\u014drakopulos","norm_person":{"id":514,"first_name":" Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","last_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos","full_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos, Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117302619","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Aristotle and Simplicius on Mathematical Infinity","main_title":{"title":"Aristotle and Simplicius on Mathematical Infinity"},"abstract":"Aristotle was the first not only to distinguish between potential and actual infinity but also to insist that potential infinity alone is enough for mathematics thus initiating an issue still central to the philosophy of mathematics. Modern scholarship, however, has attacked Aristotle's thesis because, according to the received doctrine, it does not square with Euclidean geometry and it also seems to contravene Aristotle's belief in the finitude of the physical universe. This monograph, the first thorough study of the issue, puts Aristotle's views on infinity in the proper perspective. Through a close study of the relevant Aristotelian passages it shows that the Stagirite's theory of infinity forms a well argued philosophical position which does not bear on his belief in a finite cosmos and does not undermine the Euclidean nature of geometry. The monograph draws a much more positive picture of Aristotle's views and reaffirms his disputed stature as a serious philosopher of mathematics. This innovative and stimulating contribution will be essential reading to a wide range of scholars, including classicists, philosophers of science and mathematics as well as historians of ideas. [author's abstract]","btype":2,"date":"1981","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/XpR1jO7FPHTJmR4","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":270,"full_name":"Mueller, Ian","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":514,"full_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos, Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":63,"pubplace":"Athen","publisher":"International Association for Greek Philosophy","series":"Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Ath\u00e8nes, Minist\u00e8re de la culture et des sciences","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":{"id":63,"section_of":1459,"pages":"179-182","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1459,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Thessaloniki August 7-14 1978","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1981","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/O3DQotq4JIjFp7W","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1459,"pubplace":"Athen","publisher":"Athe\u0304na : Ministry of Culture and Sciences","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Aristotle and Simplicius on Mathematical Infinity"]}
Title | Catégories et langage selon Simplicius - La question du “skopos” du traité aristotélicien des “Catégories” |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 61-90 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hoffmann, Philippe |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's Categories is the first among three commentaries left by the renowned Neoplatonic philosopher. This commentary holds a significant place in the study of Aristotle's works, as it marks the beginning of the reading of Aristotle's oeuvre from a spiritual perspective. The prayer at the end of Simplicius' commentary highlights the transformative power of studying Aristotle's Categories, allowing the soul to ascend to higher knowledge and seek ultimate happiness. Simplicius' other commentaries, such as his work on Epictetus and De Caelo, similarly express the journey of spiritual conversion and progressive ascension to higher realities within the Neoplatonic spiritual framework. The Neoplatonic curriculum involved an ethical initiation, leading to the study of Aristotle's works and culminating in the study of Plato's Timaeus and Parmenides. Overall, Simplicius' exegesis of Aristotle's Categories reveals the profound spiritual significance and transformative potential of philosophical studies within the Neoplatonic tradition. [introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/z4JuOtqVWGpQ7Ef |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"709","_score":null,"_source":{"id":709,"authors_free":[{"id":1057,"entry_id":709,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":138,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe","free_first_name":"Philippe","free_last_name":"Hoffmann","norm_person":{"id":138,"first_name":"Philippe ","last_name":"Hoffmann","full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/189361905","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1058,"entry_id":709,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Cat\u00e9gories et langage selon Simplicius - La question du \u201cskopos\u201d du trait\u00e9 aristot\u00e9licien des \u201cCat\u00e9gories\u201d","main_title":{"title":"Cat\u00e9gories et langage selon Simplicius - La question du \u201cskopos\u201d du trait\u00e9 aristot\u00e9licien des \u201cCat\u00e9gories\u201d"},"abstract":"Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's Categories is the first among three commentaries left by the renowned Neoplatonic philosopher. This commentary holds a significant place in the study of Aristotle's works, as it marks the beginning of the reading of Aristotle's oeuvre from a spiritual perspective. The prayer at the end of Simplicius' commentary highlights the transformative power of studying Aristotle's Categories, allowing the soul to ascend to higher knowledge and seek ultimate happiness. Simplicius' other commentaries, such as his work on Epictetus and De Caelo, similarly express the journey of spiritual conversion and progressive ascension to higher realities within the Neoplatonic spiritual framework. The Neoplatonic curriculum involved an ethical initiation, leading to the study of Aristotle's works and culminating in the study of Plato's Timaeus and Parmenides. Overall, Simplicius' exegesis of Aristotle's Categories reveals the profound spiritual significance and transformative potential of philosophical studies within the Neoplatonic tradition. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/z4JuOtqVWGpQ7Ef","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":138,"full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":709,"section_of":171,"pages":"61-90","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Cat\u00e9gories et langage selon Simplicius - La question du \u201cskopos\u201d du trait\u00e9 aristot\u00e9licien des \u201cCat\u00e9gories\u201d"]}
Title | Compatible Alternatives: Middle Platonist Theology and the Xenophanes Reception |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1988 |
Published in | Knowledge of God in the Greco-Roman World |
Pages | 92-117 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Mansfeld, Jaap |
Editor(s) | Broek, Roelof van den , Baarda, Tjitze , Mansfeld, Jaap |
Translator(s) |
Students of Middle Platonism are familiar with the phenomenon that the accounts of the divine provided by various authors of the 2nd century CE strike one as incoherent. Qualifications according to the viae negationis, analogia, and eminentia, which to us seem incompatible to a degree, tend to coexist in a peaceful jumble. On the one hand, the essence or nature of God is described by means of a refusal to predicate any attributes whatsoever. Attributes withheld in this way may be arranged in polar pairs. On the other hand, God’s existence as a supreme cause tends to be described in a positive way, for example, by means of varieties of the argumentum ex gradibus entium. The theology of chapter 10 of Alkinoos’ Didaskalikos is a notorious instance of such a medley. That this is not only a problem from an anachronistic modern point of view becomes clear when we adduce important evidence neglected by students of Middle Platonism—namely, the parallel accounts of the theology of Xenophanes to be found in the pseudo-Aristotelian treatise De Melisso Xenophane Gorgia (hereafter MXG), chapters 3–4, and in Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics (pp. 22.22–23.30 Diels). Here, God is said to be, on the one hand, eternal, one, homogeneous, spherical, limited, and unmoved, and, on the other, neither limited nor unlimited, and neither at rest nor in motion. Both pseudo-Aristotle and Simplicius are aware that there is a problem here. The former dialectically exploits the contradiction between the negated pairs of polar opposites and some of the positive attributes to prove Xenophanes’ position unacceptable. The latter resolves this contradiction by arguing that “spherical” means “homogeneous” and “unmoved” means “beyond motion and rest,” i.e., he explains those positive attributes which clash with the negated polar pairs in terms of precisely these pairs. The accounts in pseudo-Aristotle and Simplicius have, as a rule, puzzled students of Presocratic philosophy. What I would like to call the “doxographical vulgate”—i.e., the plurality of sources Diels (still followed by the majority of experts in the field) wanted, at least to the extent that they agree among themselves or with purported fragments of Theophrastus, to derive from Theophrastus’ lost Physikai doxai—knows nothing of the negated pairs of polar attributes. Yet Simplicius explicitly attributes these pairs to Theophrastus. This attribution, as I argue elsewhere, should be accepted. What Theophrastus, following Aristotle (Metaphysics A 5.986b 19 ff.), meant was that Xenophanes was not clear about his one principle, neither committing himself to the view that it is limited nor to the view that it is unlimited, and neither stating clearly that it moves nor that it is at rest. It follows that the doxographical vulgate, which holds that Xenophanes’ God not only is one and eternal but also homogeneous, limited, spherical, unmoved, and rational, does not derive from Theophrastus. It also follows that the source from which the description of Xenophanes’ doctrine in pseudo-Aristotle and Simplicius derives paradoxically combined the entirely positive account found in the doxographical vulgate with Theophrastus’ negative non liquet. The motives that brought about this combination are one of the subjects of the present investigation. [introduction p. 92-93] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/wBb3nfQCrMnJw05 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"931","_score":null,"_source":{"id":931,"authors_free":[{"id":1378,"entry_id":931,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":29,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","free_first_name":"Jaap","free_last_name":"Mansfeld","norm_person":{"id":29,"first_name":"Jaap","last_name":"Mansfeld","full_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119383217","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1379,"entry_id":931,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":377,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Broek, Roelof van den","free_first_name":"Roelof van den","free_last_name":"Broek","norm_person":{"id":377,"first_name":"Roelof van den","last_name":"Broek","full_name":"Broek, Roelof van den","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1032022191","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1380,"entry_id":931,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":376,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Baarda, Tjitze","free_first_name":"Tjitze","free_last_name":"Baarda","norm_person":{"id":376,"first_name":"Tjitze","last_name":"Baarda","full_name":"Baarda, Tjitze","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119525607","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1381,"entry_id":931,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":29,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","free_first_name":"Jaap","free_last_name":"Mansfeld","norm_person":{"id":29,"first_name":"Jaap","last_name":"Mansfeld","full_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119383217","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Compatible Alternatives: Middle Platonist Theology and the Xenophanes Reception","main_title":{"title":"Compatible Alternatives: Middle Platonist Theology and the Xenophanes Reception"},"abstract":"Students of Middle Platonism are familiar with the phenomenon that the accounts of the divine provided by various authors of the 2nd century CE strike one as incoherent. Qualifications according to the viae negationis, analogia, and eminentia, which to us seem incompatible to a degree, tend to coexist in a peaceful jumble. On the one hand, the essence or nature of God is described by means of a refusal to predicate any attributes whatsoever. Attributes withheld in this way may be arranged in polar pairs. On the other hand, God\u2019s existence as a supreme cause tends to be described in a positive way, for example, by means of varieties of the argumentum ex gradibus entium. The theology of chapter 10 of Alkinoos\u2019 Didaskalikos is a notorious instance of such a medley. That this is not only a problem from an anachronistic modern point of view becomes clear when we adduce important evidence neglected by students of Middle Platonism\u2014namely, the parallel accounts of the theology of Xenophanes to be found in the pseudo-Aristotelian treatise De Melisso Xenophane Gorgia (hereafter MXG), chapters 3\u20134, and in Simplicius\u2019 Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics (pp. 22.22\u201323.30 Diels).\r\n\r\nHere, God is said to be, on the one hand, eternal, one, homogeneous, spherical, limited, and unmoved, and, on the other, neither limited nor unlimited, and neither at rest nor in motion. Both pseudo-Aristotle and Simplicius are aware that there is a problem here. The former dialectically exploits the contradiction between the negated pairs of polar opposites and some of the positive attributes to prove Xenophanes\u2019 position unacceptable. The latter resolves this contradiction by arguing that \u201cspherical\u201d means \u201chomogeneous\u201d and \u201cunmoved\u201d means \u201cbeyond motion and rest,\u201d i.e., he explains those positive attributes which clash with the negated polar pairs in terms of precisely these pairs.\r\n\r\nThe accounts in pseudo-Aristotle and Simplicius have, as a rule, puzzled students of Presocratic philosophy. What I would like to call the \u201cdoxographical vulgate\u201d\u2014i.e., the plurality of sources Diels (still followed by the majority of experts in the field) wanted, at least to the extent that they agree among themselves or with purported fragments of Theophrastus, to derive from Theophrastus\u2019 lost Physikai doxai\u2014knows nothing of the negated pairs of polar attributes. Yet Simplicius explicitly attributes these pairs to Theophrastus.\r\n\r\nThis attribution, as I argue elsewhere, should be accepted. What Theophrastus, following Aristotle (Metaphysics A 5.986b 19 ff.), meant was that Xenophanes was not clear about his one principle, neither committing himself to the view that it is limited nor to the view that it is unlimited, and neither stating clearly that it moves nor that it is at rest. It follows that the doxographical vulgate, which holds that Xenophanes\u2019 God not only is one and eternal but also homogeneous, limited, spherical, unmoved, and rational, does not derive from Theophrastus.\r\n\r\nIt also follows that the source from which the description of Xenophanes\u2019 doctrine in pseudo-Aristotle and Simplicius derives paradoxically combined the entirely positive account found in the doxographical vulgate with Theophrastus\u2019 negative non liquet. The motives that brought about this combination are one of the subjects of the present investigation. [introduction p. 92-93]","btype":2,"date":"1988","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wBb3nfQCrMnJw05","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":29,"full_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":377,"full_name":"Broek, Roelof van den","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":376,"full_name":"Baarda, Tjitze","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":29,"full_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":931,"section_of":337,"pages":"92-117","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":337,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Knowledge of God in the Greco-Roman World","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"van_den_Broek1988","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1988","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1988","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ffb4bZzRDVS1ClO","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":337,"pubplace":"Leiden","publisher":"Brill","series":"\u00c9tudes Pr\u00e9liminaires aux Religions Orientales dans l\u2019Empire Romain","volume":"112","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Compatible Alternatives: Middle Platonist Theology and the Xenophanes Reception"]}
Title | Das Xenophanesreferat von MXG - Eine Wiedergabe Theophrasts? Zur These von Peter Steinmetz: 1. Theophrast als Autor der antinomischen Prädikate (MXG 977 b 3-18, Simpl.Phys. 23, 4-14)? |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1974 |
Published in | PS.-Aristoteles, MXG : Der historische Wert des Xenophanesreferats. Beiträge zur Geschichte des Eleatismus |
Pages | 208-229 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
Ziel dieses Kapitels war es zunächst, die Rückführbarkeit des Xenophanes-Referates von Simplikios und MXG auf Theophrast anhand eines Beispiels zu überprüfen. Wenn dabei die These von Steinmetz an einem entscheidenden Punkt erschüttert worden ist, da MXG mit den antinomischen Prädikaten ebensowenig eine zuverlässige Wiedergabe des Eresiers sein kann wie Simplikios, stellt sich die Frage: Was wird aus seiner Herleitung der beiden Parallelberichte teils aus den φυσικαὶ δόξαι, teils aus der Physik? [conclusion p. 229] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/3Dxf4dLb8SNzbok |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"434","_score":null,"_source":{"id":434,"authors_free":[{"id":584,"entry_id":434,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2169,"entry_id":434,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Das Xenophanesreferat von MXG - Eine Wiedergabe Theophrasts? Zur These von Peter Steinmetz: 1. Theophrast als Autor der antinomischen Pr\u00e4dikate (MXG 977 b 3-18, Simpl.Phys. 23, 4-14)?","main_title":{"title":"Das Xenophanesreferat von MXG - Eine Wiedergabe Theophrasts? Zur These von Peter Steinmetz: 1. Theophrast als Autor der antinomischen Pr\u00e4dikate (MXG 977 b 3-18, Simpl.Phys. 23, 4-14)?"},"abstract":"Ziel dieses Kapitels war es zun\u00e4chst, die R\u00fcckf\u00fchrbarkeit des Xenophanes-Referates von Simplikios und MXG auf Theophrast anhand eines Beispiels zu \u00fcberpr\u00fcfen. Wenn dabei die These von Steinmetz an einem entscheidenden Punkt ersch\u00fcttert worden ist, da MXG mit den antinomischen Pr\u00e4dikaten ebensowenig eine zuverl\u00e4ssige Wiedergabe des Eresiers sein kann wie Simplikios, stellt sich die Frage: Was wird aus seiner Herleitung der beiden Parallelberichte teils aus den \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1\u03b9, teils aus der Physik? [conclusion p. 229]","btype":2,"date":"1974","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/3Dxf4dLb8SNzbok","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":434,"section_of":2,"pages":"208-229","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":2,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":1,"language":"de","title":"PS.-Aristoteles, MXG : Der historische Wert des Xenophanesreferats. Beitr\u00e4ge zur Geschichte des Eleatismus","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner1974a","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1974","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1974","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wvYIPOcDKdaOGFN","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":2,"pubplace":"Amsterdam","publisher":"Hakkert","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Das Xenophanesreferat von MXG - Eine Wiedergabe Theophrasts? Zur These von Peter Steinmetz: 1. Theophrast als Autor der antinomischen Pr\u00e4dikate (MXG 977 b 3-18, Simpl.Phys. 23, 4-14)?"]}
Title | Die Beweise für die Unbewegtheit und Unveränderlichkeit des Seienden (MXG 974 a 14 - b 8) |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1974 |
Published in | PS.-Aristoteles, MXG : Der historische Wert des Xenophanesreferats. Beiträge zur Geschichte des Eleatismus |
Pages | 99-164 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
Wie nach der Diskussion aller textlichen Prägen völlig eindeutig ist, erwähnt der MXG-Autor in 976a12 Körperlichkeit des Einen für Melissos: hôs autos legei meint diesen Eleaten ebenso wie das spätere kai autos houtô g' einai axioi in 976a23. Die Stelle ist zur Beurteilung der Zuverlässigkeit des Autors von Wert, wie immer man sie erklären mag, weil Kenntnis des Originals auf jeden Fall ausscheidet. Wenn (a) kai touto sôma, wie es den Anschein hat, noch zu dem Zitat hôs autos legei gehört, kann diese Angabe nur aus einer Sekundärquelle geschöpft sein; aber auch falls (b) hôs autos legei, wie Apelt annimmt, allein auf ev zu beziehen ist und kai touto sôma bereits ein eigenständiger Zusatz des MXG-Autors ist, kann diesem die Aussage des Originals kaum bekannt gewesen sein. Denn in seiner Stellungnahme geht der Anonymus, selbst wenn er z.T. inadäquate Ausdeutungen daran anknüpft (z.B. homoion als homoimeres), prinzipiell von den ihm bekannten Thesen des Melissos aus. Die Annahme von sôma und mere für den Eleaten kann daher eigentlich nur bedeuten, dass dessen wirkliche Ansichten dem Autor nicht vorlagen, ihm also offenbar keine über das Referat hinausgehenden Positionen des Melissos verfügbar waren. Gegen das Zeugnis des Simplikios lassen sich somit die Angaben von MXG, wie es Zeller wollte, nicht ausspielen. Der Neuplatoniker sagt mit Recht Unkörperlichkeit für das melisseische Seiende aus; wenn er von diesem als ideellem, vollkommenem im Gegensatz zum körperlichen, kontingenten Seienden spricht (Simpl. Phys. 650,5) und in der Paraphrase den Terminus to haplôs on anwendet (Phys. 103,18-19), darf der Abstand zu dem ideellen Seienden des mit Platon einsetzenden Dualismus natürlich nicht übersehen werden. Die Eleaten verbleiben auf der Ebene dieses Seins, wie es Aristoteles (Cael. I 1, 298b21 ff.) sehr deutlich formuliert: Sie hätten nichts außer den tôn aisthetôn ousia angenommen, auf die sie die für die Existenz von Wissen notwendigen, von ihnen zuerst erkannten Charakteristika des eigentlichen Seins übertragen hätten. Melissos ist dabei radikaler als Parmenides verfahren: Dieser hatte – stets unter Bezug auf dieses Sein – nach einem Aufriss gemäß den Forderungen des Denkens dann in der Doxa-Lehre den geläufigen Anschauungen in gewisser Weise Rechnung getragen; demgegenüber betrachtet Melissos dieses Sein allein unter dem Gesichtspunkt der deduzierten Prädikate. Einen mit Parmenides vergleichbaren Doxateil, wie es Reinhardt annehmen wollte, gibt es bei ihm nicht; wohl aber gibt es, wie die voraufgehenden Untersuchungen gezeigt haben, einen zweiten Teil der Schrift des Melissos, in dem pluralistische Konzeptionen wie Vielheit und Mischung am eleatischen Einen und seinen Eigenschaften gemessen und abgelehnt wurden. In diesen Zusammenhang ließ sich auch das umstrittene fr. B9 einordnen, dessen sprachliche Formulierung enge Berührungen mit B8 aufweist: ei ... eiê bezieht sich auf die gegnerische Konzeption (B9 wie B8,6), die im Falle einer wirklichen Existenz dem Kriterium des eleatischen Einen genügen müsste (dei-Satz in B9, kei-Sätze in B8,6; B8,2). Wenn nun, wie es in B9 weiter heißt, sôma und pachos Teile implizieren, musste Melissos für das Seiende eine solche Körperlichkeit ausschließen. [conclusion p. 163-164] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/rdmGYdcJSPKrtIL |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"435","_score":null,"_source":{"id":435,"authors_free":[{"id":585,"entry_id":435,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2168,"entry_id":435,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Die Beweise f\u00fcr die Unbewegtheit und Unver\u00e4nderlichkeit des Seienden (MXG 974 a 14 - b 8)","main_title":{"title":"Die Beweise f\u00fcr die Unbewegtheit und Unver\u00e4nderlichkeit des Seienden (MXG 974 a 14 - b 8)"},"abstract":"Wie nach der Diskussion aller textlichen Pr\u00e4gen v\u00f6llig eindeutig ist, erw\u00e4hnt der MXG-Autor in 976a12 K\u00f6rperlichkeit des Einen f\u00fcr Melissos: h\u00f4s autos legei meint diesen Eleaten ebenso wie das sp\u00e4tere kai autos hout\u00f4 g' einai axioi in 976a23. Die Stelle ist zur Beurteilung der Zuverl\u00e4ssigkeit des Autors von Wert, wie immer man sie erkl\u00e4ren mag, weil Kenntnis des Originals auf jeden Fall ausscheidet.\r\n\r\nWenn (a) kai touto s\u00f4ma, wie es den Anschein hat, noch zu dem Zitat h\u00f4s autos legei geh\u00f6rt, kann diese Angabe nur aus einer Sekund\u00e4rquelle gesch\u00f6pft sein; aber auch falls (b) h\u00f4s autos legei, wie Apelt annimmt, allein auf ev zu beziehen ist und kai touto s\u00f4ma bereits ein eigenst\u00e4ndiger Zusatz des MXG-Autors ist, kann diesem die Aussage des Originals kaum bekannt gewesen sein. Denn in seiner Stellungnahme geht der Anonymus, selbst wenn er z.T. inad\u00e4quate Ausdeutungen daran ankn\u00fcpft (z.B. homoion als homoimeres), prinzipiell von den ihm bekannten Thesen des Melissos aus. Die Annahme von s\u00f4ma und mere f\u00fcr den Eleaten kann daher eigentlich nur bedeuten, dass dessen wirkliche Ansichten dem Autor nicht vorlagen, ihm also offenbar keine \u00fcber das Referat hinausgehenden Positionen des Melissos verf\u00fcgbar waren.\r\n\r\nGegen das Zeugnis des Simplikios lassen sich somit die Angaben von MXG, wie es Zeller wollte, nicht ausspielen. Der Neuplatoniker sagt mit Recht Unk\u00f6rperlichkeit f\u00fcr das melisseische Seiende aus; wenn er von diesem als ideellem, vollkommenem im Gegensatz zum k\u00f6rperlichen, kontingenten Seienden spricht (Simpl. Phys. 650,5) und in der Paraphrase den Terminus to hapl\u00f4s on anwendet (Phys. 103,18-19), darf der Abstand zu dem ideellen Seienden des mit Platon einsetzenden Dualismus nat\u00fcrlich nicht \u00fcbersehen werden. Die Eleaten verbleiben auf der Ebene dieses Seins, wie es Aristoteles (Cael. I 1, 298b21 ff.) sehr deutlich formuliert: Sie h\u00e4tten nichts au\u00dfer den t\u00f4n aisthet\u00f4n ousia angenommen, auf die sie die f\u00fcr die Existenz von Wissen notwendigen, von ihnen zuerst erkannten Charakteristika des eigentlichen Seins \u00fcbertragen h\u00e4tten.\r\n\r\nMelissos ist dabei radikaler als Parmenides verfahren: Dieser hatte \u2013 stets unter Bezug auf dieses Sein \u2013 nach einem Aufriss gem\u00e4\u00df den Forderungen des Denkens dann in der Doxa-Lehre den gel\u00e4ufigen Anschauungen in gewisser Weise Rechnung getragen; demgegen\u00fcber betrachtet Melissos dieses Sein allein unter dem Gesichtspunkt der deduzierten Pr\u00e4dikate. Einen mit Parmenides vergleichbaren Doxateil, wie es Reinhardt annehmen wollte, gibt es bei ihm nicht; wohl aber gibt es, wie die voraufgehenden Untersuchungen gezeigt haben, einen zweiten Teil der Schrift des Melissos, in dem pluralistische Konzeptionen wie Vielheit und Mischung am eleatischen Einen und seinen Eigenschaften gemessen und abgelehnt wurden.\r\n\r\nIn diesen Zusammenhang lie\u00df sich auch das umstrittene fr. B9 einordnen, dessen sprachliche Formulierung enge Ber\u00fchrungen mit B8 aufweist: ei ... ei\u00ea bezieht sich auf die gegnerische Konzeption (B9 wie B8,6), die im Falle einer wirklichen Existenz dem Kriterium des eleatischen Einen gen\u00fcgen m\u00fcsste (dei-Satz in B9, kei-S\u00e4tze in B8,6; B8,2). Wenn nun, wie es in B9 weiter hei\u00dft, s\u00f4ma und pachos Teile implizieren, musste Melissos f\u00fcr das Seiende eine solche K\u00f6rperlichkeit ausschlie\u00dfen. [conclusion p. 163-164]","btype":2,"date":"1974","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/rdmGYdcJSPKrtIL","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":435,"section_of":2,"pages":"99-164","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":2,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":1,"language":"de","title":"PS.-Aristoteles, MXG : Der historische Wert des Xenophanesreferats. Beitr\u00e4ge zur Geschichte des Eleatismus","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner1974a","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1974","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1974","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wvYIPOcDKdaOGFN","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":2,"pubplace":"Amsterdam","publisher":"Hakkert","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Die Beweise f\u00fcr die Unbewegtheit und Unver\u00e4nderlichkeit des Seienden (MXG 974 a 14 - b 8)"]}
Title | Die Schrift De Melisso Xenophane Gorgia in der neueren Forschung |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1974 |
Published in | PS.-Aristoteles, MXG : Der historische Wert des Xenophanesreferats. Beiträge zur Geschichte des Eleatismus |
Pages | 17-41 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
Von den drei Referaten der Schrift MXG bestehen für den Melissos-Abschnitt die besten Vergleichsmöglichkeiten, da Simplikios bekanntlich umfangreiche Auszüge aus der Schrift des Melissos exzerpiert hat und daneben eine Paraphrase für den Teil der Schrift bietet, der die Prädikate des Seienden behandelt. Obwohl die Quellenlage also weit günstiger ist als im Falle des Xenophanes, finden sich doch divergierende Ansichten über den Grad der Authentizität des Melissos-Referats: Reinhardt hält den Bericht für zuverlässig, da jede spätere Dialektik fehle, mehrfach noch der Wortlaut des Originals durchscheine und die entscheidenden Prädikate des Seienden exakt beibehalten seien. Gigon nennt den Abschnitt zwar "bedeutend schlechter" als das Gorgias-Referat, doch blicke der Text des Melissos unverkennbar durch. Calogero stellt das Nebeneinander von wörtlicher Nähe zum Original und von Unexaktheiten fest, die sich in der falschen Abfolge einzelner Prädikate und der Hinzufügung von Theorien (Mischungslehre) äußerten, und denkt daher an eine Wiedergabe der Melissos-Schrift aus dem Gedächtnis. Untersteiner schreibt einige dialektische Ausarbeitungen und die Hinzufügung der Mischungslehre dem Megariker zu. Während bei diesen Forschern der Melissos-Abschnitt als im Ganzen wertvoll bezeichnet wird, hat Loenen ein völlig negatives Urteil abgegeben: Der Bericht enthalte einerseits Hinzufügungen aller Art, vor allem Unterscheidungen von im Original nicht vorhandenen Möglichkeiten (Entstehung von allem oder nicht allem 974a3-9, Bewegung ins Volle oder ins Leere 974a16-18, Mischungslehre 974a21-b2), andererseits Auslassungen, z.B. fehle die Erklärung wichtiger Termini wie etwa des homoeomeries-Begriffs. Dem Bericht könne deshalb historischer Wert nicht zuerkannt werden. Es soll nun der Melissos-Abschnitt mit dem Original verglichen werden, um den Grad der Authentizität und die Art eventueller Zusätze genau zu ermitteln. Dies bedeutet zugleich den Versuch, bei einem Abschnitt mit günstiger Vergleichslage Kriterien für die Beurteilung des umstrittenen, quellenmäßig weit weniger gesicherten Xenophanes-Referats zu gewinnen. [conclusion p. 40-41] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/dnhawLwLUUqppPb |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"436","_score":null,"_source":{"id":436,"authors_free":[{"id":586,"entry_id":436,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2167,"entry_id":436,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Die Schrift De Melisso Xenophane Gorgia in der neueren Forschung","main_title":{"title":"Die Schrift De Melisso Xenophane Gorgia in der neueren Forschung"},"abstract":"Von den drei Referaten der Schrift MXG bestehen f\u00fcr den Melissos-Abschnitt die besten Vergleichsm\u00f6glichkeiten, da Simplikios bekanntlich umfangreiche Ausz\u00fcge aus der Schrift des Melissos exzerpiert hat und daneben eine Paraphrase f\u00fcr den Teil der Schrift bietet, der die Pr\u00e4dikate des Seienden behandelt. Obwohl die Quellenlage also weit g\u00fcnstiger ist als im Falle des Xenophanes, finden sich doch divergierende Ansichten \u00fcber den Grad der Authentizit\u00e4t des Melissos-Referats: Reinhardt h\u00e4lt den Bericht f\u00fcr zuverl\u00e4ssig, da jede sp\u00e4tere Dialektik fehle, mehrfach noch der Wortlaut des Originals durchscheine und die entscheidenden Pr\u00e4dikate des Seienden exakt beibehalten seien.\r\n\r\nGigon nennt den Abschnitt zwar \"bedeutend schlechter\" als das Gorgias-Referat, doch blicke der Text des Melissos unverkennbar durch. Calogero stellt das Nebeneinander von w\u00f6rtlicher N\u00e4he zum Original und von Unexaktheiten fest, die sich in der falschen Abfolge einzelner Pr\u00e4dikate und der Hinzuf\u00fcgung von Theorien (Mischungslehre) \u00e4u\u00dferten, und denkt daher an eine Wiedergabe der Melissos-Schrift aus dem Ged\u00e4chtnis. Untersteiner schreibt einige dialektische Ausarbeitungen und die Hinzuf\u00fcgung der Mischungslehre dem Megariker zu.\r\n\r\nW\u00e4hrend bei diesen Forschern der Melissos-Abschnitt als im Ganzen wertvoll bezeichnet wird, hat Loenen ein v\u00f6llig negatives Urteil abgegeben: Der Bericht enthalte einerseits Hinzuf\u00fcgungen aller Art, vor allem Unterscheidungen von im Original nicht vorhandenen M\u00f6glichkeiten (Entstehung von allem oder nicht allem 974a3-9, Bewegung ins Volle oder ins Leere 974a16-18, Mischungslehre 974a21-b2), andererseits Auslassungen, z.B. fehle die Erkl\u00e4rung wichtiger Termini wie etwa des homoeomeries-Begriffs. Dem Bericht k\u00f6nne deshalb historischer Wert nicht zuerkannt werden.\r\n\r\nEs soll nun der Melissos-Abschnitt mit dem Original verglichen werden, um den Grad der Authentizit\u00e4t und die Art eventueller Zus\u00e4tze genau zu ermitteln. Dies bedeutet zugleich den Versuch, bei einem Abschnitt mit g\u00fcnstiger Vergleichslage Kriterien f\u00fcr die Beurteilung des umstrittenen, quellenm\u00e4\u00dfig weit weniger gesicherten Xenophanes-Referats zu gewinnen. [conclusion p. 40-41]","btype":2,"date":"1974","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/dnhawLwLUUqppPb","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":436,"section_of":2,"pages":"17-41","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":2,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":1,"language":"de","title":"PS.-Aristoteles, MXG : Der historische Wert des Xenophanesreferats. Beitr\u00e4ge zur Geschichte des Eleatismus","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner1974a","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1974","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1974","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wvYIPOcDKdaOGFN","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":2,"pubplace":"Amsterdam","publisher":"Hakkert","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Die Schrift De Melisso Xenophane Gorgia in der neueren Forschung"]}
Title | Einige Aspekte der handschriftlichen Überlieferung des Physikkommentars des Simplikios |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 267-286 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Harlfinger, Dieter |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
In der Geschichte der Simplikios-Philologie spielen Frauen eine besondere Rolle. Aus der Feder der byzantinischen Prinzessin Theodora Palaiologina Rhaulaina (ca. 1240—1300)1 stammt eine der —wie sich zeigen wird — textkritisch relevantesten Handschriften des für die Erforschung der Vorsokratik, der Peripatetik wie auch des Neuplatonismus bekanntermaßen unschätzbaren Kommentars zur aristotelischen Physik des Simplikios. Der zwischen 1261 und 1282 datierende2 Codex Mosquensis Muz. 3649 mit den Büchern I—IV und dem Beginn von Buch V (desinit mutile3 803, 8 Diels4) ist die of- fensichtlich sehr gewissenhafte5 Abschrift jener Frau, die keinesfalls nur als Schreiberin hervorgetreten ist, sondern insbesondere auch als selbständige hagiographische Schriftstellerin, als tätige Patronin eines Scriptoriums und Buchilluminationsateliers, als Besitzerin einer wohl umfangreichen Bibliothek und nicht zuletzt als bedeutendes Mitglied eines Gelehrtenkreises, dem unter anderen auch Maximos Planudes, Gregorios von Zypern und Manuel Holobolos angehörten. Als sich auf Initiative und unter Leitung von Ilsetraut H a d o t die führenden Simplikios-Forscher unserer T a g e im Herbst 1985 in Paris zu ihrem ersten Fachkolloquium versammelten, durfte der Verfasser dieser Zeilen — obwohl kein Simplikianer — unter ihnen referieren, über ebenjenen Mosquensis von der H a n d der Rhaulaina. Ilsetraut H a d o t wußte, daß ich auf einer Bibliotheksreise des Jahres 1966 die Handschrift eingesehen hatte und sie aufgrund der Bewertung des „locus fenestratus" am Ende von Buch III p. 518 als neuen unabhängigen Textträger erkannt zu haben glaubte6. D a s Referat konnte zwar von der Klassifizierung des in der T a t unabhängigen Mosquensis ausgehen, mußte sich aber zur Klärung der stemmatischen Aporien, die beim Studium der Dielsschen Praefatio und des apparatus criticus zutage traten, auf die Situation der Handschrift Ε (Vorlagenwechsel sowie Eb und Eä als dislozierte Partien in Ε bzw. der Vorlage von E) und der Handschrift D (Duktusänderung und Vorlagenwechsel) konzentrieren und konnte darüber hinaus auf die interessante Rolle einer weiteren Moskauer Handschrift (Len) aufmerksam machen und Fingerzeige zu dem einen oder anderen jüngeren Manuskript geben. — Inzwischen habe ich noch einmal über den Codex F nachgedacht und nunmehr fast alle Simplikios-Handschriften im Film — soweit im Berliner Aristoteles-Archiv vorhanden7 — rasch eingese hen8. Im folgenden wage ich — der Veranstalterin des Kolloquiums und Editorin der Akten habe ich dabei für Ermunterung und Geduld zu danken —, meine ersten Eindrücke zu publizieren. Es sind lediglich vorläufige Ergebnisse, die durch systematische Untersuchungen verifiziert werden müßten; hierin ein Plädoyer für eine kodikologische Stemmatik. [introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/lJYydaL12PDErlM |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"515","_score":null,"_source":{"id":515,"authors_free":[{"id":714,"entry_id":515,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":5,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Harlfinger, Dieter","free_first_name":"Dieter","free_last_name":"Harlfinger","norm_person":{"id":5,"first_name":"Dieter","last_name":"Harlfinger","full_name":"Harlfinger, Dieter","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/107988674","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":715,"entry_id":515,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Einige Aspekte der handschriftlichen \u00dcberlieferung des Physikkommentars des Simplikios","main_title":{"title":"Einige Aspekte der handschriftlichen \u00dcberlieferung des Physikkommentars des Simplikios"},"abstract":"In der Geschichte der Simplikios-Philologie spielen Frauen eine besondere Rolle. Aus der Feder der byzantinischen Prinzessin Theodora Palaiologina Rhaulaina (ca. 1240\u20141300)1 stammt eine der \u2014wie sich zeigen wird \u2014 textkritisch relevantesten Handschriften des f\u00fcr die Erforschung der Vorsokratik, der Peripatetik wie auch des Neuplatonismus bekannterma\u00dfen unsch\u00e4tzbaren Kommentars zur aristotelischen Physik des Simplikios. Der zwischen 1261 und 1282 datierende2 Codex Mosquensis Muz. 3649 mit den B\u00fcchern I\u2014IV und dem Beginn von Buch V (desinit mutile3 803, 8 Diels4) ist die of- fensichtlich sehr gewissenhafte5 Abschrift jener Frau, die keinesfalls nur als Schreiberin hervorgetreten ist, sondern insbesondere auch als selbst\u00e4ndige hagiographische Schriftstellerin, als t\u00e4tige Patronin eines Scriptoriums und Buchilluminationsateliers, als Besitzerin einer wohl umfangreichen Bibliothek und nicht zuletzt als bedeutendes Mitglied eines Gelehrtenkreises, dem unter anderen auch Maximos Planudes, Gregorios von Zypern und Manuel Holobolos angeh\u00f6rten. Als sich auf Initiative und unter Leitung von Ilsetraut H a d o t die f\u00fchrenden Simplikios-Forscher unserer T a g e im Herbst 1985 in Paris zu ihrem ersten Fachkolloquium versammelten, durfte der Verfasser dieser Zeilen \u2014 obwohl kein Simplikianer \u2014 unter ihnen referieren, \u00fcber ebenjenen Mosquensis von der H a n d der Rhaulaina. Ilsetraut H a d o t wu\u00dfte, da\u00df ich auf einer Bibliotheksreise des Jahres 1966 die Handschrift eingesehen hatte und sie aufgrund der Bewertung des \u201elocus fenestratus\" am Ende von Buch III p. 518 als neuen unabh\u00e4ngigen Texttr\u00e4ger erkannt zu haben glaubte6. D a s Referat konnte zwar von der Klassifizierung des in der T a t unabh\u00e4ngigen Mosquensis ausgehen, mu\u00dfte sich aber zur Kl\u00e4rung der stemmatischen Aporien, die beim Studium der Dielsschen Praefatio und des apparatus criticus zutage traten, auf die Situation der Handschrift \u0395 (Vorlagenwechsel sowie Eb und E\u00e4 als dislozierte Partien in \u0395 bzw. der Vorlage von E) und der Handschrift D (Duktus\u00e4nderung und Vorlagenwechsel) konzentrieren und konnte dar\u00fcber hinaus auf die interessante Rolle einer weiteren Moskauer Handschrift (Len) aufmerksam machen und Fingerzeige zu dem einen oder anderen j\u00fcngeren Manuskript geben. \u2014 Inzwischen habe ich noch einmal \u00fcber den Codex F nachgedacht und nunmehr fast alle Simplikios-Handschriften im Film \u2014 soweit im Berliner Aristoteles-Archiv vorhanden7 \u2014 rasch eingese hen8. Im folgenden wage ich \u2014 der Veranstalterin des Kolloquiums und Editorin der Akten habe ich dabei f\u00fcr Ermunterung und Geduld zu danken \u2014, meine ersten Eindr\u00fccke zu publizieren. Es sind lediglich vorl\u00e4ufige Ergebnisse, die durch systematische Untersuchungen verifiziert werden m\u00fc\u00dften; hierin ein Pl\u00e4doyer f\u00fcr eine kodikologische Stemmatik. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/lJYydaL12PDErlM","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":5,"full_name":"Harlfinger, Dieter","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":515,"section_of":171,"pages":"267-286","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Einige Aspekte der handschriftlichen \u00dcberlieferung des Physikkommentars des Simplikios"]}
Title | Entelechie und Monade: Bemerkungen zum Gebrauch eines aristotelischen Begriffs bei Leibniz |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, Überlieferung, Nachleben |
Pages | 560-583 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Ebert, Theodor |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
Abhandlung über die Verwendung des Begriffs 'Entelechie' bei Leibnitz: "Daß Leibniz sich, um auf unsere eingangs gestellte Frage zurück zukommen, für seinen Begriff der Entelechie nicht auf Aristoteles berufen kann, dürfte damit klar geworden sein. Aus einem Begriff, der bei Aristoteles eine Seinsweise von Gegenständen charakterisie ren soll, ist bei Leibniz ein Begriff geworden, der Seiendes selber, Monaden nämlich, charakterisiert. Aber dieses Mißverständnis eines aristotelischen Begriffs durch Leibniz, das wir damit diagnostizieren müssen, ist nicht eine simple Fehlinterpretation des aristotelischen Textes. Dieses Mißverständnis ist begünstigt worden durch eine Ar gumentation des Aristoteles, die den Charakter einer dialektischen tour de force hat und die von dem Ausdruck ,Entelecheia‘ einen in gewissem Sinn problematischen Gebrauch macht." (p. 582) |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/3k7VYtKVSM42I1L |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"801","_score":null,"_source":{"id":801,"authors_free":[{"id":1183,"entry_id":801,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":76,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Ebert, Theodor","free_first_name":"Theodor","free_last_name":"Ebert","norm_person":{"id":76,"first_name":"Theodor","last_name":"Ebert","full_name":"Ebert, Theodor","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115820787","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2096,"entry_id":801,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Entelechie und Monade: Bemerkungen zum Gebrauch eines aristotelischen Begriffs bei Leibniz","main_title":{"title":"Entelechie und Monade: Bemerkungen zum Gebrauch eines aristotelischen Begriffs bei Leibniz"},"abstract":"Abhandlung \u00fcber die Verwendung des Begriffs 'Entelechie' bei Leibnitz: \"Da\u00df Leibniz sich, um auf unsere eingangs gestellte Frage zur\u00fcck\u00ad\r\nzukommen, f\u00fcr seinen Begriff der Entelechie nicht auf Aristoteles \r\nberufen kann, d\u00fcrfte damit klar geworden sein. Aus einem Begriff, \r\nder bei Aristoteles eine Seinsweise von Gegenst\u00e4nden charakterisie\u00ad\r\nren soll, ist bei Leibniz ein Begriff geworden, der Seiendes selber, \r\nMonaden n\u00e4mlich, charakterisiert. Aber dieses Mi\u00dfverst\u00e4ndnis eines \r\naristotelischen Begriffs durch Leibniz, das wir damit diagnostizieren \r\nm\u00fcssen, ist nicht eine simple Fehlinterpretation des aristotelischen \r\nTextes. Dieses Mi\u00dfverst\u00e4ndnis ist beg\u00fcnstigt worden durch eine Ar\u00ad\r\ngumentation des Aristoteles, die den Charakter einer dialektischen \r\ntour de force hat und die von dem Ausdruck ,Entelecheia\u2018 einen in \r\ngewissem Sinn problematischen Gebrauch macht.\" (p. 582)","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/3k7VYtKVSM42I1L","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":76,"full_name":"Ebert, Theodor","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":801,"section_of":189,"pages":"560-583","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":189,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, \u00dcberlieferung, Nachleben","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Lulofs\/Kollesch\/Nutton1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Kommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles sind das Thema dieses Bandes. Mit der Aristotelesrenaissance des 1. Jh. v.Chr. einsetzend, vermitteln die Beitr\u00e4ge, unter acht Hauptkapiteln zusammengefa\u00dft, ein eindrucksvolles Bild von der Rezeption zweier Jahrtausende. D a \u00df diese Rezeption kontinuierlich in ihren wichtigen Phasen illustriert werden kann, ist - wie schon im ersten Band - der freundlichen Kooperation der beteiligten Autoren zu verdanken. Als besonderer Gl\u00fccksfall mag gelten, da\u00df einige Beitr\u00e4ge sich in idealer Weise erg\u00e4nzen. So wird der Leser in zwei auf einanderfolgenden Artikeln die Interpretationsgeschichte der zentralen Kapitel Metaphysik \u039b 7 und 9 von Plotin und Themistios \u00fcber Maimonides und Gersonides bis Hegel verfolgen k\u00f6nnen. Dieses Bem\u00fchen um Aristoteles von der Antike bis in die Neuzeit ist etwa f\u00fcr De anima bei Alexander von Aphrodisias und Leibniz, f\u00fcr die \r\nKategorien bei Plotin und Peirce dokumentiert, wobei die Erstver\u00f6ffentlichung der Ubersetzung von Cat. 1 - 4 durch den bedeutenden amerikanischen Philosophen mit besonderer Freude angezeigt werden darf. \r\nVon den Autoren dieses Bandes weilen Paul Henry und Charles B. Schmitt nicht mehr unter uns. In ein Buch \u00fcber Plotins Entretiens sollte der hier ver\u00f6ffentlichte Beitrag von Paul Henry sp\u00e4ter einmal integriert werden; daraus erkl\u00e4ren sich gelegentliche Hinweise auf geplante Teile dieses nun nicht mehr vollendeten Werkes. Die Studie von Charles B.Schmitt \u00fcber die Aristoteles-Florilegien der Renaissance bietet die erste Gesamtdarstellung zu diesem Thema und enth\u00e4lt im Anhang ein Verzeichnis mit wichtigen Erg\u00e4nzungen zu seiner grundlegenden \u201eBibliography of Aristotle Editions, 1501-1600\". [Vorwort p. V-VI]\r\n","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Q1P6OhIp8zaE99c","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":189,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet","volume":"2","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Entelechie und Monade: Bemerkungen zum Gebrauch eines aristotelischen Begriffs bei Leibniz"]}
Title | Gibt es Spuren von Theophrasts Phys. op. bei Cicero? |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1989 |
Published in | Cicero's Knowledge of the Peripatos |
Pages | 133-158 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Mansfeld, Jaap |
Editor(s) | Fortenbaugh, William W. , Steinmetz, Peter |
Translator(s) |
Unter Hinweis auf Cicero, Lucullus (= Academica priora II) 118 und 123, Tusculanae disputationes I 18 ff. und De natura deorum I 25 ff. hat Hermann Diels diese Frage bekanntlich bejaht. Die wichtigste Stelle, auf die ich mich aus mehreren Gründen beschränke, ist dabei der Passus über die Prinzipien (Luc. 118), wo der Dissens (dissensio, Luc. 117) der Philosophen von Thales bis zu Platon und den Pythagoreern kritisiert wird. Diels hat hier ganz auffallend argumentiert. Zum einen hat er, teilweise zu Recht, auf Übereinstimmungen zwischen Luc. 118 und den entsprechenden Theophrast-Fragmenten bzw. Paraphrasen in Simplikios’ Kommentar zur aristotelischen Physik hingewiesen, die Usener und er den Physica opinionum zugewiesen haben. Als nächstes aber hat er Luc. 119–121 über die stoische Theorie der Vorsehung (SVF I 92 u. 1161) und über Aristoteles (De philos. fr. 20 Ross) und Stratons (fr. 32 Wehrli) entgegengesetzte Auffassungen ausgeklammert, weil dieses Stück nicht auf Theophrast zurückgeführt werden könne. Aus den nachfolgenden Paragraphen, die über verschiedene Ansichten von den Himmelskörpern und der Erde referieren, hat er schließlich 123 „Hiketas von Syrakus, wie Theophrast sagt“ (Hicetas Syracosius, ut ait Theophrastus …) usw. wieder als Beweis dafür angezogen, dass die doxographische Übersicht zur Astronomie aus den Physica opinionum stamme. In der Nachfolge Krisches hatte schließlich schon Diels zu Recht bemerkt, dass Ciceros unmittelbare Quelle ein Akademiker, wohl ein Karneadesschüler, sein müsse. Das Textstück über Hiketas (auch abgedruckt in Vorsokr. 51.1) hat er als Physica opinionum fr. 18 aufgenommen (DG 492–3). Es ist dies der einzige Cicerotext in der betreffenden Dielsschen Sammlung. [introduction p. 133] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/MGhjgtg4bJWxFhu |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"930","_score":null,"_source":{"id":930,"authors_free":[{"id":1375,"entry_id":930,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":29,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","free_first_name":"Jaap","free_last_name":"Mansfeld","norm_person":{"id":29,"first_name":"Jaap","last_name":"Mansfeld","full_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119383217","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1376,"entry_id":930,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":7,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Fortenbaugh, William W.","free_first_name":"William W.","free_last_name":"Fortenbaugh","norm_person":{"id":7,"first_name":"William W. ","last_name":"Fortenbaugh","full_name":"Fortenbaugh, William W. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/110233700","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1377,"entry_id":930,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":378,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Steinmetz, Peter","free_first_name":"Peter","free_last_name":"Steinmetz","norm_person":{"id":378,"first_name":"Peter","last_name":"Steinmetz","full_name":"Steinmetz, Peter","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/11891913X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Gibt es Spuren von Theophrasts Phys. op. bei Cicero?","main_title":{"title":"Gibt es Spuren von Theophrasts Phys. op. bei Cicero?"},"abstract":"Unter Hinweis auf Cicero, Lucullus (= Academica priora II) 118 und 123, Tusculanae disputationes I 18 ff. und De natura deorum I 25 ff. hat Hermann Diels diese Frage bekanntlich bejaht. Die wichtigste Stelle, auf die ich mich aus mehreren Gr\u00fcnden beschr\u00e4nke, ist dabei der Passus \u00fcber die Prinzipien (Luc. 118), wo der Dissens (dissensio, Luc. 117) der Philosophen von Thales bis zu Platon und den Pythagoreern kritisiert wird. Diels hat hier ganz auffallend argumentiert.\r\n\r\nZum einen hat er, teilweise zu Recht, auf \u00dcbereinstimmungen zwischen Luc. 118 und den entsprechenden Theophrast-Fragmenten bzw. Paraphrasen in Simplikios\u2019 Kommentar zur aristotelischen Physik hingewiesen, die Usener und er den Physica opinionum zugewiesen haben. Als n\u00e4chstes aber hat er Luc. 119\u2013121 \u00fcber die stoische Theorie der Vorsehung (SVF I 92 u. 1161) und \u00fcber Aristoteles (De philos. fr. 20 Ross) und Stratons (fr. 32 Wehrli) entgegengesetzte Auffassungen ausgeklammert, weil dieses St\u00fcck nicht auf Theophrast zur\u00fcckgef\u00fchrt werden k\u00f6nne.\r\n\r\nAus den nachfolgenden Paragraphen, die \u00fcber verschiedene Ansichten von den Himmelsk\u00f6rpern und der Erde referieren, hat er schlie\u00dflich 123 \u201eHiketas von Syrakus, wie Theophrast sagt\u201c (Hicetas Syracosius, ut ait Theophrastus \u2026) usw. wieder als Beweis daf\u00fcr angezogen, dass die doxographische \u00dcbersicht zur Astronomie aus den Physica opinionum stamme.\r\n\r\nIn der Nachfolge Krisches hatte schlie\u00dflich schon Diels zu Recht bemerkt, dass Ciceros unmittelbare Quelle ein Akademiker, wohl ein Karneadessch\u00fcler, sein m\u00fcsse. Das Textst\u00fcck \u00fcber Hiketas (auch abgedruckt in Vorsokr. 51.1) hat er als Physica opinionum fr. 18 aufgenommen (DG 492\u20133). Es ist dies der einzige Cicerotext in der betreffenden Dielsschen Sammlung. [introduction p. 133]","btype":2,"date":"1989","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/MGhjgtg4bJWxFhu","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":29,"full_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":7,"full_name":"Fortenbaugh, William W. ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":378,"full_name":"Steinmetz, Peter","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":930,"section_of":334,"pages":"133-158","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":334,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Cicero's Knowledge of the Peripatos","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Fortenbaugh1989b","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1989","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1989","abstract":"Cicero is best known for his political speeches. His Catilinarian orations are regularly studied in third or fourth year Latin; his self-proclaimed role as savior of the Republic is much discussed in courses on Roman history. But, however fascinating such material may be, there is another side to Cicero which is equally important and only now receiving the attention it deserves. This is Cicero's interest in Hellenistic thought. As a young man he studied philosophy in Greece; throughout his life he maintained a keen interest in intellectual history; and during periods of political inactivity - especially in his last years as the Republic collapsed - he wrote treatises that today are invaluable sources for our knowledge of Hellenistic philosophy, including the School of Aristotle.\r\n\r\nThe essays collected in this volume deal with these treatises and in particular with Cicero's knowledge of Peripatetic philosophy. They ask such questions as: Did Cicero-know Aristotle first hand, or was the corpus Aristotelicum unavailable to him and his contemporaries? Did Cicero have access to the writings of Theophrastus, and in general did he know the post-Aristotelians whose works are all but lost to us? When Cicero reports the views of early philosophers, is he a reliable witness, and is he conveying important information? These and other fundamental questions are asked with special reference to traditional areas of Greek thought: logic and rhetoric, politics and ethics, physics, psychology, and theology. The answers are various, but the overall impression is clear: Cicero himself was a highly intelligent, well educated Roman, whose treatises contain significant material. Scholars working on Peripatetic thought and on the Hellenistic period as a whole cannot afford to ignore them.\r\n\r\nThis fourth volume in the Rutgers University Studies in Classic Humanities series deals with Cicero, orator and writer of the late Roman Republic. Interest in Cicero arose out of Project Theophrastus, an international undertaking based at Rutgers dedicated to collecting, editing, and translating the fragments of Theophrastus. This collection will be of value to philologists, classicists, philosophers, as well as those interested in the history of science. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FFKNInd4WCcNVDu","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":334,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Routledge","series":"Rutgers Studies in Classical Humanities","volume":"4","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Gibt es Spuren von Theophrasts Phys. op. bei Cicero?"]}
Title | Guillaume de Moerbeke et Saint Thomas |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1989 |
Published in | Guillaume de Moerbeke. Recueil d’études à l’occasion du 700e anniversaire de sa mort (1286) |
Pages | 57-82 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Steel, Carlos |
Editor(s) | Brams, Jozef , Vanhamel, Willy |
Translator(s) |
On peut difficilement expliquer l’utilisation privilégiée des traductions de Moerbeke dont témoigne l’œuvre de saint Thomas, si on n’admet pas que les deux hommes aient été en relation directe. Certes, Guillaume a commencé son projet de traduction sans l’initiative ou l’encouragement de Thomas. Mais, quand ce dernier eut pris connaissance du travail de son confrère (probablement lors d’une rencontre à Viterbe), il a commencé à utiliser ses traductions. Il est même probable qu’il a commandé quelques fois lui-même une traduction. Les données manquent pour pouvoir parler d’une véritable collaboration entre les deux hommes. D’ailleurs, je n’ai pas l’impression que leurs intérêts intellectuels étaient convergents. Si on peut prendre le prologue de la Perspectiva de Witelo comme un témoignage indirect sur la pensée de Guillaume, il semble qu’il avait une préférence pour une philosophie platonisante, avec un intérêt particulier pour la philosophie de la nature et l’astronomie (-logie?). Il avait probablement plus de connaturalité intellectuelle avec son jeune ami et compatriote Henri Bate (qui lui a dédié son traité sur la composition de l’astrolabe) qu’avec le théologien-philosophe Thomas d’Aquin. Quoi qu’il en soit, il est hors de doute que Thomas a pu profiter largement du travail de son confrère. Selon la tradition, Thomas aurait pris des initiatives pour obtenir de nouvelles traductions d’Aristote. Les faits que nous avons examinés ne sont pas en contradiction avec ce témoignage. Mais, comme il arrive fréquemment dans une tradition hagiographique, on accentue tellement les exploits du héros principal qu’on a tendance à réduire l’activité des contemporains à celle de « collaborateurs » et à minimiser leur apport original. D’où la tradition que Guillaume de Moerbeke aurait entrepris tout son travail ad instantiam fratris Thomae. L’étude de l’histoire des traductions et les remarques critiques du F. Gauthier nous ont obligés à limiter nettement la portée de ce témoignage. Cette étude a restitué ainsi à Moerbeke son autonomie et son originalité intellectuelle. Mais elle a confirmé également qu’il y a eu communication scientifique entre les deux dominicains (ce qui est le noyau solide de la tradition). Thomas a très vite compris l’importance du travail de son confrère. Il en a profité le premier, et c’est probablement grâce à son autorité que des traductions de Moerbeke ont commencé à circuler à Paris, et à partir de là dans la culture latine. [conclusion p. 81-82] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/3D0JB4FJderQiIl |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1388","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1388,"authors_free":[{"id":2147,"entry_id":1388,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":14,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Steel, Carlos","free_first_name":"Carlos","free_last_name":"Steel","norm_person":{"id":14,"first_name":"Carlos ","last_name":"Steel","full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/122963083","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2148,"entry_id":1388,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":337,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Brams, Jozef","free_first_name":"Jozef","free_last_name":"Brams","norm_person":{"id":337,"first_name":"Jozef","last_name":"Brams","full_name":"Brams, Jozef","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1145645712","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2149,"entry_id":1388,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":338,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","free_first_name":"Willy","free_last_name":"Vanhamel","norm_person":{"id":338,"first_name":"Willy","last_name":"Vanhamel","full_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/141109661","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Guillaume de Moerbeke et Saint Thomas","main_title":{"title":"Guillaume de Moerbeke et Saint Thomas"},"abstract":"On peut difficilement expliquer l\u2019utilisation privil\u00e9gi\u00e9e des traductions de Moerbeke dont t\u00e9moigne l\u2019\u0153uvre de saint Thomas, si on n\u2019admet pas que les deux hommes aient \u00e9t\u00e9 en relation directe. Certes, Guillaume a commenc\u00e9 son projet de traduction sans l\u2019initiative ou l\u2019encouragement de Thomas. Mais, quand ce dernier eut pris connaissance du travail de son confr\u00e8re (probablement lors d\u2019une rencontre \u00e0 Viterbe), il a commenc\u00e9 \u00e0 utiliser ses traductions. Il est m\u00eame probable qu\u2019il a command\u00e9 quelques fois lui-m\u00eame une traduction. Les donn\u00e9es manquent pour pouvoir parler d\u2019une v\u00e9ritable collaboration entre les deux hommes.\r\n\r\nD\u2019ailleurs, je n\u2019ai pas l\u2019impression que leurs int\u00e9r\u00eats intellectuels \u00e9taient convergents. Si on peut prendre le prologue de la Perspectiva de Witelo comme un t\u00e9moignage indirect sur la pens\u00e9e de Guillaume, il semble qu\u2019il avait une pr\u00e9f\u00e9rence pour une philosophie platonisante, avec un int\u00e9r\u00eat particulier pour la philosophie de la nature et l\u2019astronomie (-logie?). Il avait probablement plus de connaturalit\u00e9 intellectuelle avec son jeune ami et compatriote Henri Bate (qui lui a d\u00e9di\u00e9 son trait\u00e9 sur la composition de l\u2019astrolabe) qu\u2019avec le th\u00e9ologien-philosophe Thomas d\u2019Aquin.\r\n\r\nQuoi qu\u2019il en soit, il est hors de doute que Thomas a pu profiter largement du travail de son confr\u00e8re. Selon la tradition, Thomas aurait pris des initiatives pour obtenir de nouvelles traductions d\u2019Aristote. Les faits que nous avons examin\u00e9s ne sont pas en contradiction avec ce t\u00e9moignage. Mais, comme il arrive fr\u00e9quemment dans une tradition hagiographique, on accentue tellement les exploits du h\u00e9ros principal qu\u2019on a tendance \u00e0 r\u00e9duire l\u2019activit\u00e9 des contemporains \u00e0 celle de \u00ab collaborateurs \u00bb et \u00e0 minimiser leur apport original.\r\n\r\nD\u2019o\u00f9 la tradition que Guillaume de Moerbeke aurait entrepris tout son travail ad instantiam fratris Thomae. L\u2019\u00e9tude de l\u2019histoire des traductions et les remarques critiques du F. Gauthier nous ont oblig\u00e9s \u00e0 limiter nettement la port\u00e9e de ce t\u00e9moignage. Cette \u00e9tude a restitu\u00e9 ainsi \u00e0 Moerbeke son autonomie et son originalit\u00e9 intellectuelle. Mais elle a confirm\u00e9 \u00e9galement qu\u2019il y a eu communication scientifique entre les deux dominicains (ce qui est le noyau solide de la tradition).\r\n\r\nThomas a tr\u00e8s vite compris l\u2019importance du travail de son confr\u00e8re. Il en a profit\u00e9 le premier, et c\u2019est probablement gr\u00e2ce \u00e0 son autorit\u00e9 que des traductions de Moerbeke ont commenc\u00e9 \u00e0 circuler \u00e0 Paris, et \u00e0 partir de l\u00e0 dans la culture latine. [conclusion p. 81-82]","btype":2,"date":"1989","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/3D0JB4FJderQiIl","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":14,"full_name":"Steel, Carlos ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":337,"full_name":"Brams, Jozef","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":338,"full_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1388,"section_of":326,"pages":"57-82","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":326,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Guillaume de Moerbeke. Recueil d\u2019\u00e9tudes \u00e0 l\u2019occasion du 700e anniversaire de sa mort (1286)","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Brams1989","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1989","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1989","abstract":"T h e following articles are included in this volume: \"Moerbeke, traducteur et inter-\r\nprete: Un texte et une pensee\" by Gerard Verbeke (pp. 1-21); \"Guillaume de Moer-\r\nbeke et la cour pontificale\" by Agostino Paravicini Bagliani (pp. 23-52); \"Note con-\r\ncernant certaines missions qui auraient ete confiees a Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by\r\nWilly Vanhamel (pp. 53-56); \"Guillaume de Moerbeke et saint Thomas\" by Carlos\r\nSteel (pp. 57-82); \"Pietro d'Abano e l'utilizzazione della traduzione di Guglielmo di\r\nMoerbeke del commento di Simplicio al \/\/ De caelo di Aristotele\" by Graziella Federici\r\nVescovini (pp. 83-106); \"Quelques utilisateurs des textes rares de Moerbeke\r\n(Philopon, Tria opuscula) et particulierement Jacques de Viterbe\" by Louis Jacques\r\nBataillon (pp. 107-12); \"Quelques remarques codicologiques et paleographiques\r\nau sujet du ms. Vaticano Ottob. lat. 1850\" by Robert Wielockx (pp. 113-33);\r\n\"La liste des ceuvres d'Hippocrate dans le Vindobonensis phil. gr. 100: Un\r\nautographe de Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Gudrun Vuillemin-Diem (pp. 135-83);\r\n\"Note concernant la collation d'un deuxieme manuscrit grec de la Physique\r\npar Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Jozef Brams and Gudrun Vuillemin-Diem (pp.\r\n185-92); \"La 'Recensio Matritensis' de la Physique\" by Jozef Brams (pp. 193-220);\r\n\"La Translatio anonyma e la Translatio Guillelmi del De partibus animalium (Analisi del\r\nlibro I)\" by Pietro Rossi (pp. 221-45); \"L'attribution de la Translatio nova du De\r\ngenerations et corruptione a Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Joanna Judycka (pp. 247-51);\r\n\"Iudicialia ad Syrum: Une traduction de Guillaume de Moerbeke du Quadripartitum\r\nde Cl. Ptol\u00a3mee\" by Luc Anthonis (pp. 253-55); \"Methode de traduction et\r\nproblemes de chronologie\" by Fernand Bossier (pp. 257-94); \"L'usage des mots\r\nhybrides greco-latins par Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Louis Jacques Bataillon (pp.\r\n295-99); and \"Biobibliographie de Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Willy Vanhamel\r\n(pp. 301-83).","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/kM52uB2YgiCytgt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":326,"pubplace":"Leuven","publisher":"Leuven University Press","series":"Ancient and Medieval Philosophy de Wulf-Mansion Centre, Series 1","volume":"7","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Guillaume de Moerbeke et Saint Thomas"]}
Title | Infinity and the Creation |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science |
Pages | 164-178 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
The arguments of Philoponus on which I want to focus concern the Christian view that the universe had a beginning. But here already I must draw a distinction. For in talking of the universe beginning, I am not talking merely of the present orderly arrangement of the earth, sun, moon, and stars. Many pagans would have accepted that the present arrangement of matter had a beginning. What, with very few exceptions, they all thought absurd was that matter itself should have had a beginning. Indeed, Jews and Christians themselves were embarrassed about this doctrine and were by no means unanimous in accepting it. It has been suggested that the oldest references to creation in the Old Testament come in Job, and that there God is envisaged as imposing order on pre-existing matter, not as creating matter itself. It has further been doubted whether there is any clear statement in the Bible of creation out of nothing. The opinion of Philo the Jew, in the first century A.D., is a matter of controversy, but I believe that he takes different sides in different works. A little later, Hermogenes and others offered a surprising reason for denying matter a beginning. They pointed to the use of the word "was" in the opening of Genesis, where it is said that the earth was without form and void, and they took the use of the past tense to show that earth, or matter, was already in existence when the Creator began work. It is often held, although I am not inclined to agree myself, that Boethius endorsed the Neoplatonist view of a beginningless universe at the end of his Consolation of Philosophy. What I would acknowledge is that other Christians in these centuries, such as Synesius and Elias, did deny the universe a beginning or end under the influence of Platonism. If we skip to the thirteenth century, we find Thomas Aquinas and his teacher Albert the Great saying that it cannot be established by philosophy one way or the other whether the universe had a beginning. It is only Scripture which reveals that it did. Two slightly younger contemporaries in Paris went a step further—indeed, a step too far. Boethius of Dacia (the Dane, not the sixth-century Roman) and Siger of Brabant maintained that philosophical argument showed the universe to be beginningless, but that nonetheless, reason must bow to revelation. They had to flee Paris in the condemnation of 1277, and there is a tradition that Siger was murdered. [introduction p. 165-167] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/RDC5FI7QaO4jMjf |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"489","_score":null,"_source":{"id":489,"authors_free":[{"id":669,"entry_id":489,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":670,"entry_id":489,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Infinity and the Creation","main_title":{"title":"Infinity and the Creation"},"abstract":"The arguments of Philoponus on which I want to focus concern the Christian view that the universe had a beginning. But here already I must draw a distinction. For in talking of the universe beginning, I am not talking merely of the present orderly arrangement of the earth, sun, moon, and stars. Many pagans would have accepted that the present arrangement of matter had a beginning. What, with very few exceptions, they all thought absurd was that matter itself should have had a beginning.\r\n\r\nIndeed, Jews and Christians themselves were embarrassed about this doctrine and were by no means unanimous in accepting it. It has been suggested that the oldest references to creation in the Old Testament come in Job, and that there God is envisaged as imposing order on pre-existing matter, not as creating matter itself. It has further been doubted whether there is any clear statement in the Bible of creation out of nothing. The opinion of Philo the Jew, in the first century A.D., is a matter of controversy, but I believe that he takes different sides in different works.\r\n\r\nA little later, Hermogenes and others offered a surprising reason for denying matter a beginning. They pointed to the use of the word \"was\" in the opening of Genesis, where it is said that the earth was without form and void, and they took the use of the past tense to show that earth, or matter, was already in existence when the Creator began work. It is often held, although I am not inclined to agree myself, that Boethius endorsed the Neoplatonist view of a beginningless universe at the end of his Consolation of Philosophy.\r\n\r\nWhat I would acknowledge is that other Christians in these centuries, such as Synesius and Elias, did deny the universe a beginning or end under the influence of Platonism. If we skip to the thirteenth century, we find Thomas Aquinas and his teacher Albert the Great saying that it cannot be established by philosophy one way or the other whether the universe had a beginning. It is only Scripture which reveals that it did.\r\n\r\nTwo slightly younger contemporaries in Paris went a step further\u2014indeed, a step too far. Boethius of Dacia (the Dane, not the sixth-century Roman) and Siger of Brabant maintained that philosophical argument showed the universe to be beginningless, but that nonetheless, reason must bow to revelation. They had to flee Paris in the condemnation of 1277, and there is a tradition that Siger was murdered. [introduction p. 165-167]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/RDC5FI7QaO4jMjf","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":489,"section_of":1383,"pages":"164-178","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1383,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sorabij1987d","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"All the chapters in this book are new, except for the inaugural lecture (Chapter 9), which I apologise for reprinting virtually unrevised and with the original lecture context still apparent. It seemed desirable, however, that so crucial a part ofthe controversy should be represented. The collection originated in a conference on Philoponus held at the Institute of Classical Studies in London in June 1983, which provided an opportunity for interested parties to pool knowledge from the many different disciplines that are relevant to his work. Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 6 are drawn from the conference, while two other conference papers, those of Henry Blumenthal and Richard Sorabji, are being incorporated into books in preparation (see Bibliography). Sorabji's main suggestions, however, are included in Chapter I in the discussion of matter and extension (pp 18 and 23). The remairnng chapters, apart from the inaugural lecture, were solicited or written for the volume, two of them (5 and 12) having been delivered first at a seminar on Ancient Science at the Institute of Classical Studies. [preface, p. ix-x]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/buhMZZl0djmIx9v","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1383,"pubplace":"Ithaca, New York","publisher":"Cornell University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"1","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Infinity and the Creation"]}
Title | John Philoponus |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science |
Pages | 1-40 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
This chapter delves into the life and intellectual contributions of John Philoponus, a pivotal figure bridging Neoplatonism and Christianity. It explores his relationship with Ammonius and examines how his Christian faith influenced his philosophical and scientific endeavors. The text covers Philoponus' critique of the Aristotelian worldview, focusing on key topics such as the creation of the universe, the impetus theory of dynamics, and the concept of velocity in a vacuum. It also addresses his innovative ideas about vacuum and space, his challenges to Aristotle's notions of natural place, and his interpretation of matter as extension. Philoponus is recognized for disrupting Aristotle's categorical framework, rejecting the fifth element, and presenting novel theories about the directionality of light. The chapter reflects on his attacks on Aristotle in retrospect, highlighting the interplay between his scientific theories and Christian doctrines, including Christ, the Trinity, resurrection, and the soul. Additionally, the chapter examines his influence on later thought, tracing his intellectual antecedents and the chronology of his writings. [Derived from the entire text] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/FDyWUVJUOYpvtvb |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"488","_score":null,"_source":{"id":488,"authors_free":[{"id":667,"entry_id":488,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":668,"entry_id":488,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"John Philoponus","main_title":{"title":"John Philoponus"},"abstract":"This chapter delves into the life and intellectual contributions of John Philoponus, a pivotal figure bridging Neoplatonism and Christianity. It explores his relationship with Ammonius and examines how his Christian faith influenced his philosophical and scientific endeavors. The text covers Philoponus' critique of the Aristotelian worldview, focusing on key topics such as the creation of the universe, the impetus theory of dynamics, and the concept of velocity in a vacuum. It also addresses his innovative ideas about vacuum and space, his challenges to Aristotle's notions of natural place, and his interpretation of matter as extension.\r\n\r\nPhiloponus is recognized for disrupting Aristotle's categorical framework, rejecting the fifth element, and presenting novel theories about the directionality of light. The chapter reflects on his attacks on Aristotle in retrospect, highlighting the interplay between his scientific theories and Christian doctrines, including Christ, the Trinity, resurrection, and the soul. Additionally, the chapter examines his influence on later thought, tracing his intellectual antecedents and the chronology of his writings. [Derived from the entire text]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FDyWUVJUOYpvtvb","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":488,"section_of":1383,"pages":"1-40","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1383,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sorabij1987d","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"All the chapters in this book are new, except for the inaugural lecture (Chapter 9), which I apologise for reprinting virtually unrevised and with the original lecture context still apparent. It seemed desirable, however, that so crucial a part ofthe controversy should be represented. The collection originated in a conference on Philoponus held at the Institute of Classical Studies in London in June 1983, which provided an opportunity for interested parties to pool knowledge from the many different disciplines that are relevant to his work. Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 6 are drawn from the conference, while two other conference papers, those of Henry Blumenthal and Richard Sorabji, are being incorporated into books in preparation (see Bibliography). Sorabji's main suggestions, however, are included in Chapter I in the discussion of matter and extension (pp 18 and 23). The remairnng chapters, apart from the inaugural lecture, were solicited or written for the volume, two of them (5 and 12) having been delivered first at a seminar on Ancient Science at the Institute of Classical Studies. [preface, p. ix-x]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/buhMZZl0djmIx9v","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1383,"pubplace":"Ithaca, New York","publisher":"Cornell University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"1","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["John Philoponus"]}
Title | L'ecole néoplatonicienne d'Athènes |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1990 |
Published in | Recherches sur le néoplatonisme après Plotin |
Pages | 127-129 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Saffrey, Henri Dominique |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
À l’intérieur du vaste mouvement philosophique que l’on désigne globalement sous le nom de néo-platonisme et qui se développe du IIIe au VIe siècle après J.-C., on distingue des écoles diverses. Fondé à Rome par Plotin, qui y enseigne de 245 à 270, et maintenu vivant sur place par Porphyre et ses successeurs (dont plusieurs passèrent au christianisme, par exemple Marius Victorinus), le néo-platonisme se répandit d’abord en Asie Mineure et spécialement à Apamée et Antioche, où enseigna Jamblique. Celui-ci réussit à amalgamer la métaphysique plotinienne et les théories et pratiques de la théurgie en vogue dans l’Orient grec. Cette synthèse fournit à l’empereur Julien l’Apostat une base doctrinale pour le renouveau de la religion païenne qu’il tenta de faire triompher sous son règne (361-363). De cette école syrienne sortirent deux rameaux d’inégale valeur : d’une part, l’école de Pergame, franchement adonnée à la magie et délaissant entièrement le vieux rationalisme grec, et, d’autre part, l’école d’Athènes, qui parviendra à se greffer sur la souche de l’antique Académie de Platon au début du Ve siècle. À peu près au même moment, un autre rejeton paraîtra à Alexandrie, et cette école survivra même à celle d’Athènes pour faire passer au monde arabe vers la fin du VIe siècle tout le capital du néo-platonisme. [introduction p. 126] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/ZrGOMqaxAxCT1p0 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1174","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1174,"authors_free":[{"id":1749,"entry_id":1174,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":228,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","free_first_name":"Henri Dominique","free_last_name":"Saffrey","norm_person":{"id":228,"first_name":"Henri Dominique","last_name":"Saffrey","full_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130160059","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"L'ecole n\u00e9oplatonicienne d'Ath\u00e8nes","main_title":{"title":"L'ecole n\u00e9oplatonicienne d'Ath\u00e8nes"},"abstract":"\u00c0 l\u2019int\u00e9rieur du vaste mouvement philosophique que l\u2019on d\u00e9signe globalement sous le nom de n\u00e9o-platonisme et qui se d\u00e9veloppe du IIIe au VIe si\u00e8cle apr\u00e8s J.-C., on distingue des \u00e9coles diverses.\r\n\r\nFond\u00e9 \u00e0 Rome par Plotin, qui y enseigne de 245 \u00e0 270, et maintenu vivant sur place par Porphyre et ses successeurs (dont plusieurs pass\u00e8rent au christianisme, par exemple Marius Victorinus), le n\u00e9o-platonisme se r\u00e9pandit d\u2019abord en Asie Mineure et sp\u00e9cialement \u00e0 Apam\u00e9e et Antioche, o\u00f9 enseigna Jamblique. Celui-ci r\u00e9ussit \u00e0 amalgamer la m\u00e9taphysique plotinienne et les th\u00e9ories et pratiques de la th\u00e9urgie en vogue dans l\u2019Orient grec. Cette synth\u00e8se fournit \u00e0 l\u2019empereur Julien l\u2019Apostat une base doctrinale pour le renouveau de la religion pa\u00efenne qu\u2019il tenta de faire triompher sous son r\u00e8gne (361-363).\r\n\r\nDe cette \u00e9cole syrienne sortirent deux rameaux d\u2019in\u00e9gale valeur : d\u2019une part, l\u2019\u00e9cole de Pergame, franchement adonn\u00e9e \u00e0 la magie et d\u00e9laissant enti\u00e8rement le vieux rationalisme grec, et, d\u2019autre part, l\u2019\u00e9cole d\u2019Ath\u00e8nes, qui parviendra \u00e0 se greffer sur la souche de l\u2019antique Acad\u00e9mie de Platon au d\u00e9but du Ve si\u00e8cle.\r\n\r\n\u00c0 peu pr\u00e8s au m\u00eame moment, un autre rejeton para\u00eetra \u00e0 Alexandrie, et cette \u00e9cole survivra m\u00eame \u00e0 celle d\u2019Ath\u00e8nes pour faire passer au monde arabe vers la fin du VIe si\u00e8cle tout le capital du n\u00e9o-platonisme. [introduction p. 126]","btype":2,"date":"1990","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ZrGOMqaxAxCT1p0","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":228,"full_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1174,"section_of":1461,"pages":"127-129","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1461,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":1,"language":"fr","title":"Recherches sur le n\u00e9oplatonisme apr\u00e8s Plotin","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Saffrey1990","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1990","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/PXWKxSDEtCXXJtb","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1461,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Vrin","series":"Histoire des doctrines de l\u2019antiquit\u00e9 classique","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["L'ecole n\u00e9oplatonicienne d'Ath\u00e8nes"]}
Title | La Physique d’Aristote et les anciens commentateurs grecs |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1981 |
Published in | Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Thessaloniki August 7-14 1978 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Verbeke, Gérard |
Editor(s) | Theodōrakopulos, Iōannēs N. |
Translator(s) |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/WCFPRwh1E2k3zgK |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"185","_score":null,"_source":{"id":185,"authors_free":[{"id":241,"entry_id":185,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2506,"entry_id":185,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":514,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Theod\u014drakopulos, I\u014dann\u0113s N.","free_first_name":" I\u014dann\u0113s N.","free_last_name":"Theod\u014drakopulos","norm_person":{"id":514,"first_name":" Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","last_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos","full_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos, Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117302619","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"La Physique d\u2019Aristote et les anciens commentateurs grecs","main_title":{"title":"La Physique d\u2019Aristote et les anciens commentateurs grecs"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"1981","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/WCFPRwh1E2k3zgK","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":514,"full_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos, Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":185,"pubplace":"Athen","publisher":"Minist\u00e8re de la culture et des sciences","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":{"id":185,"section_of":1459,"pages":"","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1459,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Thessaloniki August 7-14 1978","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1981","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/O3DQotq4JIjFp7W","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1459,"pubplace":"Athen","publisher":"Athe\u0304na : Ministry of Culture and Sciences","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["La Physique d\u2019Aristote et les anciens commentateurs grecs"]}
Title | La critique d’authenticite chez les commentateurs grecs d’Aristote |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1974 |
Published in | Mansel’e Armağan. Mélanges Mansel, vol. I |
Pages | 265-288 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Moraux, Paul |
Editor(s) | Akurgal, Ekrem , Alkım, Uluğ Bahadır , Mansel, Arif Müfid |
Translator(s) |
Tout comme l’archéologie, la numismatique ou l’épigraphie, l’histoire littéraire est parfois amenée à se demander si les matériaux sur lesquels elle travaille sont bien authentiques. Dans la transmission des textes antiques, en effet, les erreurs fortuites d’attribution devaient se produire plus aisément que de nos jours. Par ailleurs, la notion de propriété littéraire était assez flottante ; un auteur plus récent ne se faisait aucun scrupule à reproduire, parfois littéralement, ce qu’un auteur plus ancien avait écrit sur le même sujet. Enfin, pour les raisons les plus diverses, il y a eu parfois fraude délibérée, le faussaire lançant sous un autre nom, souvent un nom illustre, un ouvrage de son cru. Il est remarquable que, dans les derniers siècles de l’Antiquité grecque, les commentateurs d’Aristote se soient posé la question de savoir si tel ou tel écrit dont ils avaient à s’occuper était bien l’œuvre d’Aristote. Divers témoignages nous apprennent même que le problème de l’authenticité était l’un de ceux que le commentateur devait aborder dans son introduction, avant de s’attaquer à l’analyse et à l’interprétation du texte proprement dit. On se rappellera que dans une sorte d’introduction générale à la lecture d’Aristote, Ammonius et plusieurs autres commentateurs issus de son école s’arrêtaient aux dix questions suivantes : D’où les diverses écoles philosophiques tirent-elles leur nom ? Comment faut-il classer les ouvrages d’Aristote ? Par quelle discipline doit-on commencer l’étude de la philosophie aristotélicienne ? Quel est le but de cette philosophie ? Par quels moyens peut-on arriver à ce but ? Quels sont les caractères de l’exposé ou du style d’Aristote ? Comment justifier l’obscurité d’Aristote ? Quelles sont les qualités requises de l’interprète d’Aristote ? Quelles sont les qualités requises de l’étudiant qui aborde la philosophie d’Aristote ? Quelles questions convient-il d’examiner avant d’étudier chaque traité en particulier ? Nous n’avons pas à nous étendre ici sur le problème, assez controversé, de l’origine de ce schéma. Disons simplement que, même si sa forme stéréotypée est assez récente, certains de ses éléments sont à coup sûr bien antérieurs à Ammonius, chez qui le schéma apparaît pour la première fois. C’est le dixième point qui doit retenir ici notre attention. De l’avis des commentateurs, il convient, en effet, avant d’expliquer chaque traité, de répondre dans l’introduction aux six questions suivantes : Quel est le but du traité en question ? Quelle est son utilité ? Quelle est sa place dans l’œuvre d’Aristote ? Comment expliquer son titre ? Le traité est-il authentique ? Quelles en sont les grandes divisions ? Bien sûr, toutes ces questions ne se posent pas dans tous les cas avec la même acuité : il peut arriver, par exemple, que l’utilité de l’ouvrage soit évidente, ou que son titre soit clair, ou encore que son authenticité saute aux yeux et n’ait jamais été contestée ; alors, le commentateur n’aura pas à s’étendre sur ces questions. Quoi qu’il en soit, il est intéressant de noter que le problème de l’authenticité faisait partie des sujets habituellement abordés par les commentateurs dans leurs introductions aux divers ouvrages d’Aristote. Nous nous proposons d’examiner, dans les pages qui suivent, les quelques traces de cette critique d’authenticité qui ont survécu dans les commentaires arrivés jusqu’à nous. Plusieurs commentateurs néoplatoniciens indiquent pour quelles raisons et à la suite de quelles circonstances il a pu se faire que l’on attribue au Stagirite des ouvrages n’émanant pas de lui. En gros, ils citent les motifs suivants : Certains rois payaient bien les textes qu’ils acquéraient pour les bibliothèques qu’ils avaient créées ; cela ne pouvait qu’inciter les faussaires au travail. Par ailleurs, la similitude de certains noms d’auteurs ou de certains titres a pu provoquer des confusions ou des erreurs d’attribution. Enfin, partant de bonnes intentions, certains disciples ont fait à leur maître l’honneur de lui attribuer leurs propres productions. Ces indications des commentateurs sur les causes des attributions erronées viennent de faire l’objet d’une bonne étude ; nous n’y reviendrons donc pas. En revanche, nous croyons utile d’examiner plus en détail les déclarations des commentateurs relatives à l’authenticité de certains traités du corpus aristotelicum. Cela nous permettra de voir quels arguments étaient utilisés pour établir ou contester l’authenticité d’un ouvrage, et aussi de mesurer la valeur des jugements portés dans les différents cas. Les traités ou parties de traités sur lesquels nous possédons, à cet égard, des renseignements concrets sont : les Catégories, les Postprédicaments (chapitres 10-15 des Catégories), le De interpretatione, les Analytiques, la Physique, les Météorologiques, et les deux premiers livres de la Métaphysique. [introduction p. 265-267] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/0K9jPcuuBUt3j54 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"956","_score":null,"_source":{"id":956,"authors_free":[{"id":1434,"entry_id":956,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":137,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Moraux, Paul","free_first_name":"Paul","free_last_name":"Moraux","norm_person":{"id":137,"first_name":"Paul ","last_name":"Moraux","full_name":"Moraux, Paul ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117755591","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2111,"entry_id":956,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":262,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Akurgal, Ekrem","free_first_name":"Ekrem","free_last_name":"Akurgal","norm_person":{"id":262,"first_name":"Ekrem","last_name":"Akurgal","full_name":"Akurgal, Ekrem","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118859358","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2112,"entry_id":956,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":261,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Alk\u0131m, Ulu\u011f Bahad\u0131r","free_first_name":"Ulu\u011f Bahad\u0131r","free_last_name":"Alk\u0131m","norm_person":{"id":261,"first_name":"Ulu\u011f Bahad\u0131r","last_name":"Alk\u0131m","full_name":"Alk\u0131m, Ulu\u011f Bahad\u0131r","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118859137","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2410,"entry_id":956,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":260,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Mansel, Arif M\u00fcfid","free_first_name":"Arif M\u00fcfid","free_last_name":"Mansel","norm_person":{"id":260,"first_name":"Arif M\u00fcfid","last_name":"Mansel","full_name":"Mansel, Arif M\u00fcfid","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119020068","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"La critique d\u2019authenticite chez les commentateurs grecs d\u2019Aristote","main_title":{"title":"La critique d\u2019authenticite chez les commentateurs grecs d\u2019Aristote"},"abstract":"Tout comme l\u2019arch\u00e9ologie, la numismatique ou l\u2019\u00e9pigraphie, l\u2019histoire litt\u00e9raire est parfois amen\u00e9e \u00e0 se demander si les mat\u00e9riaux sur lesquels elle travaille sont bien authentiques. Dans la transmission des textes antiques, en effet, les erreurs fortuites d\u2019attribution devaient se produire plus ais\u00e9ment que de nos jours. Par ailleurs, la notion de propri\u00e9t\u00e9 litt\u00e9raire \u00e9tait assez flottante\u202f; un auteur plus r\u00e9cent ne se faisait aucun scrupule \u00e0 reproduire, parfois litt\u00e9ralement, ce qu\u2019un auteur plus ancien avait \u00e9crit sur le m\u00eame sujet. Enfin, pour les raisons les plus diverses, il y a eu parfois fraude d\u00e9lib\u00e9r\u00e9e, le faussaire lan\u00e7ant sous un autre nom, souvent un nom illustre, un ouvrage de son cru.\r\n\r\nIl est remarquable que, dans les derniers si\u00e8cles de l\u2019Antiquit\u00e9 grecque, les commentateurs d\u2019Aristote se soient pos\u00e9 la question de savoir si tel ou tel \u00e9crit dont ils avaient \u00e0 s\u2019occuper \u00e9tait bien l\u2019\u0153uvre d\u2019Aristote. Divers t\u00e9moignages nous apprennent m\u00eame que le probl\u00e8me de l\u2019authenticit\u00e9 \u00e9tait l\u2019un de ceux que le commentateur devait aborder dans son introduction, avant de s\u2019attaquer \u00e0 l\u2019analyse et \u00e0 l\u2019interpr\u00e9tation du texte proprement dit. On se rappellera que dans une sorte d\u2019introduction g\u00e9n\u00e9rale \u00e0 la lecture d\u2019Aristote, Ammonius et plusieurs autres commentateurs issus de son \u00e9cole s\u2019arr\u00eataient aux dix questions suivantes :\r\n\r\n D\u2019o\u00f9 les diverses \u00e9coles philosophiques tirent-elles leur nom ?\r\n Comment faut-il classer les ouvrages d\u2019Aristote ?\r\n Par quelle discipline doit-on commencer l\u2019\u00e9tude de la philosophie aristot\u00e9licienne ?\r\n Quel est le but de cette philosophie ?\r\n Par quels moyens peut-on arriver \u00e0 ce but ?\r\n Quels sont les caract\u00e8res de l\u2019expos\u00e9 ou du style d\u2019Aristote ?\r\n Comment justifier l\u2019obscurit\u00e9 d\u2019Aristote ?\r\n Quelles sont les qualit\u00e9s requises de l\u2019interpr\u00e8te d\u2019Aristote ?\r\n Quelles sont les qualit\u00e9s requises de l\u2019\u00e9tudiant qui aborde la philosophie d\u2019Aristote ?\r\n Quelles questions convient-il d\u2019examiner avant d\u2019\u00e9tudier chaque trait\u00e9 en particulier ?\r\n\r\nNous n\u2019avons pas \u00e0 nous \u00e9tendre ici sur le probl\u00e8me, assez controvers\u00e9, de l\u2019origine de ce sch\u00e9ma. Disons simplement que, m\u00eame si sa forme st\u00e9r\u00e9otyp\u00e9e est assez r\u00e9cente, certains de ses \u00e9l\u00e9ments sont \u00e0 coup s\u00fbr bien ant\u00e9rieurs \u00e0 Ammonius, chez qui le sch\u00e9ma appara\u00eet pour la premi\u00e8re fois. C\u2019est le dixi\u00e8me point qui doit retenir ici notre attention. De l\u2019avis des commentateurs, il convient, en effet, avant d\u2019expliquer chaque trait\u00e9, de r\u00e9pondre dans l\u2019introduction aux six questions suivantes :\r\n\r\n Quel est le but du trait\u00e9 en question ?\r\n Quelle est son utilit\u00e9 ?\r\n Quelle est sa place dans l\u2019\u0153uvre d\u2019Aristote ?\r\n Comment expliquer son titre ?\r\n Le trait\u00e9 est-il authentique ?\r\n Quelles en sont les grandes divisions ?\r\n\r\nBien s\u00fbr, toutes ces questions ne se posent pas dans tous les cas avec la m\u00eame acuit\u00e9\u202f: il peut arriver, par exemple, que l\u2019utilit\u00e9 de l\u2019ouvrage soit \u00e9vidente, ou que son titre soit clair, ou encore que son authenticit\u00e9 saute aux yeux et n\u2019ait jamais \u00e9t\u00e9 contest\u00e9e\u202f; alors, le commentateur n\u2019aura pas \u00e0 s\u2019\u00e9tendre sur ces questions. Quoi qu\u2019il en soit, il est int\u00e9ressant de noter que le probl\u00e8me de l\u2019authenticit\u00e9 faisait partie des sujets habituellement abord\u00e9s par les commentateurs dans leurs introductions aux divers ouvrages d\u2019Aristote.\r\n\r\nNous nous proposons d\u2019examiner, dans les pages qui suivent, les quelques traces de cette critique d\u2019authenticit\u00e9 qui ont surv\u00e9cu dans les commentaires arriv\u00e9s jusqu\u2019\u00e0 nous. Plusieurs commentateurs n\u00e9oplatoniciens indiquent pour quelles raisons et \u00e0 la suite de quelles circonstances il a pu se faire que l\u2019on attribue au Stagirite des ouvrages n\u2019\u00e9manant pas de lui. En gros, ils citent les motifs suivants :\r\n\r\n Certains rois payaient bien les textes qu\u2019ils acqu\u00e9raient pour les biblioth\u00e8ques qu\u2019ils avaient cr\u00e9\u00e9es\u202f; cela ne pouvait qu\u2019inciter les faussaires au travail.\r\n Par ailleurs, la similitude de certains noms d\u2019auteurs ou de certains titres a pu provoquer des confusions ou des erreurs d\u2019attribution.\r\n Enfin, partant de bonnes intentions, certains disciples ont fait \u00e0 leur ma\u00eetre l\u2019honneur de lui attribuer leurs propres productions.\r\n\r\nCes indications des commentateurs sur les causes des attributions erron\u00e9es viennent de faire l\u2019objet d\u2019une bonne \u00e9tude\u202f; nous n\u2019y reviendrons donc pas. En revanche, nous croyons utile d\u2019examiner plus en d\u00e9tail les d\u00e9clarations des commentateurs relatives \u00e0 l\u2019authenticit\u00e9 de certains trait\u00e9s du corpus aristotelicum. Cela nous permettra de voir quels arguments \u00e9taient utilis\u00e9s pour \u00e9tablir ou contester l\u2019authenticit\u00e9 d\u2019un ouvrage, et aussi de mesurer la valeur des jugements port\u00e9s dans les diff\u00e9rents cas.\r\n\r\nLes trait\u00e9s ou parties de trait\u00e9s sur lesquels nous poss\u00e9dons, \u00e0 cet \u00e9gard, des renseignements concrets sont :\r\n\r\n les Cat\u00e9gories,\r\n les Postpr\u00e9dicaments (chapitres 10-15 des Cat\u00e9gories),\r\n le De interpretatione,\r\n les Analytiques,\r\n la Physique,\r\n les M\u00e9t\u00e9orologiques,\r\n et les deux premiers livres de la M\u00e9taphysique. [introduction p. 265-267]","btype":2,"date":"1974","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/0K9jPcuuBUt3j54","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":137,"full_name":"Moraux, Paul ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":262,"full_name":"Akurgal, Ekrem","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":261,"full_name":"Alk\u0131m, Ulu\u011f Bahad\u0131r","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":260,"full_name":"Mansel, Arif M\u00fcfid","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":956,"section_of":296,"pages":"265-288","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":296,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Mansel\u2019e Arma\u011fan. M\u00e9langes Mansel, vol. I","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Mansel1974","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1974","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1974","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ySvGVCjObmF3lEv","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":296,"pubplace":"Ankara","publisher":"T\u00fcrk Tarih Kurumu Bas\u0131mevi","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["La critique d\u2019authenticite chez les commentateurs grecs d\u2019Aristote"]}
Title | La division néoplatonicienne des écrits d'Aristote |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, Überlieferung, Nachleben |
Pages | 249-285 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
Nous pouvons donc résumer en quelques mots le résultat de nos recherches. La division des écrits d’Aristote, telle quelle est présentée dans les commentaires néoplatoniciens, est, prise dans son ensemble, un pur produit de la philosophie néoplatonicienne, produit qui intègre néanmoins quelques éléments qui remontent à une époque antérieure à cette philosophie. Ce qui me paraît être typiquement et exclusivement néoplatonicien, c’est la division des écrits aristotéliciens en écrits particuliers, intermédiaires et généraux. D’abord, la place des Lettres au début de la liste est une particularité que la division néoplatonicienne ne partage, à ma connaissance, avec aucune autre liste non seulement d’écrits aristotéliciens, mais aussi d’écrits de n’importe quel auteur. Ensuite, la catégorie des écrits intermédiaires ne peut avoir de sens qu’à l’intérieur du système néoplatonicien, car elle sert surtout à se débarrasser d’un certain nombre d’écrits bio logiques d’Aristote, parce que ceux-ci n’avaient pas de place dans le cursus philosophique néoplatonicien. Pour les péripatéticiens au con traire, ces écrits rentraient tout simplement dans la partie physique de la philosophie, comme Simplicius nous l’apprend au début de son commentaire sur la Physique128, où il reproduit le classement péripatéticien des écrits physiques d’Aristote. Pour les péripatéticiens, comme d’ailleurs pour n’importe quel auteur de Pinax, le fait de séparer les écrits d’Aristote se rapportant aux choses de la nature en deux catégories, l’une qui comprendrait des écrits «intermédiaires», l’autre qui rassemblerait les écrits physiques et correspondrait à une subdivision des écrits généraux, ne pouvait avoir aucun sens. Cette séparation n’était possible que dans la perspective de l’ontologie néoplatonicienne. Il y a d’ailleurs confusion des deux systèmes dans la division de David. Il respecte d’abord la division néoplatonicienne en écrits particuliers, intermédiaires et généraux en donnant des exemples adéquats pour chaque rubrique, mais quand il arrive à la rubrique physique des écrits théorétiques, il suit, en énumérant des exemples, la liste péripatéticienne ou tout simplement le pinax des écrits d’Aristote qui se trouvait à la suite de sa biographie. Il répète donc quelques titres qu’il avait auparavant classés dans les écrits intermédiaires et ajoute bon nombre de traités qui, selon le point de vue néoplatonicien, n’ont rien à voir avec la philosophie. [conclusion, p. 284-285] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/GosX6JCGE0N12qC |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"697","_score":null,"_source":{"id":697,"authors_free":[{"id":1036,"entry_id":697,"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}},{"id":1037,"entry_id":697,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"La division n\u00e9oplatonicienne des \u00e9crits d'Aristote","main_title":{"title":"La division n\u00e9oplatonicienne des \u00e9crits d'Aristote"},"abstract":"Nous pouvons donc r\u00e9sumer en quelques mots le r\u00e9sultat de nos recherches. La division des \u00e9crits d\u2019Aristote, telle quelle est pr\u00e9sen\u00adt\u00e9e dans les commentaires n\u00e9oplatoniciens, est, prise dans son ensem\u00adble, un pur produit de la philosophie n\u00e9oplatonicienne, produit qui int\u00e8gre n\u00e9anmoins quelques \u00e9l\u00e9ments qui remontent \u00e0 une \u00e9poque ant\u00e9rieure \u00e0 cette philosophie. Ce qui me para\u00eet \u00eatre typiquement et exclusivement n\u00e9oplatonicien, c\u2019est la division des \u00e9crits aristot\u00e9li\u00adciens en \u00e9crits particuliers, interm\u00e9diaires et g\u00e9n\u00e9raux. D\u2019abord, la \r\nplace des Lettres au d\u00e9but de la liste est une particularit\u00e9 que la divi\u00adsion n\u00e9oplatonicienne ne partage, \u00e0 ma connaissance, avec aucune \r\nautre liste non seulement d\u2019\u00e9crits aristot\u00e9liciens, mais aussi d\u2019\u00e9crits de n\u2019importe quel auteur. Ensuite, la cat\u00e9gorie des \u00e9crits interm\u00e9di\u00adaires ne peut avoir de sens qu\u2019\u00e0 l\u2019int\u00e9rieur du syst\u00e8me n\u00e9oplatonicien, car elle sert surtout \u00e0 se d\u00e9barrasser d\u2019un certain nombre d\u2019\u00e9crits bio\u00ad\r\nlogiques d\u2019Aristote, parce que ceux-ci n\u2019avaient pas de place dans le cursus philosophique n\u00e9oplatonicien. Pour les p\u00e9ripat\u00e9ticiens au con\u00ad\r\ntraire, ces \u00e9crits rentraient tout simplement dans la partie physique de la philosophie, comme Simplicius nous l\u2019apprend au d\u00e9but de son commentaire sur la Physique128, o\u00f9 il reproduit le classement p\u00e9ripat\u00e9ticien des \u00e9crits physiques d\u2019Aristote. Pour les p\u00e9ripat\u00e9ticiens, \r\ncomme d\u2019ailleurs pour n\u2019importe quel auteur de Pinax, le fait de s\u00e9parer les \u00e9crits d\u2019Aristote se rapportant aux choses de la nature en \r\ndeux cat\u00e9gories, l\u2019une qui comprendrait des \u00e9crits \u00abinterm\u00e9diaires\u00bb, l\u2019autre qui rassemblerait les \u00e9crits physiques et correspondrait \u00e0 une \r\nsubdivision des \u00e9crits g\u00e9n\u00e9raux, ne pouvait avoir aucun sens. Cette s\u00e9paration n\u2019\u00e9tait possible que dans la perspective de l\u2019ontologie \r\nn\u00e9oplatonicienne. Il y a d\u2019ailleurs confusion des deux syst\u00e8mes dans la division de David. Il respecte d\u2019abord la division n\u00e9oplatonicienne \r\nen \u00e9crits particuliers, interm\u00e9diaires et g\u00e9n\u00e9raux en donnant des exemples ad\u00e9quats pour chaque rubrique, mais quand il arrive \u00e0 la \r\nrubrique physique des \u00e9crits th\u00e9or\u00e9tiques, il suit, en \u00e9num\u00e9rant des exemples, la liste p\u00e9ripat\u00e9ticienne ou tout simplement le pinax des \u00e9crits d\u2019Aristote qui se trouvait \u00e0 la suite de sa biographie. Il r\u00e9p\u00e8te donc quelques titres qu\u2019il avait auparavant class\u00e9s dans les \u00e9crits \r\ninterm\u00e9diaires et ajoute bon nombre de trait\u00e9s qui, selon le point de vue n\u00e9oplatonicien, n\u2019ont rien \u00e0 voir avec la philosophie. [conclusion, p. 284-285]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/GosX6JCGE0N12qC","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":697,"section_of":189,"pages":"249-285","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":189,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, \u00dcberlieferung, Nachleben","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Lulofs\/Kollesch\/Nutton1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Kommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles sind das Thema dieses Bandes. Mit der Aristotelesrenaissance des 1. Jh. v.Chr. einsetzend, vermitteln die Beitr\u00e4ge, unter acht Hauptkapiteln zusammengefa\u00dft, ein eindrucksvolles Bild von der Rezeption zweier Jahrtausende. D a \u00df diese Rezeption kontinuierlich in ihren wichtigen Phasen illustriert werden kann, ist - wie schon im ersten Band - der freundlichen Kooperation der beteiligten Autoren zu verdanken. Als besonderer Gl\u00fccksfall mag gelten, da\u00df einige Beitr\u00e4ge sich in idealer Weise erg\u00e4nzen. So wird der Leser in zwei auf einanderfolgenden Artikeln die Interpretationsgeschichte der zentralen Kapitel Metaphysik \u039b 7 und 9 von Plotin und Themistios \u00fcber Maimonides und Gersonides bis Hegel verfolgen k\u00f6nnen. Dieses Bem\u00fchen um Aristoteles von der Antike bis in die Neuzeit ist etwa f\u00fcr De anima bei Alexander von Aphrodisias und Leibniz, f\u00fcr die \r\nKategorien bei Plotin und Peirce dokumentiert, wobei die Erstver\u00f6ffentlichung der Ubersetzung von Cat. 1 - 4 durch den bedeutenden amerikanischen Philosophen mit besonderer Freude angezeigt werden darf. \r\nVon den Autoren dieses Bandes weilen Paul Henry und Charles B. Schmitt nicht mehr unter uns. In ein Buch \u00fcber Plotins Entretiens sollte der hier ver\u00f6ffentlichte Beitrag von Paul Henry sp\u00e4ter einmal integriert werden; daraus erkl\u00e4ren sich gelegentliche Hinweise auf geplante Teile dieses nun nicht mehr vollendeten Werkes. Die Studie von Charles B.Schmitt \u00fcber die Aristoteles-Florilegien der Renaissance bietet die erste Gesamtdarstellung zu diesem Thema und enth\u00e4lt im Anhang ein Verzeichnis mit wichtigen Erg\u00e4nzungen zu seiner grundlegenden \u201eBibliography of Aristotle Editions, 1501-1600\". [Vorwort p. V-VI]\r\n","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Q1P6OhIp8zaE99c","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":189,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet","volume":"2","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["La division n\u00e9oplatonicienne des \u00e9crits d'Aristote"]}
Title | La fin de l'Acádemie |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1971 |
Published in | Le Néoplatonisme: Actes du Colloque International sur le Néoplatonisme organisé dans le cadre des Colloques Internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique à Royaumont du 9 au 13 juin 1969 |
Pages | 281-290 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Cameron, Alan |
Editor(s) | Schuhl, Pierre-Maxime , Hadot, Pierre |
Translator(s) |
Avec la mort de Proclus en 485, l’Académie tomba dans un déclin rapide. Trois générations durant, les meilleurs philosophes avaient été formés à Athènes par Plutarque, Syrianus et Proclus. Au contraire, les meilleurs philosophes de la génération suivante, Asclépius, Damascius, Eutocius, Olympiodore, Philopon et Simplicius, furent tous élèves d’Ammonius à Alexandrie. Ammonius lui-même avait été élève de Proclus. Nous connaissons les noms de tous les successeurs de Proclus à Athènes, mais ils ne sont guère pour nous que des noms. Même Damascius, qui était scolarque en l’année fatidique de 529, admet que la philosophie à Athènes n’était jamais tombée aussi bas que juste avant son accession à la chaire. Tout cela est hors de conteste. Pourtant, les savants modernes ont généralement considéré que ce déclin a continué sans interruption jusqu’en 529 et qu’en 529, lorsque Justinien a publié son illustre édit fermant l’Académie, elle était déjà sur son lit de mort. Autrement dit, ils considèrent que l’acte de Justinien fut plutôt de l’euthanasie qu’un assassinat. La dernière étude sur la fermeture de l’Académie admet sans discussion qu’en 529, la philosophie païenne d’Athènes avait déjà succombé sous les coups de la philosophie christianisée d’Alexandrie et de Gaza, que les étudiants, sauvés des griffes de l’impie Damascius, pouvaient désormais être guidés sur les chemins de la vérité par des chrétiens comme Philopon et Procope de Gaza. Hélas ! Cette image édifiante n’a rien à voir avec l’histoire. Il est douteux qu’il y ait jamais eu une école chrétienne de philosophie à Gaza. Énée et Procope étaient tous deux professeurs de rhétorique, et leurs plus fameux disciples furent aussi des rhéteurs (Épiphanius, Choricius). En tous cas, en 529, tous deux étaient morts. En ce qui concerne Alexandrie, contrairement à une opinion largement répandue, Philopon ne succéda pas à la chaire d’Ammonius. Pour des raisons que nous ne connaissons pas, il est resté, semble-t-il, toute sa vie grammaticus, professeur de littérature. Et vers la fin de sa vie, il se tourna de plus en plus de la philosophie vers la théologie — et vers l’hérésie. En outre, l’influence de la tradition scolaire était si forte, même dans le cas de philosophes chrétiens, que les écrits de Philopon ont exercé une influence étonnamment faible sur l’enseignement à Alexandrie. Olympiodore, qui enseignait encore à Alexandrie dans les années 560, était en effet païen, et ses successeurs, Élie, David, Étienne, bien que chrétiens, continuèrent à enseigner des doctrines comme l’éternité du monde et la divinité des corps célestes, qui avaient été déjà depuis longtemps réfutées par Philopon. Nous ne découvrons certainement pas ce qui est quelquefois évoqué en termes grandiloquents comme une synthèse de l’aristotélisme et du christianisme. Dès lors, il ne saurait être question de la vitalité supérieure d’une philosophie chrétienne écrasant les faibles survivants du paganisme sur leur propre terrain. De fait, si l’on compare le travail qui se fait à Athènes et à Alexandrie dans la première moitié du VIe siècle — en négligeant la production des dernières années de Philopon, comme étrangère à la tradition universitaire proprement dite —, il est clair que Damascius et Simplicius surpassent de beaucoup leurs rivaux alexandrins. Quant à la réputation de Damascius comme professeur (et la compétence scientifique a autant d’importance que l’habileté pédagogique), elle est établie par la liste de ses élèves en 529, qui comprenait des philosophes originaires de Cilicie, de Phrygie, de Lydie, de Phénicie et de Gaza : un véritable recrutement international. Assez étrangement, on a voulu tirer argument du caractère international de l’école de Damascius pour prouver la décadence de l’Académie. Athènes elle-même, dit-on, ne pouvait plus produire des Athéniens pour cultiver l’héritage de Platon. C’est ignorer le caractère international de la vie universitaire à la fin de l’Antiquité, caractère bien mis en évidence par la Vie d’Isidore écrite par Damascius et par Eunape dans les Vies des sophistes. En cet âge d’or de la rhétorique que fut le IVe siècle, à Athènes, les grands noms étaient Julien de Cappadoce, Himérius de Bithynie, Prohairesius d’Arménie. À peu près aucun Athénien parmi eux. Proclus lui-même était lycien, Syrianus, alexandrin. C’est plutôt un signe de la santé de ses institutions qu’Athènes pût encore attirer des étrangers de valeur ! Je voudrais suggérer, en effet, que bien loin que ce fût l’Académie qui fût sur son lit de mort en 529, c’était l’école d’Alexandrie qui était en déclin après la mort d’Ammonius, alors que l’Académie reprenait vie. Les successeurs d’Ammonius à Alexandrie furent Eutocius le mathématicien et Olympiodore, philosophes, ni l’un ni l’autre de grande envergure. Tandis que vers 529, l’énergique et habile Damascius avait repris en main l’Académie et s’était entouré d’une équipe de disciples dévoués — dévoués, car nous savons qu’ils le suivirent en Perse après la fermeture de l’Académie. Une illustration frappante de ce changement de relation entre Athènes et Alexandrie est le fait que, alors que dans ses premiers commentaires Olympiodore dépendait essentiellement d’Ammonius, dans ses dernières œuvres, il s’appuie de plus en plus sur Damascius. Nous saisissons, là encore, Alexandrie se tournant vers Athènes. Il se peut que Justinien n’ait pas fermé l’Académie par mépris, parce qu’elle était moribonde, mais — et c’est une raison plus naturelle et plus plausible — par crainte, parce qu’elle reprenait vie. [introduction p. 281-283] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/WEx2IgLff0lYEzl |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1258","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1258,"authors_free":[{"id":1837,"entry_id":1258,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"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":2334,"entry_id":1258,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":23,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Schuhl, Pierre-Maxime","free_first_name":"Pierre-Maxime","free_last_name":"Schuhl","norm_person":{"id":23,"first_name":"Pierre-Maxime","last_name":"Schuhl","full_name":"Schuhl, Pierre-Maxime ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117559718X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2335,"entry_id":1258,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":158,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Hadot, Pierre","free_first_name":"Pierre","free_last_name":"Hadot","norm_person":{"id":158,"first_name":"Pierre","last_name":"Hadot","full_name":"Hadot, Pierre","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115663517","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"La fin de l'Ac\u00e1demie","main_title":{"title":"La fin de l'Ac\u00e1demie"},"abstract":"Avec la mort de Proclus en 485, l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie tomba dans un d\u00e9clin rapide. Trois g\u00e9n\u00e9rations durant, les meilleurs philosophes avaient \u00e9t\u00e9 form\u00e9s \u00e0 Ath\u00e8nes par Plutarque, Syrianus et Proclus. Au contraire, les meilleurs philosophes de la g\u00e9n\u00e9ration suivante, Ascl\u00e9pius, Damascius, Eutocius, Olympiodore, Philopon et Simplicius, furent tous \u00e9l\u00e8ves d\u2019Ammonius \u00e0 Alexandrie. Ammonius lui-m\u00eame avait \u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e9l\u00e8ve de Proclus.\r\n\r\nNous connaissons les noms de tous les successeurs de Proclus \u00e0 Ath\u00e8nes, mais ils ne sont gu\u00e8re pour nous que des noms. M\u00eame Damascius, qui \u00e9tait scolarque en l\u2019ann\u00e9e fatidique de 529, admet que la philosophie \u00e0 Ath\u00e8nes n\u2019\u00e9tait jamais tomb\u00e9e aussi bas que juste avant son accession \u00e0 la chaire.\r\n\r\nTout cela est hors de conteste. Pourtant, les savants modernes ont g\u00e9n\u00e9ralement consid\u00e9r\u00e9 que ce d\u00e9clin a continu\u00e9 sans interruption jusqu\u2019en 529 et qu\u2019en 529, lorsque Justinien a publi\u00e9 son illustre \u00e9dit fermant l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie, elle \u00e9tait d\u00e9j\u00e0 sur son lit de mort. Autrement dit, ils consid\u00e8rent que l\u2019acte de Justinien fut plut\u00f4t de l\u2019euthanasie qu\u2019un assassinat.\r\n\r\nLa derni\u00e8re \u00e9tude sur la fermeture de l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie admet sans discussion qu\u2019en 529, la philosophie pa\u00efenne d\u2019Ath\u00e8nes avait d\u00e9j\u00e0 succomb\u00e9 sous les coups de la philosophie christianis\u00e9e d\u2019Alexandrie et de Gaza, que les \u00e9tudiants, sauv\u00e9s des griffes de l\u2019impie Damascius, pouvaient d\u00e9sormais \u00eatre guid\u00e9s sur les chemins de la v\u00e9rit\u00e9 par des chr\u00e9tiens comme Philopon et Procope de Gaza. H\u00e9las ! Cette image \u00e9difiante n\u2019a rien \u00e0 voir avec l\u2019histoire.\r\n\r\nIl est douteux qu\u2019il y ait jamais eu une \u00e9cole chr\u00e9tienne de philosophie \u00e0 Gaza. \u00c9n\u00e9e et Procope \u00e9taient tous deux professeurs de rh\u00e9torique, et leurs plus fameux disciples furent aussi des rh\u00e9teurs (\u00c9piphanius, Choricius). En tous cas, en 529, tous deux \u00e9taient morts.\r\n\r\nEn ce qui concerne Alexandrie, contrairement \u00e0 une opinion largement r\u00e9pandue, Philopon ne succ\u00e9da pas \u00e0 la chaire d\u2019Ammonius. Pour des raisons que nous ne connaissons pas, il est rest\u00e9, semble-t-il, toute sa vie grammaticus, professeur de litt\u00e9rature. Et vers la fin de sa vie, il se tourna de plus en plus de la philosophie vers la th\u00e9ologie \u2014 et vers l\u2019h\u00e9r\u00e9sie.\r\n\r\nEn outre, l\u2019influence de la tradition scolaire \u00e9tait si forte, m\u00eame dans le cas de philosophes chr\u00e9tiens, que les \u00e9crits de Philopon ont exerc\u00e9 une influence \u00e9tonnamment faible sur l\u2019enseignement \u00e0 Alexandrie. Olympiodore, qui enseignait encore \u00e0 Alexandrie dans les ann\u00e9es 560, \u00e9tait en effet pa\u00efen, et ses successeurs, \u00c9lie, David, \u00c9tienne, bien que chr\u00e9tiens, continu\u00e8rent \u00e0 enseigner des doctrines comme l\u2019\u00e9ternit\u00e9 du monde et la divinit\u00e9 des corps c\u00e9lestes, qui avaient \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9j\u00e0 depuis longtemps r\u00e9fut\u00e9es par Philopon.\r\n\r\nNous ne d\u00e9couvrons certainement pas ce qui est quelquefois \u00e9voqu\u00e9 en termes grandiloquents comme une synth\u00e8se de l\u2019aristot\u00e9lisme et du christianisme.\r\n\r\nD\u00e8s lors, il ne saurait \u00eatre question de la vitalit\u00e9 sup\u00e9rieure d\u2019une philosophie chr\u00e9tienne \u00e9crasant les faibles survivants du paganisme sur leur propre terrain. De fait, si l\u2019on compare le travail qui se fait \u00e0 Ath\u00e8nes et \u00e0 Alexandrie dans la premi\u00e8re moiti\u00e9 du VIe si\u00e8cle \u2014 en n\u00e9gligeant la production des derni\u00e8res ann\u00e9es de Philopon, comme \u00e9trang\u00e8re \u00e0 la tradition universitaire proprement dite \u2014, il est clair que Damascius et Simplicius surpassent de beaucoup leurs rivaux alexandrins.\r\n\r\nQuant \u00e0 la r\u00e9putation de Damascius comme professeur (et la comp\u00e9tence scientifique a autant d\u2019importance que l\u2019habilet\u00e9 p\u00e9dagogique), elle est \u00e9tablie par la liste de ses \u00e9l\u00e8ves en 529, qui comprenait des philosophes originaires de Cilicie, de Phrygie, de Lydie, de Ph\u00e9nicie et de Gaza : un v\u00e9ritable recrutement international.\r\n\r\nAssez \u00e9trangement, on a voulu tirer argument du caract\u00e8re international de l\u2019\u00e9cole de Damascius pour prouver la d\u00e9cadence de l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie. Ath\u00e8nes elle-m\u00eame, dit-on, ne pouvait plus produire des Ath\u00e9niens pour cultiver l\u2019h\u00e9ritage de Platon. C\u2019est ignorer le caract\u00e8re international de la vie universitaire \u00e0 la fin de l\u2019Antiquit\u00e9, caract\u00e8re bien mis en \u00e9vidence par la Vie d\u2019Isidore \u00e9crite par Damascius et par Eunape dans les Vies des sophistes.\r\n\r\nEn cet \u00e2ge d\u2019or de la rh\u00e9torique que fut le IVe si\u00e8cle, \u00e0 Ath\u00e8nes, les grands noms \u00e9taient Julien de Cappadoce, Him\u00e9rius de Bithynie, Prohairesius d\u2019Arm\u00e9nie. \u00c0 peu pr\u00e8s aucun Ath\u00e9nien parmi eux. Proclus lui-m\u00eame \u00e9tait lycien, Syrianus, alexandrin. C\u2019est plut\u00f4t un signe de la sant\u00e9 de ses institutions qu\u2019Ath\u00e8nes p\u00fbt encore attirer des \u00e9trangers de valeur !\r\n\r\nJe voudrais sugg\u00e9rer, en effet, que bien loin que ce f\u00fbt l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie qui f\u00fbt sur son lit de mort en 529, c\u2019\u00e9tait l\u2019\u00e9cole d\u2019Alexandrie qui \u00e9tait en d\u00e9clin apr\u00e8s la mort d\u2019Ammonius, alors que l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie reprenait vie.\r\n\r\nLes successeurs d\u2019Ammonius \u00e0 Alexandrie furent Eutocius le math\u00e9maticien et Olympiodore, philosophes, ni l\u2019un ni l\u2019autre de grande envergure. Tandis que vers 529, l\u2019\u00e9nergique et habile Damascius avait repris en main l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie et s\u2019\u00e9tait entour\u00e9 d\u2019une \u00e9quipe de disciples d\u00e9vou\u00e9s \u2014 d\u00e9vou\u00e9s, car nous savons qu\u2019ils le suivirent en Perse apr\u00e8s la fermeture de l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie.\r\n\r\nUne illustration frappante de ce changement de relation entre Ath\u00e8nes et Alexandrie est le fait que, alors que dans ses premiers commentaires Olympiodore d\u00e9pendait essentiellement d\u2019Ammonius, dans ses derni\u00e8res \u0153uvres, il s\u2019appuie de plus en plus sur Damascius. Nous saisissons, l\u00e0 encore, Alexandrie se tournant vers Ath\u00e8nes.\r\n\r\nIl se peut que Justinien n\u2019ait pas ferm\u00e9 l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie par m\u00e9pris, parce qu\u2019elle \u00e9tait moribonde, mais \u2014 et c\u2019est une raison plus naturelle et plus plausible \u2014 par crainte, parce qu\u2019elle reprenait vie. [introduction p. 281-283]","btype":2,"date":"1971","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/WEx2IgLff0lYEzl","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":20,"full_name":"Cameron, Alan ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":23,"full_name":"Schuhl, Pierre-Maxime ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":158,"full_name":"Hadot, Pierre","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1258,"section_of":1257,"pages":"281-290","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1257,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Le N\u00e9oplatonisme: Actes du Colloque International sur le N\u00e9oplatonisme organis\u00e9 dans le cadre des Colloques Internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique \u00e0 Royaumont du 9 au 13 juin 1969","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Schuhl_Hadot1971","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1971","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"The book is a valuable resource for scholars and students of Neoplatonism, providing a comprehensive overview of the history and development of this important philosophical tradition. It is divided into three main sections. The first section focuses on the historical development of Neoplatonism, tracing its origins in the philosophy of Plato and its development through the works of Plotinus, Proclus, and other Neoplatonic thinkers. The second section explores the relationship between Neoplatonism and other philosophical traditions, such as Aristotelianism, Stoicism, and Epicureanism. The third section examines the influence of Neoplatonism on literature and Christianity. [introduction]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/3Ys5KdoaAlOHE6L","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1257,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["La fin de l'Ac\u00e1demie"]}
Title | La relation chez Simplicius |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 113-147 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Luna, Concetta |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
This text is about Simplicius' doctrine of the relation. Although Simplicius did not dedicate a specific treatise to the relation, his views can be reconstructed from his commentary on Aristotle's Categories and certain passages in his commentary on Physics. Simplicius' approach to the Categories builds upon a rich tradition of commentaries, and he offers both questions and solutions in his own commentary. The author argues that Simplicius' elaboration of the concept of relation is not necessarily original, but his writings present a valuable contribution to the clarification of the concept. The text also discusses other traditions of reflection on the categories, such as those of the Academy and the Stoics. [introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/B73LnGwsUzauanV |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1116","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1116,"authors_free":[{"id":1685,"entry_id":1116,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":458,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Luna, Concetta","free_first_name":"Concetta","free_last_name":"Luna","norm_person":{"id":458,"first_name":"Concetta","last_name":"Luna","full_name":"Luna, Concetta","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1153489031","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1686,"entry_id":1116,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"La relation chez Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"La relation chez Simplicius"},"abstract":"This text is about Simplicius' doctrine of the relation. Although Simplicius did not dedicate a specific treatise to the relation, his views can be reconstructed from his commentary on Aristotle's Categories and certain passages in his commentary on Physics. Simplicius' approach to the Categories builds upon a rich tradition of commentaries, and he offers both questions and solutions in his own commentary. The author argues that Simplicius' elaboration of the concept of relation is not necessarily original, but his writings present a valuable contribution to the clarification of the concept. The text also discusses other traditions of reflection on the categories, such as those of the Academy and the Stoics. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/B73LnGwsUzauanV","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":458,"full_name":"Luna, Concetta","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1116,"section_of":171,"pages":"113-147","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["La relation chez Simplicius"]}
Title | La survie du Commentaire de Simplicius sur le manual d'Épictète du XVe au XVII siècles: Perotti, Politien, Steuchus, John Smith, Cudworth |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 326-367 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hadot, Pierre |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
The survival of Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' "Handbook" from the 15th to the 17th centuries can be observed from two perspectives. Firstly, there is a focus on the preservation and dissemination of the text itself through printing and translation. However, this study concentrates on the second aspect, which concerns the philosophical content of the commentary. The examination of its philosophical content has aided in understanding Epictetus' "Handbook," resolving certain philosophical problems, and demonstrating the convergence between Platonism and Christianity.The philosophical importance of Simplicius' commentary is exemplified by the work of various scholars, such as Perotti, Politien, Steuchus, John Smith, and Cudworth. They draw on Simplicius' ideas to address and resolve philosophical questions. For instance, Cudworth uses Simplicius' assertion that the principle of movement must move itself and be without parts or extension to argue for the existence of a spiritual substance. Cudworth further highlights how Simplicius perfectly expresses the Platonic idea of the soul's self-motion, where it moves not according to bodily or local movements but according to the movements of the soul, such as examination, volition, thought, and opinion. Overall, the survival of Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' "Handbook" throughout this period has not only contributed to a better understanding of the text itself but also enriched philosophical discussions and fostered connections between Platonism and Christianity. [introduction/conclusion] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/YBJwmhRAfIkqrD5 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"519","_score":null,"_source":{"id":519,"authors_free":[{"id":724,"entry_id":519,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":158,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hadot, Pierre","free_first_name":"Pierre","free_last_name":"Hadot","norm_person":{"id":158,"first_name":"Pierre","last_name":"Hadot","full_name":"Hadot, Pierre","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115663517","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":725,"entry_id":519,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"La survie du Commentaire de Simplicius sur le manual d'\u00c9pict\u00e8te du XVe au XVII si\u00e8cles: Perotti, Politien, Steuchus, John Smith, Cudworth","main_title":{"title":"La survie du Commentaire de Simplicius sur le manual d'\u00c9pict\u00e8te du XVe au XVII si\u00e8cles: Perotti, Politien, Steuchus, John Smith, Cudworth"},"abstract":"The survival of Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' \"Handbook\" from the 15th to the 17th centuries can be observed from two perspectives. Firstly, there is a focus on the preservation and dissemination of the text itself through printing and translation. However, this study concentrates on the second aspect, which concerns the philosophical content of the commentary. The examination of its philosophical content has aided in understanding Epictetus' \"Handbook,\" resolving certain philosophical problems, and demonstrating the convergence between Platonism and Christianity.The philosophical importance of Simplicius' commentary is exemplified by the work of various scholars, such as Perotti, Politien, Steuchus, John Smith, and Cudworth. They draw on Simplicius' ideas to address and resolve philosophical questions. For instance, Cudworth uses Simplicius' assertion that the principle of movement must move itself and be without parts or extension to argue for the existence of a spiritual substance. Cudworth further highlights how Simplicius perfectly expresses the Platonic idea of the soul's self-motion, where it moves not according to bodily or local movements but according to the movements of the soul, such as examination, volition, thought, and opinion. Overall, the survival of Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' \"Handbook\" throughout this period has not only contributed to a better understanding of the text itself but also enriched philosophical discussions and fostered connections between Platonism and Christianity. [introduction\/conclusion]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/YBJwmhRAfIkqrD5","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":158,"full_name":"Hadot, Pierre","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":519,"section_of":171,"pages":"326-367","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["La survie du Commentaire de Simplicius sur le manual d'\u00c9pict\u00e8te du XVe au XVII si\u00e8cles: Perotti, Politien, Steuchus, John Smith, Cudworth"]}
Title | La vie et l’œuvre de Simplicius d’après des sources grecques et arabes |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 3-39 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
Voici donc les conclusions auxquelles on peut aboutir au sujet des œuvres de Simplicius. Nous sont conservés : les commentaires sur le Manuel d’Epictète, sur le De caelo, sur la Physique, sur les Catégories, probablement sur le De anima d’Aristote. Sont perdus, mais attestés de façon plus ou moins sûre : un commentaire sur le premier livre des Éléments d’Euclide, un commentaire sur la Métaphysique d’Aristote, un commentaire sur l’ouvrage de Jamblique consacré à la secte des Pythagoriciens, une Épitomé de la Physique de Théophraste (si le commentaire sur le De anima, où se trouve un renvoi à cette œuvre, est authentique), et peut-être un commentaire sur la Techné d’Hermogène. [conclusion p. 39] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/DUSQYbD2Vn7RuIp |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"522","_score":null,"_source":{"id":522,"authors_free":[{"id":728,"entry_id":522,"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}},{"id":729,"entry_id":522,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"La vie et l\u2019\u0153uvre de Simplicius d\u2019apr\u00e8s des sources grecques et arabes","main_title":{"title":"La vie et l\u2019\u0153uvre de Simplicius d\u2019apr\u00e8s des sources grecques et arabes"},"abstract":"Voici donc les conclusions auxquelles on peut aboutir au sujet des \u0153uvres de Simplicius.\r\n\r\nNous sont conserv\u00e9s : les commentaires sur le Manuel d\u2019Epict\u00e8te, sur le De caelo, sur la Physique, sur les Cat\u00e9gories, probablement sur le De anima d\u2019Aristote.\r\n\r\nSont perdus, mais attest\u00e9s de fa\u00e7on plus ou moins s\u00fbre : un commentaire sur le premier livre des \u00c9l\u00e9ments d\u2019Euclide, un commentaire sur la M\u00e9taphysique d\u2019Aristote, un commentaire sur l\u2019ouvrage de Jamblique consacr\u00e9 \u00e0 la secte des Pythagoriciens, une \u00c9pitom\u00e9 de la Physique de Th\u00e9ophraste (si le commentaire sur le De anima, o\u00f9 se trouve un renvoi \u00e0 cette \u0153uvre, est authentique), et peut-\u00eatre un commentaire sur la Techn\u00e9 d\u2019Hermog\u00e8ne. [conclusion p. 39]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/DUSQYbD2Vn7RuIp","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":522,"section_of":171,"pages":"3-39","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["La vie et l\u2019\u0153uvre de Simplicius d\u2019apr\u00e8s des sources grecques et arabes"]}
Title | Le programme d'enseignement dans les Ecoles neoplatoniciennes |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1982 |
Published in | Porphyre. La vie de Plotin. Travaux préliminaires et index grec complet |
Pages | 277-280 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Goulet- Cazé, Marie-Odile |
Editor(s) | Brisson, Luc , Goulet-Cazé, Marie-Odile , Goulet, Richard , O’Brien, Denis |
Translator(s) |
Les écoles néoplatoniciennes postérieures ont établi un programme d’enseignement qu’on peut reconstituer dans ses grandes lignes. Voici quelles sont les principales étapes de ce cursus : a) Propédeutique morale : Étude de textes comme le Manuel d’Épictète et le Carmen aureum pythagoricien pour introduire la vie morale. Ces œuvres étaient souvent accompagnées de commentaires, notamment par Simplicius et Hiéroclès. b) Introduction générale à la philosophie : Basée sur l'Isagogè de Porphyre, cette étape proposait une définition et des divisions de la philosophie (théorétique et pratique), suivant un schéma attribué à Porphyre ou Andronicus. c) Étude préparatoire à Aristote : Lecture et commentaire de l'Isagogè comme introduction indispensable aux Catégories d’Aristote, en appliquant un cadre méthodologique précis avant d’entamer le commentaire. d) Introduction à Aristote : Les commentaires sur les Catégories soulevaient dix questions essentielles sur Aristote, incluant son style, la structure de ses écrits, et les qualités requises pour ses lecteurs et exégètes. e) Cycle d’études aristotéliciennes : Études couvrant logique, éthique, politique, physique et théologie sur une durée estimée à deux ou trois ans. Ce cycle préparait les étudiants à l’étude des dialogues platoniciens. f) Étude de Platon : Introduction systématique à Platon, incluant l’ordre de lecture des dialogues. Cette phase s’inspirait également des médio-platoniciens comme Albinus et Alcinoos. g) Oracles chaldaïques : Étudiés comme le sommet de la formation philosophique. Proclus et d’autres néoplatoniciens harmonisaient ces enseignements avec ceux de Platon. h) Poésie orphique : Considérée comme le niveau suprême, la poésie orphique, notamment les Hymnes, faisait l’objet de commentaires approfondis, particulièrement chez Proclus et Syrianus. [derived from the entire text] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/kPjIT5NBhbhdLeA |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"534","_score":null,"_source":{"id":534,"authors_free":[{"id":754,"entry_id":534,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":100,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Goulet- Caz\u00e9, Marie-Odile","free_first_name":"Marie-Odile","free_last_name":"Goulet- Caz\u00e9","norm_person":{"id":100,"first_name":"Marie-Odile ","last_name":"Goulet-Caz\u00e9","full_name":"Goulet-Caz\u00e9, Marie-Odile ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/124602924","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2105,"entry_id":534,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":18,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Brisson, Luc","free_first_name":"Luc","free_last_name":"Brisson","norm_person":{"id":18,"first_name":"Luc","last_name":"Brisson","full_name":"Brisson, Luc ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/114433259","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2106,"entry_id":534,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":100,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Goulet-Caz\u00e9, Marie-Odile ","free_first_name":"Marie-Odile ","free_last_name":"Goulet-Caz\u00e9","norm_person":{"id":100,"first_name":"Marie-Odile ","last_name":"Goulet-Caz\u00e9","full_name":"Goulet-Caz\u00e9, Marie-Odile ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/124602924","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2107,"entry_id":534,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":136,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Goulet, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Goulet","norm_person":{"id":136,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Goulet","full_name":"Goulet, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1042353395","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2108,"entry_id":534,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":144,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"O\u2019Brien, Denis","free_first_name":"Denis","free_last_name":"O\u2019Brien","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":"Le programme d'enseignement dans les Ecoles neoplatoniciennes","main_title":{"title":"Le programme d'enseignement dans les Ecoles neoplatoniciennes"},"abstract":"Les \u00e9coles n\u00e9oplatoniciennes post\u00e9rieures ont \u00e9tabli un programme d\u2019enseignement qu\u2019on peut reconstituer dans ses grandes lignes. Voici quelles sont les principales \u00e9tapes de ce cursus : a) Prop\u00e9deutique morale : \u00c9tude de textes comme le Manuel d\u2019\u00c9pict\u00e8te et le Carmen aureum pythagoricien pour introduire la vie morale. Ces \u0153uvres \u00e9taient souvent accompagn\u00e9es de commentaires, notamment par Simplicius et Hi\u00e9rocl\u00e8s.\r\n\r\nb) Introduction g\u00e9n\u00e9rale \u00e0 la philosophie : Bas\u00e9e sur l'Isagog\u00e8 de Porphyre, cette \u00e9tape proposait une d\u00e9finition et des divisions de la philosophie (th\u00e9or\u00e9tique et pratique), suivant un sch\u00e9ma attribu\u00e9 \u00e0 Porphyre ou Andronicus.\r\n\r\nc) \u00c9tude pr\u00e9paratoire \u00e0 Aristote : Lecture et commentaire de l'Isagog\u00e8 comme introduction indispensable aux Cat\u00e9gories d\u2019Aristote, en appliquant un cadre m\u00e9thodologique pr\u00e9cis avant d\u2019entamer le commentaire.\r\n\r\nd) Introduction \u00e0 Aristote : Les commentaires sur les Cat\u00e9gories soulevaient dix questions essentielles sur Aristote, incluant son style, la structure de ses \u00e9crits, et les qualit\u00e9s requises pour ses lecteurs et ex\u00e9g\u00e8tes.\r\n\r\ne) Cycle d\u2019\u00e9tudes aristot\u00e9liciennes : \u00c9tudes couvrant logique, \u00e9thique, politique, physique et th\u00e9ologie sur une dur\u00e9e estim\u00e9e \u00e0 deux ou trois ans. Ce cycle pr\u00e9parait les \u00e9tudiants \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9tude des dialogues platoniciens.\r\n\r\nf) \u00c9tude de Platon : Introduction syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 Platon, incluant l\u2019ordre de lecture des dialogues. Cette phase s\u2019inspirait \u00e9galement des m\u00e9dio-platoniciens comme Albinus et Alcinoos.\r\n\r\ng) Oracles chalda\u00efques : \u00c9tudi\u00e9s comme le sommet de la formation philosophique. Proclus et d\u2019autres n\u00e9oplatoniciens harmonisaient ces enseignements avec ceux de Platon.\r\n\r\nh) Po\u00e9sie orphique : Consid\u00e9r\u00e9e comme le niveau supr\u00eame, la po\u00e9sie orphique, notamment les Hymnes, faisait l\u2019objet de commentaires approfondis, particuli\u00e8rement chez Proclus et Syrianus. [derived from the entire text]","btype":2,"date":"1982","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/kPjIT5NBhbhdLeA","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":100,"full_name":"Goulet-Caz\u00e9, Marie-Odile ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":18,"full_name":"Brisson, Luc ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":100,"full_name":"Goulet-Caz\u00e9, Marie-Odile ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":136,"full_name":"Goulet, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":144,"full_name":"O'Brien, Denis","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":534,"section_of":377,"pages":"277-280","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":377,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Porphyre. La vie de Plotin. Travaux pr\u00e9liminaires et index grec complet","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Brisson1982","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1982","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1982","abstract":"Il est apparu que le dernier mot n'avait pas \u00e9t\u00e9 dit sur ce texte de Porphyre, capital pour notre connaissance de la personne et de l'\u00e9cole de Plotin, et plus largement de la vie philosophique au IIIe si\u00e8cle de notre \u00e8re. Car on est en pr\u00e9sence d'un document dont la simplicit\u00e9 est illusoire : la traduction m\u00eame en est h\u00e9riss\u00e9e de difficult\u00e9s, qui, dans nombre de cas, semblent avoir jusqu'ici \u00e9chapp\u00e9 \u00e0 l'attention ; d'autre part, la valeur historique de cette biographie, indubitable en apparence, ne cesse en v\u00e9rit\u00e9 de faire probl\u00e8me par suite de l'application de Porphyre \u00e0 se donner en toute circonstance le beau r\u00f4le.\r\nDe telles consid\u00e9rations, et d'autres encore, ont donn\u00e9 \u00e0 penser que l'on ne perdrait pas son temps en reprenant l'\u00e9tude de ce vieux texte sur des bases enti\u00e8rement nouvelles. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/dg4i4rIRJWOzIZa","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":377,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Vrin","series":"Histoire des doctrines de l'Antiquit\u00e9 classique","volume":"6","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Le programme d'enseignement dans les Ecoles neoplatoniciennes"]}
Title | Les calendriers en usage à Harran d’après les sources arabes et le commentaire de Simplicius à la Physique d’Aristote |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 40-57 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Tardieu, Michel |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
L’ordre des saisons adopté par Simplicius pour énumérer et classer les calendriers groupe d’abord deux calendriers luni-solaires (attique et asiate), puis deux calendriers solaires (romain et arabe). Comme dans l’Athènes de Proclus finissant, le premier de ces calendriers n’était en usage qu’à l’Académie. Mais, à la différence de la situation contemporaine de Marinus écrivant la biographie de son maître, la symbolique des lunaisons du calendrier attique, avec un cycle analogue de fêtes et de rites, était réalité hors de l’enceinte de l’Académie, dans la société harrânienne. Le calendrier luni-solaire attique en usage dans l’École platonicienne de Harrân ne se différenciait du calendrier luni-solaire local hérité de la colonisation macédonienne que par son début d’année et les noms de ses mois. Le passage de l’un à l’autre n’offrait aucune difficulté. Plus besoin, comme le faisait Marinus, de julianiser artificiellement le nombre du jour du mois attique pour transcrire une date du calendrier de la ville. L’hémérologe de Florence mettant la nouvelle année du calendrier asiate le 23 septembre et Jean Lydus faisant partir le calendrier attique du 23 juin, il y avait totale correspondance du point de vue du jour du mois entre le calendrier académique dont Lydus donne les noms attiques et le calendrier civil et religieux de la ville, dont l’Hémerologion et al-Hàsimî transmettent respectivement les noms macédoniens et araméens. L’exemple des débuts d’année, développé par Simplicius, offre un déroulement du temps harrânien à quatre entrées festives, comme l’a bien noté al-Bîrünî. L’année académique des Platoniciens, réglée sur le solstice d’été (calendrier attique), y commençait au 1ᵉʳ Hekatombaiôn, qui correspondait respectivement au 1ᵉʳ Lôos (Éphèse), au 23 juin (Romains), au 4 Panemos (Arabes). L’année civile et religieuse de la ville, réglée sur l’équinoxe d’automne (calendrier asiate), y commençait au 1ᵉʳ Dios/Tišrîn al-awwal, qui correspondait au 23 septembre (Romains), au 6 Gorpiaios (Arabes), au 1ᵉʳ Puanepsiôn (Athéniens). L’année civile et religieuse de l’Empire, réglée sur le solstice d’hiver (calendrier romain), y commençait au 1ᵉʳ janvier/Kânûn II, qui correspondait au 16 Audunaios (Arabes), au 8 Gamêliôn (Athéniens), au 8 Peritios (Éphèse). L’année coutumière de la région, réglée sur l’équinoxe vernal (calendrier arabe), y commençait au 1ᵉʳ Xanthikos/Nîsân, qui correspondait à la veille du 30 Elaphêboliôn (Athéniens), au 22 mars (Romains), et à la veille du 30 Xanthikos (Éphèse). La parenthèse sur les débuts d’année, ouverte par Simplicius à propos de l’exemple du début du mois choisi par Aristote pour illustrer le concept de consécution temporelle, se referme sur trois acquis essentiels. Elle constitue le plus ancien témoignage connu sur les calendriers en usage chez les Greco-araméens de Harrân. Elle permet d’identifier, par leur origine historique et leur appartenance nationale, les calendriers fournis par al-Sarahsî, al-Hàsimî et Wahb. Elle confirme que c’est bien là, dans cette «ville bénie, parce que jamais souillée par l’erreur de Nazareth», que trouvèrent refuge les derniers Platoniciens après 533. Dans les calendriers de Wahb et d’al-Hâsimî, se côtoient pêle-mêle les noms de divinités babyloniennes, égyptiennes, grecques, anatoliennes, syriennes et arabes. Un tel syncrétisme ne pouvait que faire bon ménage avec la religion de l’Académie. Selon l’objectif de l’École d’Athènes, en effet, le philosophe ne devait se contenter d’être le thérapeute d’une seule ville, ou celui des coutumes de quelques peuples. Il lui fallait aussi être «l’hiérophante du monde entier». En s’installant à Harrân à leur retour d’Iran, les compagnons de Damascius avaient choisi l’endroit idéal pour réaliser un tel programme. [conclusion p. 55-57] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/TgVuqJv1CIhi085 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"475","_score":null,"_source":{"id":475,"authors_free":[{"id":640,"entry_id":475,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":331,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Tardieu, Michel","free_first_name":"Michel","free_last_name":"Tardieu","norm_person":{"id":331,"first_name":"Michel","last_name":"Tardieu","full_name":"Tardieu, Michel","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140490701","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":641,"entry_id":475,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Les calendriers en usage \u00e0 Harran d\u2019apr\u00e8s les sources arabes et le commentaire de Simplicius \u00e0 la Physique d\u2019Aristote","main_title":{"title":"Les calendriers en usage \u00e0 Harran d\u2019apr\u00e8s les sources arabes et le commentaire de Simplicius \u00e0 la Physique d\u2019Aristote"},"abstract":"L\u2019ordre des saisons adopt\u00e9 par Simplicius pour \u00e9num\u00e9rer et classer les calendriers groupe d\u2019abord deux calendriers luni-solaires (attique et asiate), puis deux calendriers solaires (romain et arabe). Comme dans l\u2019Ath\u00e8nes de Proclus finissant, le premier de ces calendriers n\u2019\u00e9tait en usage qu\u2019\u00e0 l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie. Mais, \u00e0 la diff\u00e9rence de la situation contemporaine de Marinus \u00e9crivant la biographie de son ma\u00eetre, la symbolique des lunaisons du calendrier attique, avec un cycle analogue de f\u00eates et de rites, \u00e9tait r\u00e9alit\u00e9 hors de l\u2019enceinte de l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie, dans la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 harr\u00e2nienne.\r\n\r\nLe calendrier luni-solaire attique en usage dans l\u2019\u00c9cole platonicienne de Harr\u00e2n ne se diff\u00e9renciait du calendrier luni-solaire local h\u00e9rit\u00e9 de la colonisation mac\u00e9donienne que par son d\u00e9but d\u2019ann\u00e9e et les noms de ses mois. Le passage de l\u2019un \u00e0 l\u2019autre n\u2019offrait aucune difficult\u00e9. Plus besoin, comme le faisait Marinus, de julianiser artificiellement le nombre du jour du mois attique pour transcrire une date du calendrier de la ville.\r\n\r\nL\u2019h\u00e9m\u00e9rologe de Florence mettant la nouvelle ann\u00e9e du calendrier asiate le 23 septembre et Jean Lydus faisant partir le calendrier attique du 23 juin, il y avait totale correspondance du point de vue du jour du mois entre le calendrier acad\u00e9mique dont Lydus donne les noms attiques et le calendrier civil et religieux de la ville, dont l\u2019H\u00e9merologion et al-H\u00e0sim\u00ee transmettent respectivement les noms mac\u00e9doniens et aram\u00e9ens.\r\n\r\nL\u2019exemple des d\u00e9buts d\u2019ann\u00e9e, d\u00e9velopp\u00e9 par Simplicius, offre un d\u00e9roulement du temps harr\u00e2nien \u00e0 quatre entr\u00e9es festives, comme l\u2019a bien not\u00e9 al-B\u00eer\u00fcn\u00ee. L\u2019ann\u00e9e acad\u00e9mique des Platoniciens, r\u00e9gl\u00e9e sur le solstice d\u2019\u00e9t\u00e9 (calendrier attique), y commen\u00e7ait au 1\u1d49\u02b3 Hekatombai\u00f4n, qui correspondait respectivement au 1\u1d49\u02b3 L\u00f4os (\u00c9ph\u00e8se), au 23 juin (Romains), au 4 Panemos (Arabes).\r\n\r\nL\u2019ann\u00e9e civile et religieuse de la ville, r\u00e9gl\u00e9e sur l\u2019\u00e9quinoxe d\u2019automne (calendrier asiate), y commen\u00e7ait au 1\u1d49\u02b3 Dios\/Ti\u0161r\u00een al-awwal, qui correspondait au 23 septembre (Romains), au 6 Gorpiaios (Arabes), au 1\u1d49\u02b3 Puanepsi\u00f4n (Ath\u00e9niens).\r\n\r\nL\u2019ann\u00e9e civile et religieuse de l\u2019Empire, r\u00e9gl\u00e9e sur le solstice d\u2019hiver (calendrier romain), y commen\u00e7ait au 1\u1d49\u02b3 janvier\/K\u00e2n\u00fbn II, qui correspondait au 16 Audunaios (Arabes), au 8 Gam\u00eali\u00f4n (Ath\u00e9niens), au 8 Peritios (\u00c9ph\u00e8se).\r\n\r\nL\u2019ann\u00e9e coutumi\u00e8re de la r\u00e9gion, r\u00e9gl\u00e9e sur l\u2019\u00e9quinoxe vernal (calendrier arabe), y commen\u00e7ait au 1\u1d49\u02b3 Xanthikos\/N\u00ees\u00e2n, qui correspondait \u00e0 la veille du 30 Elaph\u00eaboli\u00f4n (Ath\u00e9niens), au 22 mars (Romains), et \u00e0 la veille du 30 Xanthikos (\u00c9ph\u00e8se).\r\n\r\nLa parenth\u00e8se sur les d\u00e9buts d\u2019ann\u00e9e, ouverte par Simplicius \u00e0 propos de l\u2019exemple du d\u00e9but du mois choisi par Aristote pour illustrer le concept de cons\u00e9cution temporelle, se referme sur trois acquis essentiels.\r\n\r\nElle constitue le plus ancien t\u00e9moignage connu sur les calendriers en usage chez les Greco-aram\u00e9ens de Harr\u00e2n. Elle permet d\u2019identifier, par leur origine historique et leur appartenance nationale, les calendriers fournis par al-Sarahs\u00ee, al-H\u00e0sim\u00ee et Wahb.\r\n\r\nElle confirme que c\u2019est bien l\u00e0, dans cette \u00abville b\u00e9nie, parce que jamais souill\u00e9e par l\u2019erreur de Nazareth\u00bb, que trouv\u00e8rent refuge les derniers Platoniciens apr\u00e8s 533.\r\n\r\nDans les calendriers de Wahb et d\u2019al-H\u00e2sim\u00ee, se c\u00f4toient p\u00eale-m\u00eale les noms de divinit\u00e9s babyloniennes, \u00e9gyptiennes, grecques, anatoliennes, syriennes et arabes. Un tel syncr\u00e9tisme ne pouvait que faire bon m\u00e9nage avec la religion de l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie.\r\n\r\nSelon l\u2019objectif de l\u2019\u00c9cole d\u2019Ath\u00e8nes, en effet, le philosophe ne devait se contenter d\u2019\u00eatre le th\u00e9rapeute d\u2019une seule ville, ou celui des coutumes de quelques peuples. Il lui fallait aussi \u00eatre \u00abl\u2019hi\u00e9rophante du monde entier\u00bb.\r\n\r\nEn s\u2019installant \u00e0 Harr\u00e2n \u00e0 leur retour d\u2019Iran, les compagnons de Damascius avaient choisi l\u2019endroit id\u00e9al pour r\u00e9aliser un tel programme. [conclusion p. 55-57]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/TgVuqJv1CIhi085","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":331,"full_name":"Tardieu, Michel","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":475,"section_of":171,"pages":"40-57","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Les calendriers en usage \u00e0 Harran d\u2019apr\u00e8s les sources arabes et le commentaire de Simplicius \u00e0 la Physique d\u2019Aristote"]}
Title | Les catégories aristotéliciennes d’action et de passion vues par Simplicius |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1980 |
Published in | Concepts et catégories dans la pensée antique |
Pages | 253-269 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Vamvoukakis, Nicolas |
Editor(s) | Aubenque, Pierre |
Translator(s) |
L’analyse du commentaire de Simplicius sur les catégories aristotéliciennes d’action et de passion (ou, plus exactement, d’«agir» et de «pâtir») est d’un intérêt multiple. Les notions mêmes sont d’une importance capitale aussi bien pour Aristote que pour le néoplatonisme tardif : en tant que catégories, elles désignent la mobilité, le dynamisme et la créativité de l’être ; en tant que réalités physiques ou métaphysiques désignées par ces mots, l’action et la passion sont directement liées à la théorie aristotélicienne de puissance, d’acte et de mouvement, et non moins à la problématique néoplatonicienne sur la Procession. L’importance du sujet fait du commentaire de Simplicius une bonne occasion pour manifester l’utilité de ce genre de commentaires pour la meilleure compréhension de la pensée aristotélicienne ; et cela d’autant plus que Simplicius consacre aux catégories d’action et de passion quarante pages de commentaire alors que le texte aristotélicien dans le traité des Catégories ne dépasse pas huit lignes. Par l’exposé exhaustif et raisonné de tous les points de vue concernant ces deux catégories, Simplicius nous offre un tableau aussi complet que possible des problèmes sur l’action et la passion qu’Aristote aurait pu ou aurait dû se poser lui-même dans son discours sur les Catégories. Ainsi l’examen portera sur les caractères principaux de l’action et de la passion, sur ce qui est le propre de chacune et justifie sa position comme une catégorie à part, sur le problème de la réductibilité de ces deux catégories aux autres ou à une seule et sur leur division en espèces. Toutes ces questions, prises dans leur généralité, sont indiscutablement conformes à l’esprit de l’auteur du traité des Catégories ; mais lorsqu’on aborde leur examen détaillé dans le commentaire de Simplicius, on est souvent étonné par l’intrusion d’éléments, surtout spéculatifs, qui, en apparence, relèvent d’un mode de pensée complètement étranger à celui d’Aristote. Mais, en fait, une étude serrée du commentaire montre qu’il est possible (et même nécessaire, si l’on veut tirer le meilleur parti de ce texte) de distinguer : les éléments purement aristotéliciens ; ceux qui, exprimés en termes néoplatoniciens, sont aisément transposables dans l’univers d’Aristote ; ceux qui prolongent la problématique aristotélicienne dans la perspective du néoplatonisme tardif. Ces prolongements ne sont pourtant pas dépourvus d’intérêt pour l’aristotélisme : en posant et en résolvant des problèmes qu’Aristote lui-même n’avait pas posés, mais qui, en dernière analyse, découlent de ses propres thèses, et auxquels on doit donc chercher une réponse même si Aristote ne l’a pas donnée, on comprend beaucoup plus à fond toutes les ramifications de sa problématique ; et de même par l’examen des réponses proposées ou en essayant de répondre soi-même à la place d’Aristote. D’où il ressort que la bonne compréhension et l’appréciation juste d’un commentaire de Simplicius sur Aristote présupposent une connaissance adéquate de la philosophie aristotélicienne ainsi qu’une certaine expérience des traits particuliers à la pensée et à la sensibilité des néoplatoniciens tardifs. Car ces commentaires ne sont pas exégétiques au sens, malheureusement si familier pour nous, de la paraphrase élaborée, mais, sans négliger les nuances, s’attaquent au cœur même des problèmes, sur lesquels ils proposent des solutions bien articulées. [introduction p. 253-254] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/O07AYBHdocDRTVL |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"455","_score":null,"_source":{"id":455,"authors_free":[{"id":611,"entry_id":455,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":344,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Vamvoukakis, Nicolas","free_first_name":"Nicolas","free_last_name":"Vamvoukakis","norm_person":{"id":344,"first_name":"Nicolas","last_name":"Vamvoukakis","full_name":"Vamvoukakis, Nicolas","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":612,"entry_id":455,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":149,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","free_first_name":"Pierre","free_last_name":"Aubenque","norm_person":{"id":149,"first_name":"Pierre","last_name":"Aubenque","full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118919458","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Les cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes d\u2019action et de passion vues par Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Les cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes d\u2019action et de passion vues par Simplicius"},"abstract":"L\u2019analyse du commentaire de Simplicius sur les cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes d\u2019action et de passion (ou, plus exactement, d\u2019\u00abagir\u00bb et de \u00abp\u00e2tir\u00bb) est d\u2019un int\u00e9r\u00eat multiple. Les notions m\u00eames sont d\u2019une importance capitale aussi bien pour Aristote que pour le n\u00e9oplatonisme tardif : en tant que cat\u00e9gories, elles d\u00e9signent la mobilit\u00e9, le dynamisme et la cr\u00e9ativit\u00e9 de l\u2019\u00eatre ; en tant que r\u00e9alit\u00e9s physiques ou m\u00e9taphysiques d\u00e9sign\u00e9es par ces mots, l\u2019action et la passion sont directement li\u00e9es \u00e0 la th\u00e9orie aristot\u00e9licienne de puissance, d\u2019acte et de mouvement, et non moins \u00e0 la probl\u00e9matique n\u00e9oplatonicienne sur la Procession.\r\n\r\nL\u2019importance du sujet fait du commentaire de Simplicius une bonne occasion pour manifester l\u2019utilit\u00e9 de ce genre de commentaires pour la meilleure compr\u00e9hension de la pens\u00e9e aristot\u00e9licienne ; et cela d\u2019autant plus que Simplicius consacre aux cat\u00e9gories d\u2019action et de passion quarante pages de commentaire alors que le texte aristot\u00e9licien dans le trait\u00e9 des Cat\u00e9gories ne d\u00e9passe pas huit lignes. Par l\u2019expos\u00e9 exhaustif et raisonn\u00e9 de tous les points de vue concernant ces deux cat\u00e9gories, Simplicius nous offre un tableau aussi complet que possible des probl\u00e8mes sur l\u2019action et la passion qu\u2019Aristote aurait pu ou aurait d\u00fb se poser lui-m\u00eame dans son discours sur les Cat\u00e9gories.\r\n\r\nAinsi l\u2019examen portera sur les caract\u00e8res principaux de l\u2019action et de la passion, sur ce qui est le propre de chacune et justifie sa position comme une cat\u00e9gorie \u00e0 part, sur le probl\u00e8me de la r\u00e9ductibilit\u00e9 de ces deux cat\u00e9gories aux autres ou \u00e0 une seule et sur leur division en esp\u00e8ces. Toutes ces questions, prises dans leur g\u00e9n\u00e9ralit\u00e9, sont indiscutablement conformes \u00e0 l\u2019esprit de l\u2019auteur du trait\u00e9 des Cat\u00e9gories ; mais lorsqu\u2019on aborde leur examen d\u00e9taill\u00e9 dans le commentaire de Simplicius, on est souvent \u00e9tonn\u00e9 par l\u2019intrusion d\u2019\u00e9l\u00e9ments, surtout sp\u00e9culatifs, qui, en apparence, rel\u00e8vent d\u2019un mode de pens\u00e9e compl\u00e8tement \u00e9tranger \u00e0 celui d\u2019Aristote.\r\n\r\nMais, en fait, une \u00e9tude serr\u00e9e du commentaire montre qu\u2019il est possible (et m\u00eame n\u00e9cessaire, si l\u2019on veut tirer le meilleur parti de ce texte) de distinguer :\r\n\r\n les \u00e9l\u00e9ments purement aristot\u00e9liciens ;\r\n ceux qui, exprim\u00e9s en termes n\u00e9oplatoniciens, sont ais\u00e9ment transposables dans l\u2019univers d\u2019Aristote ;\r\n ceux qui prolongent la probl\u00e9matique aristot\u00e9licienne dans la perspective du n\u00e9oplatonisme tardif.\r\n\r\nCes prolongements ne sont pourtant pas d\u00e9pourvus d\u2019int\u00e9r\u00eat pour l\u2019aristot\u00e9lisme : en posant et en r\u00e9solvant des probl\u00e8mes qu\u2019Aristote lui-m\u00eame n\u2019avait pas pos\u00e9s, mais qui, en derni\u00e8re analyse, d\u00e9coulent de ses propres th\u00e8ses, et auxquels on doit donc chercher une r\u00e9ponse m\u00eame si Aristote ne l\u2019a pas donn\u00e9e, on comprend beaucoup plus \u00e0 fond toutes les ramifications de sa probl\u00e9matique ; et de m\u00eame par l\u2019examen des r\u00e9ponses propos\u00e9es ou en essayant de r\u00e9pondre soi-m\u00eame \u00e0 la place d\u2019Aristote.\r\n\r\nD\u2019o\u00f9 il ressort que la bonne compr\u00e9hension et l\u2019appr\u00e9ciation juste d\u2019un commentaire de Simplicius sur Aristote pr\u00e9supposent une connaissance ad\u00e9quate de la philosophie aristot\u00e9licienne ainsi qu\u2019une certaine exp\u00e9rience des traits particuliers \u00e0 la pens\u00e9e et \u00e0 la sensibilit\u00e9 des n\u00e9oplatoniciens tardifs. Car ces commentaires ne sont pas ex\u00e9g\u00e9tiques au sens, malheureusement si familier pour nous, de la paraphrase \u00e9labor\u00e9e, mais, sans n\u00e9gliger les nuances, s\u2019attaquent au c\u0153ur m\u00eame des probl\u00e8mes, sur lesquels ils proposent des solutions bien articul\u00e9es. [introduction p. 253-254]","btype":2,"date":"1980","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/O07AYBHdocDRTVL","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":344,"full_name":"Vamvoukakis, Nicolas","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":149,"full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":455,"section_of":302,"pages":"253-269","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":302,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Concepts et cat\u00e9gories dans la pens\u00e9e antique","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Aubenque1980b","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1980","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1980","abstract":"Depuis Aristote, on entend par cat\u00e9gories des concepts tr\u00e8s g\u00e9n\u00e9raux, dont la g\u00e9n\u00e9ralit\u00e9 ne d\u00e9rive pas de l\u2019exp\u00e9rience, mais en quelque sorte la pr\u00e9c\u00e8de, puisque c\u2019est eux et eux seuls qui nous permettent de l\u2019organiser et de la penser. Ces concepts \u2013 substance, quantit\u00e9, relation, qualit\u00e9, lieu, temps, action, passion, situation, avoir \u2013 sont-ils des structures universelles de toute pens\u00e9e ou bien sont-ils li\u00e9s aux particularit\u00e9s s\u00e9mantiques ou syntaxiques d\u2019un syst\u00e8me linguistique particulier, en l\u2019occurrence de la langue grecque, \u00e0 l\u2019int\u00e9rieur de laquelle ils ont \u00e9t\u00e9 pour la premi\u00e8re fois \u00e9nonc\u00e9s et rassembl\u00e9s?\r\nLes \u00e9tudes ici r\u00e9unies, issues d\u2019un s\u00e9minaire qui s\u2019est poursuivi durant plusieurs ann\u00e9es au Centre de recherche sur la Pens\u00e9e antique de l\u2019Universit\u00e9 de Paris-Sorbonne, associ\u00e9 au C.N.R.S. (Centre L\u00e9on-Robin), s\u2019efforcent d\u2019apporter des \u00e9l\u00e9ments de r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 cette grande question, qui demeure au centre des discussions contemporaines sur les rapports de la philosophie et du langage. Leur apport sp\u00e9cifique consiste dans une ex\u00e9g\u00e8se rigoureuse des analyses du trait\u00e9 aristot\u00e9licien des Cat\u00e9gories, \u00e9clair\u00e9 par les d\u00e9veloppements ult\u00e9rieurs de la doctrine, tels que nous les connaissons notamment \u00e0 travers le Commentaire du N\u00e9oplatonicien Simplicius. Certaines de ces \u00e9tudes examinent l\u2019influence ou les transformations des cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes chez les Sto\u00efciens, les grammairiens grecs de la fin de l\u2019Antiquit\u00e9, les N\u00e9oplatoniciens tardifs, les P\u00e8res de l\u2019\u00c9glise et dans la tradition latine antique et m\u00e9di\u00e9vale. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FGpf7U5Cy1dboYI","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":302,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Vrin","series":"Bibliotheque d\u2019histoire de la philosophie","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Les cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes d\u2019action et de passion vues par Simplicius"]}
Title | Les catégories ΠΟΙ et ΠΟΤΕ chez Aristote et Simplicius |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1980 |
Published in | Concepts et catégories dans la pensée antique |
Pages | 217-245 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hoffmann, Philippe |
Editor(s) | Aubenque, Pierre |
Translator(s) |
L'exposé que l'on va lire ne se propose pas d'étudier les concepts de lieu ou de temps chez Aristote et son commentateur Simplicius, mais de scruter les quelques indications qu’Aristote, dans son Traité des Catégories, nous donne sur les prédicats ποῦ et ποτέ, ou que l'on peut trouver dans certains passages de Physique IV. La matière fournie par les textes aristotéliciens étant peu abondante, notre attention se portera principalement sur le Commentaire de Simplicius. Si les catégories ποῦ et ποτέ ne se confondent pas avec les concepts de lieu et de temps, c’est pourtant par rapport à eux, c'est-à-dire par différence avec eux, qu'elles prennent sens et consistance. C'est pourquoi, et bien que ce ne soit qu’à titre secondaire, la méditation sur le temps et le lieu nourrit le commentaire de Simplicius, chez qui elle fonde (ainsi d’ailleurs que chez nombre de commentateurs antérieurs) l'ordre relatif des deux catégories : selon que le temps ou le lieu est considéré comme plus « proche » de l'essence, plus « apparenté » à elle, la catégorie ποῦ (ou la catégorie ποτέ) se situera plus près de l’ousia dans la liste des catégories. Tel étant le critère du classement, l'analyse catégoriale court toujours le risque d’être remplacée par une étude « physique » du temps ou du lieu. Mais Simplicius situe la doctrine des catégories au niveau d’une étude des signifiés et des significations. Un second danger se présente alors, qui est de confondre l'analyse catégoriale et l'analyse grammaticale des « parties du discours ». En effet, les catégories ποῦ et ποτέ correspondent presque exclusivement à deux classes d’adverbes, qui sont, respectivement, les adverbes de lieu et les adverbes de temps. Nous verrons que Simplicius, analysant et classant les significations des adverbes (et compléments) de lieu, ne fait que reprendre, sur ce point, la doctrine grammaticale classique, telle qu'on la voit exposée dans la Grammaire de Denys le Thrace, dans les scholies relatives à cette grammaire, ou chez un auteur comme Apollonius Dyscole. Guidé par l'idée d’une étroite parenté entre les catégories ποῦ et ποτέ, Simplicius étudie les adverbes de temps en suivant comme modèle la doctrine grammaticale des adverbes de lieu. À la suite de Jamblique, il défend, contre les attaques de Plotin, la thèse soutenue par Aristote dans son Traité des Catégories : ποτέ et ποῦ sont des catégories distinctes et propres, tandis que temps et lieu relèvent de la quantité. Pour fonder cette distinction, Jamblique et Simplicius établissent que ποῦ signifie « la relation au lieu de ce qui est dans le lieu », et ποτέ « la relation au temps de ce qui est dans le temps ». D'autre part, ποῦ et ποτέ se différencient des relatifs, en ce que la relation constitutive de ces derniers est convertible, ce qui n’est pas le cas de la relation constitutive de ces deux catégories : il s'agit, par exemple, de la relation au lieu de ce qui est dans le lieu, et non de la relation du lieu à ce qui est en lui. [introduction p. 217-218] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/NQv0lwgedEPlhBo |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"508","_score":null,"_source":{"id":508,"authors_free":[{"id":702,"entry_id":508,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":138,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe","free_first_name":"Philippe","free_last_name":"Hoffmann","norm_person":{"id":138,"first_name":"Philippe ","last_name":"Hoffmann","full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/189361905","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":703,"entry_id":508,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":149,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","free_first_name":"Pierre","free_last_name":"Aubenque","norm_person":{"id":149,"first_name":"Pierre","last_name":"Aubenque","full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118919458","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Les cat\u00e9gories \u03a0\u039f\u0399 et \u03a0\u039f\u03a4\u0395 chez Aristote et Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Les cat\u00e9gories \u03a0\u039f\u0399 et \u03a0\u039f\u03a4\u0395 chez Aristote et Simplicius"},"abstract":"L'expos\u00e9 que l'on va lire ne se propose pas d'\u00e9tudier les concepts de lieu ou de temps chez Aristote et son commentateur Simplicius, mais de scruter les quelques indications qu\u2019Aristote, dans son Trait\u00e9 des Cat\u00e9gories, nous donne sur les pr\u00e9dicats \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 et \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad, ou que l'on peut trouver dans certains passages de Physique IV. La mati\u00e8re fournie par les textes aristot\u00e9liciens \u00e9tant peu abondante, notre attention se portera principalement sur le Commentaire de Simplicius.\r\n\r\nSi les cat\u00e9gories \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 et \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad ne se confondent pas avec les concepts de lieu et de temps, c\u2019est pourtant par rapport \u00e0 eux, c'est-\u00e0-dire par diff\u00e9rence avec eux, qu'elles prennent sens et consistance. C'est pourquoi, et bien que ce ne soit qu\u2019\u00e0 titre secondaire, la m\u00e9ditation sur le temps et le lieu nourrit le commentaire de Simplicius, chez qui elle fonde (ainsi d\u2019ailleurs que chez nombre de commentateurs ant\u00e9rieurs) l'ordre relatif des deux cat\u00e9gories : selon que le temps ou le lieu est consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme plus \u00ab proche \u00bb de l'essence, plus \u00ab apparent\u00e9 \u00bb \u00e0 elle, la cat\u00e9gorie \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 (ou la cat\u00e9gorie \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad) se situera plus pr\u00e8s de l\u2019ousia dans la liste des cat\u00e9gories.\r\n\r\nTel \u00e9tant le crit\u00e8re du classement, l'analyse cat\u00e9goriale court toujours le risque d\u2019\u00eatre remplac\u00e9e par une \u00e9tude \u00ab physique \u00bb du temps ou du lieu. Mais Simplicius situe la doctrine des cat\u00e9gories au niveau d\u2019une \u00e9tude des signifi\u00e9s et des significations. Un second danger se pr\u00e9sente alors, qui est de confondre l'analyse cat\u00e9goriale et l'analyse grammaticale des \u00ab parties du discours \u00bb. En effet, les cat\u00e9gories \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 et \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad correspondent presque exclusivement \u00e0 deux classes d\u2019adverbes, qui sont, respectivement, les adverbes de lieu et les adverbes de temps.\r\n\r\nNous verrons que Simplicius, analysant et classant les significations des adverbes (et compl\u00e9ments) de lieu, ne fait que reprendre, sur ce point, la doctrine grammaticale classique, telle qu'on la voit expos\u00e9e dans la Grammaire de Denys le Thrace, dans les scholies relatives \u00e0 cette grammaire, ou chez un auteur comme Apollonius Dyscole. Guid\u00e9 par l'id\u00e9e d\u2019une \u00e9troite parent\u00e9 entre les cat\u00e9gories \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 et \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad, Simplicius \u00e9tudie les adverbes de temps en suivant comme mod\u00e8le la doctrine grammaticale des adverbes de lieu.\r\n\r\n\u00c0 la suite de Jamblique, il d\u00e9fend, contre les attaques de Plotin, la th\u00e8se soutenue par Aristote dans son Trait\u00e9 des Cat\u00e9gories : \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad et \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 sont des cat\u00e9gories distinctes et propres, tandis que temps et lieu rel\u00e8vent de la quantit\u00e9. Pour fonder cette distinction, Jamblique et Simplicius \u00e9tablissent que \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 signifie \u00ab la relation au lieu de ce qui est dans le lieu \u00bb, et \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad \u00ab la relation au temps de ce qui est dans le temps \u00bb.\r\n\r\nD'autre part, \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 et \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad se diff\u00e9rencient des relatifs, en ce que la relation constitutive de ces derniers est convertible, ce qui n\u2019est pas le cas de la relation constitutive de ces deux cat\u00e9gories : il s'agit, par exemple, de la relation au lieu de ce qui est dans le lieu, et non de la relation du lieu \u00e0 ce qui est en lui. [introduction p. 217-218]","btype":2,"date":"1980","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/NQv0lwgedEPlhBo","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":138,"full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":149,"full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":508,"section_of":302,"pages":"217-245","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":302,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Concepts et cat\u00e9gories dans la pens\u00e9e antique","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Aubenque1980b","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1980","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1980","abstract":"Depuis Aristote, on entend par cat\u00e9gories des concepts tr\u00e8s g\u00e9n\u00e9raux, dont la g\u00e9n\u00e9ralit\u00e9 ne d\u00e9rive pas de l\u2019exp\u00e9rience, mais en quelque sorte la pr\u00e9c\u00e8de, puisque c\u2019est eux et eux seuls qui nous permettent de l\u2019organiser et de la penser. Ces concepts \u2013 substance, quantit\u00e9, relation, qualit\u00e9, lieu, temps, action, passion, situation, avoir \u2013 sont-ils des structures universelles de toute pens\u00e9e ou bien sont-ils li\u00e9s aux particularit\u00e9s s\u00e9mantiques ou syntaxiques d\u2019un syst\u00e8me linguistique particulier, en l\u2019occurrence de la langue grecque, \u00e0 l\u2019int\u00e9rieur de laquelle ils ont \u00e9t\u00e9 pour la premi\u00e8re fois \u00e9nonc\u00e9s et rassembl\u00e9s?\r\nLes \u00e9tudes ici r\u00e9unies, issues d\u2019un s\u00e9minaire qui s\u2019est poursuivi durant plusieurs ann\u00e9es au Centre de recherche sur la Pens\u00e9e antique de l\u2019Universit\u00e9 de Paris-Sorbonne, associ\u00e9 au C.N.R.S. (Centre L\u00e9on-Robin), s\u2019efforcent d\u2019apporter des \u00e9l\u00e9ments de r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 cette grande question, qui demeure au centre des discussions contemporaines sur les rapports de la philosophie et du langage. Leur apport sp\u00e9cifique consiste dans une ex\u00e9g\u00e8se rigoureuse des analyses du trait\u00e9 aristot\u00e9licien des Cat\u00e9gories, \u00e9clair\u00e9 par les d\u00e9veloppements ult\u00e9rieurs de la doctrine, tels que nous les connaissons notamment \u00e0 travers le Commentaire du N\u00e9oplatonicien Simplicius. Certaines de ces \u00e9tudes examinent l\u2019influence ou les transformations des cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes chez les Sto\u00efciens, les grammairiens grecs de la fin de l\u2019Antiquit\u00e9, les N\u00e9oplatoniciens tardifs, les P\u00e8res de l\u2019\u00c9glise et dans la tradition latine antique et m\u00e9di\u00e9vale. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FGpf7U5Cy1dboYI","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":302,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Vrin","series":"Bibliotheque d\u2019histoire de la philosophie","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Les cat\u00e9gories \u03a0\u039f\u0399 et \u03a0\u039f\u03a4\u0395 chez Aristote et Simplicius"]}
Title | Les circonstances de la transmission des fragments de Diogène et la reconstruction de l’argument (Simplicius, Commentaire de la Physique, p. 148,26-153,24) |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1983 |
Published in | Diogène d’Apollonie: Edition, traduction et commentaire des fragments et témoignages |
Pages | 37-53 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Laks, André |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
The article discusses the circumstances of the transmission of the fragments of Diogenes and the reconstruction of his argument by Simplicius in his Commentary on Physics. It highlights the significance of Simplicius' work in shedding light on the ancient philosopher, and explains how Simplicius came to cite Diogenes verbatim. The article also explores the issue of intermediaries in the texts and the difficulties in their construction. The study is important in understanding the history of philosophy and the transmission of ancient texts. [introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/NoBGGFCfD4qd7PP |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1188","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1188,"authors_free":[{"id":1760,"entry_id":1188,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":225,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","free_first_name":"Andr\u00e9","free_last_name":"Laks","norm_person":{"id":225,"first_name":"Andr\u00e9","last_name":"Laks","full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/135869161","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Les circonstances de la transmission des fragments de Diog\u00e8ne et la reconstruction de l\u2019argument (Simplicius, Commentaire de la Physique, p. 148,26-153,24)","main_title":{"title":"Les circonstances de la transmission des fragments de Diog\u00e8ne et la reconstruction de l\u2019argument (Simplicius, Commentaire de la Physique, p. 148,26-153,24)"},"abstract":"The article discusses the circumstances of the transmission of the fragments of Diogenes and the reconstruction of his argument by Simplicius in his Commentary on Physics. It highlights the significance of Simplicius' work in shedding light on the ancient philosopher, and explains how Simplicius came to cite Diogenes verbatim. The article also explores the issue of intermediaries in the texts and the difficulties in their construction. The study is important in understanding the history of philosophy and the transmission of ancient texts. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1983","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/NoBGGFCfD4qd7PP","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":225,"full_name":"Laks, Andr\u00e9","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1188,"section_of":1367,"pages":"37-53","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1367,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":1,"language":"fr","title":"Diog\u00e8ne d\u2019Apollonie: Edition, traduction et commentaire des fragments et t\u00e9moignages","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Laks2008","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2008","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"Depuis la premi\u00e8re \u00e9dition de ce livre, Diog\u00e8ne d'Apollonie, un des derniers \"physiciens\" pr\u00e9socratiques, longtemps d\u00e9valoris\u00e9 par la r\u00e9putation d' \"\u00e9clectique\" que H. Diels avait attach\u00e9e \u00e0 son nom dans un article de 1881, a suscit\u00e9 un regain d'int\u00e9r\u00eat.\r\n\r\nCette seconde \u00e9dition d'un ouvrage qui reste \u00e0 ce jour le seul commentaire exhaustif des fragments et des t\u00e9moignages de Diog\u00e8ne, a \u00e9t\u00e9 revue et corrig\u00e9e, mais elle prend aussi en compte, dans une s\u00e9rie d'ajouts marqu\u00e9s comme tels, les travaux parus au cours des vint-cinq ann\u00e9es \u00e9coul\u00e9es. Le livre retrace l'histoire de la transmission des fragments de Diog\u00e8ne, analyse les positions de la critique moderne depuis l'article s\u00e9minal de F. Schleiermacher (1811), et offre, pour chacun des douze fragments et des quelques trente-six t\u00e9moignages, dont un nouveau classement est propos\u00e9, une analyse visant \u00e0 reconstruire la logique de l'original perdu.\r\n\r\nQuatre des Notes additionnelles abordent des probl\u00e8mes sp\u00e9cifiques, qui requ\u00e9raient un traitement s\u00e9par\u00e9. Une cinqui\u00e8me, en anglais, offre une pr\u00e9sentation synth\u00e9tique de l'interpr\u00e9tation ici d\u00e9fendue, qui situe l'importance de Diog\u00e8ne dans son rapport \u00e0 Anaxagore et \u00e0 sa doctrine de l' \"intellect\". [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/WWBP0kG5a0nZ1I3","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1367,"pubplace":"Sankt Augustin","publisher":"Academia Verlag","series":"International Pre-Platonic Studies","volume":"6","edition_no":"2 (1st 1983)","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Les circonstances de la transmission des fragments de Diog\u00e8ne et la reconstruction de l\u2019argument (Simplicius, Commentaire de la Physique, p. 148,26-153,24)"]}
Title | Les introductions aux commentaires exégétiques chez les auteurs néoplatoniciens et les auteurs chrétiens |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1990 |
Published in | Simplicius. Commentaire sur les Catégories. Traduction commentée sous la direction de Ilsetraut Hadot. Fascicule I: Introduction, Première partie (p. 1-9, 3 Kalbfleisch) |
Pages | 21-47 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
The text discusses the introductions to exegetical commentaries by Neoplatonic and Christian authors, using Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's Categories as an example. It is divided into two parts: the first provides the historical context, sources and method, and the second develops the two traditional outlines used in the introduction of commentaries on the Categories. These two outlines are found in the commentaries of the four other Neoplatonic authors who commented on the Categories, namely Ammonius, Philopon, Olympiodore and David, and also in the Arabic introductions of Al-Farabi and Al-Kindi. The text offers a comparative study of the commentaries and the introductions, highlighting the differences in structure and form. [introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/2ecCQO0VOCCVgZa |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1182","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1182,"authors_free":[{"id":1755,"entry_id":1182,"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}},{"id":1974,"entry_id":1182,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Les introductions aux commentaires ex\u00e9g\u00e9tiques chez les auteurs n\u00e9oplatoniciens et les auteurs chr\u00e9tiens","main_title":{"title":"Les introductions aux commentaires ex\u00e9g\u00e9tiques chez les auteurs n\u00e9oplatoniciens et les auteurs chr\u00e9tiens"},"abstract":"The text discusses the introductions to exegetical commentaries by Neoplatonic and Christian authors, using Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's Categories as an example. It is divided into two parts: the first provides the historical context, sources and method, and the second develops the two traditional outlines used in the introduction of commentaries on the Categories. These two outlines are found in the commentaries of the four other Neoplatonic authors who commented on the Categories, namely Ammonius, Philopon, Olympiodore and David, and also in the Arabic introductions of Al-Farabi and Al-Kindi. The text offers a comparative study of the commentaries and the introductions, highlighting the differences in structure and form. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1990","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/2ecCQO0VOCCVgZa","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1182,"section_of":179,"pages":"21-47","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":179,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Commentaire sur les Cat\u00e9gories. Traduction comment\u00e9e sous la direction de Ilsetraut Hadot. Fascicule I: Introduction, Premi\u00e8re partie (p. 1-9, 3 Kalbfleisch)","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1990e","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1990","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1990","abstract":"The French translation with commentary, the first in a modern language, allows historians of philosophy access to a fundamental work for the understanding of medieval and modern thought. They could also explore more easily the great variety of information contained in the commentary of Simplicius on the history of the exegis of the Cat\u00e9gories of Aristotle, and more generally on the history of comparative philosophy of Simplicius. They will discover some important aspects in the actual thought of Simplicius, which so far has hardly been explored. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/KyrBWf80BsqVFO8","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":179,"pubplace":"Leiden - New York - K\u00f8benhavn - K\u00f6ln","publisher":"Brill","series":"Philosophia antiqua. A Series of studies on ancient Philosophy","volume":"50.1","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Les introductions aux commentaires ex\u00e9g\u00e9tiques chez les auteurs n\u00e9oplatoniciens et les auteurs chr\u00e9tiens"]}
Title | Levels of human thinking in Philoponus |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1985 |
Published in | After Chalcedon. Studies in Theology and Church History. Offered to Professor Albert van Roey for his seventieth birthday |
Pages | 451-470 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Verbeke, Gérard |
Editor(s) | Laga, Carl , Munitiz, Joseph A. , Rompay, Lucas van |
Translator(s) |
What is finally the meaning of Philoponus’s teaching on the levels of thought? Taking into account the previous considerations, we may conclude that this doctrine is intended to disclose the true nature of philosophical reflection as a direct and immediate intuition of the intelligible world. This disclosure is an internal one: each individual bears within himself, in the hidden abodes of his consciousness, a treasure of philosophical wisdom". In order to contemplate the highest truth, man should not leave himself, on the contrary he should come back and turn to himself, to his true self. Most people live outside themselves in a permanent forgetfulness of their real nature: they hardly participate in philosophical wisdom, they only possess some common intuitions, which are a kind of trace or vestige of rational truth. They never come to the level of a direct contemplation of the intelligibles. In order to reach the supreme level of thinking man needs a moral preparation, which makes him able to overcome the influence of irrational movements; he also needs an intellectual training by means of discursive reasoning in order to free himself from the impact of senses and imagination. If these requirements are fulfilled, man be comes able to contemplate directly true reality in the internal world of his consciousness. [conclusion, p. 469] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/PBqIyB5guZfHl6C |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1391","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1391,"authors_free":[{"id":2156,"entry_id":1391,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2160,"entry_id":1391,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":349,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Laga, Carl","free_first_name":"Carl","free_last_name":"Laga","norm_person":{"id":349,"first_name":"Carl","last_name":"Laga","full_name":"Laga, Carl","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119278146","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2161,"entry_id":1391,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":350,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Munitiz, Joseph A.","free_first_name":"Joseph A.","free_last_name":"Munitiz","norm_person":{"id":350,"first_name":"Joseph A.","last_name":"Munitiz","full_name":"Munitiz, Joseph A.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/105468202X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2162,"entry_id":1391,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":351,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Rompay, Lucas van","free_first_name":"Lucas","free_last_name":"Rompay van","norm_person":{"id":351,"first_name":"Lucas","last_name":"Rompay, van","full_name":"Rompay, Lucas van","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1055081453","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Levels of human thinking in Philoponus","main_title":{"title":"Levels of human thinking in Philoponus"},"abstract":"What is finally the meaning of Philoponus\u2019s teaching on the levels of thought? Taking into account the previous considerations, we may \r\nconclude that this doctrine is intended to disclose the true nature of philosophical reflection as a direct and immediate intuition of the \r\nintelligible world. This disclosure is an internal one: each individual bears within himself, in the hidden abodes of his consciousness, a treasure \r\nof philosophical wisdom\". In order to contemplate the highest truth, man should not leave himself, on the contrary he should come back \r\nand turn to himself, to his true self. Most people live outside them\u00adselves in a permanent forgetfulness of their real nature: they hardly \r\nparticipate in philosophical wisdom, they only possess some common intuitions, which are a kind of trace or vestige of rational truth. \r\nThey never come to the level of a direct contemplation of the intelligibles. In order to reach the supreme level of thinking man needs a moral preparation, which makes him able to overcome the influence of irrational movements; he also needs an intellectual training by means \r\nof discursive reasoning in order to free himself from the impact of senses and imagination. If these requirements are fulfilled, man be\u00ad\r\ncomes able to contemplate directly true reality in the internal world of his consciousness. [conclusion, p. 469]","btype":2,"date":"1985","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/PBqIyB5guZfHl6C","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":349,"full_name":"Laga, Carl","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":350,"full_name":"Munitiz, Joseph A.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":351,"full_name":"Rompay, Lucas van","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1391,"section_of":1392,"pages":"451-470","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1392,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"After Chalcedon. Studies in Theology and Church History. Offered to Professor Albert van Roey for his seventieth birthday","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Laga1985","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1985","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"This volume in honour of Prof. P.H.L. Eggermont, Indologist and Classicist, is focused on North and Northwest India, and on the adjacent regions to the west, with special attention to the Hellenistic monarchies, the historical geography of India, the ancient trade routes, and the contacts between India, Greece and Rome. The contributions of this Festschrift provide a bulk of material, especially for those interested in relations between Classical and Oriental philological, historical, archaeological, and geographical sources. Besides, the volume contains a biography and a bibliography of Prof. Eggermont. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ERNutaoLJTpirTN","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1392,"pubplace":"Leuven","publisher":"Itgeverij Peeters Leuven","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Levels of human thinking in Philoponus"]}
Title | Mathematics and Philosophy in Proclus' Commentary on Book I of Euclid's Elements |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Proclus, lecteur et interprète des anciens. Actes du colloque international du CNRS, Paris (2-4 octobre 1985) |
Pages | 305-318 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Mueller, Ian |
Editor(s) | Pépin, Jean , Saffrey, Henri Dominique |
Translator(s) |
In the prologue to his commentary on book I of Euclid’s Elements Proclus refers to two areas of disagreement among the Platonists concerning mathematics. In the first passage in which he does this (29.14ff.) he indicates that some philoi from his own hearth encourage students to disdain mathematics, enlisting on their side Plato himself because of some of Socrates’ remarks in the Republic, notably the rhetorical question of 533 c 3-5 [...]. The second passage comes at the end of Proclus’ famous description of the character of geometry [...]. In this paper I wish to pursue these disagreements in the hopes of throwing light on distinctive features of Proclus’ philosophy of mathematics. [Introduction, p. 305] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/KU98nZhkgyJWbsr |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1211","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1211,"authors_free":[{"id":1792,"entry_id":1211,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":270,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mueller, Ian","free_first_name":"Ian","free_last_name":"Mueller","norm_person":{"id":270,"first_name":"Ian","last_name":"Mueller","full_name":"Mueller, Ian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1793,"entry_id":1211,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":227,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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}},{"id":2119,"entry_id":1211,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":228,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","free_first_name":"Henri Dominique","free_last_name":"Saffrey","norm_person":{"id":228,"first_name":"Henri Dominique","last_name":"Saffrey","full_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130160059","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Mathematics and Philosophy in Proclus' Commentary on Book I of Euclid's Elements","main_title":{"title":"Mathematics and Philosophy in Proclus' Commentary on Book I of Euclid's Elements"},"abstract":"In the prologue to his commentary on book I of Euclid\u2019s Elements Proclus refers to two areas of disagreement among the Platonists concerning mathematics. In the first passage in which he does this (29.14ff.) he indicates that some philoi from his own hearth encourage \r\nstudents to disdain mathematics, enlisting on their side Plato himself because of some of Socrates\u2019 remarks in the Republic, notably the rhetorical question of 533 c 3-5 [...]. The second passage comes at the end of Proclus\u2019 famous description of the character of geometry [...]. In this paper I wish to pursue these disagreements in the hopes of throwing light on distinctive features of Proclus\u2019 philosophy of mathematics. [Introduction, p. 305]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/KU98nZhkgyJWbsr","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":270,"full_name":"Mueller, Ian","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":227,"full_name":"P\u00e9pin, Jean","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":228,"full_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1211,"section_of":159,"pages":"305-318","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":159,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Proclus, lecteur et interpr\u00e8te des anciens. Actes du colloque international du CNRS, Paris (2-4 octobre 1985)","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"P\u00e9pin-Saffrey1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Du 5e si\u00e8cle jusqu'au d\u00e9but du 19e si\u00e8cle, Proclus fut consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme l'h\u00e9ritier par excellence de Platon, celui qui avait su tirer des dialogues un expos\u00e9 syst\u00e9matique et coh\u00e9rent de la philosophie platonicienne. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/QluMshmjYrV5JtV","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":159,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Centre national de la recherche scientifique","series":"Colloques internationaux du Centre national de la recherche scientifique","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Mathematics and Philosophy in Proclus' Commentary on Book I of Euclid's Elements"]}
Title | Neoplatonism, the Greek Commentators, and Renaissance Aristotelianism |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1982 |
Published in | Neoplatonism and Christian thought |
Pages | 169-177 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Mahoney, Edward P. |
Editor(s) | O'Meara, Dominic J. |
Translator(s) |
In this paper I should like to share with my fellow students of Neoplatonism the results of researches in medieval and Renaissance Aristotelianism that have brought to light interesting ways in which Neoplatonism came to have a special impact on the development of Renaissance Aristotelianism. It is certainly not my aim to exclude other possible ways in which Neoplatonism had its effect, but I do believe that historians of ancient Neoplatonism will themselves be surprised to learn of the pervasiveness of certain themes among supposed proponents of Aristotle during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The two topics on which I wish to concentrate are (1) the influence on late fifteenth- and early sixteenth-century Aristotelianism of two late ancient commentators on Aristotle, namely, Themistius <317—388) and Simplicius (Jl. 530),1 and (2) a conceptual scheme of metaphysical hierarchy whose origins are clearly Neoplatonic and which was constantly debated during the same period. [Author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/2eyv4WzmHFlkenV |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1111","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1111,"authors_free":[{"id":1678,"entry_id":1111,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":459,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mahoney, Edward P.","free_first_name":"Edward P.","free_last_name":"Mahoney","norm_person":{"id":459,"first_name":"Edward P.","last_name":"Mahoney","full_name":"Mahoney, Edward P.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/123905818","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1679,"entry_id":1111,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":279,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","free_first_name":"Dominic J.","free_last_name":"O'Meara","norm_person":{"id":279,"first_name":"Dominic J.","last_name":"O'Meara","full_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/11180664X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Neoplatonism, the Greek Commentators, and Renaissance Aristotelianism","main_title":{"title":"Neoplatonism, the Greek Commentators, and Renaissance Aristotelianism"},"abstract":"In this paper I should like to share with my fellow students of Neoplatonism the results of researches in medieval and Renaissance Aristotelianism that have brought to light interesting ways in which Neoplatonism came to have a special impact on the development of Renaissance Aristotelianism. It is certainly not my aim to exclude other possible ways in which Neoplatonism had its effect, but I do believe that historians of ancient Neoplatonism will themselves be surprised to learn of the pervasiveness of certain themes among supposed proponents of Aris\u00adtotle during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The two topics on which I wish to concentrate are (1) the influence on late fifteenth- and early sixteenth-century Aristotelianism of two late ancient commentators on Aristotle, namely, Themistius <317\u2014388) and Simplicius (Jl. 530),1 and (2) a conceptual scheme of metaphysical hierarchy whose origins are clearly Neoplatonic and which was constantly debated during the same period. [Author's abstract]","btype":2,"date":"1982","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/2eyv4WzmHFlkenV","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":459,"full_name":"Mahoney, Edward P.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":279,"full_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1111,"section_of":12,"pages":"169-177","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":12,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Neoplatonism and Christian thought","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"O'Meara1982","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1982","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1981","abstract":"In this volume, the relationships between two of the most vital currents in Western thought are examined by a group of nineteen internationally known specialists in a variety of disciplines\u2014classics, patristics, philosophy, theology, history of ideas, literature. The contributing scholars discuss Neoplatonic theories about God, creation, man, and salvation, in relation to the ways in which they were adopted, adapted, or rejected by major Christian thinkers of five periods: Patristic, Later Greek and Byzantine, Medieval, Renaissance, and Modern. [a.a]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/8tb5ZmmacZhgjDn","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":12,"pubplace":"Albany","publisher":"State University of New York Press","series":"Studies in Neoplatonism: Ancient and Modern","volume":"3","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Neoplatonism, the Greek Commentators, and Renaissance Aristotelianism"]}
Title | Ort und Raum nach Aristoteles und Simplikios. Eine philosophische Topologie |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1983 |
Published in | Aristoteles als Wissenschaftstheoretiker. Eine Aufsatzsammlung |
Pages | 113-122 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Verbeke, Gérard |
Editor(s) | Irmscher, Johannes , Müller, Reimar |
Translator(s) |
Der Text diskutiert die aristotelische Perspektive zu Ort und Raum sowie die Interpretationen, die Simplikios in späteren neuplatonischen Kommentaren dazu geliefert hat. Die Studie widmet sich drei Hauptfragen bezüglich des Orts: ob er ein Bestandteil von Körpern ist, ob er ein Zwischenraum zwischen umgebenden Körpern ist und welche Bedeutung der Ort hat und welchen Einfluss er auf die Dinge hat. Die aristotelische Physik strebt nach einer grundlegenden Erklärung der sinnlichen Welt und untersucht die Essenz der Bewegung, die Zusammensetzung physischer Körper, Notwendigkeit, Zufall, Unendlichkeit, Ort und Zeit. Der Artikel vergleicht zudem Physik und Metaphysik und betont, dass beide nach umfassenden Erklärungen der Realität streben. Die Untersuchung beleuchtet das aristotelische Verständnis von Ort und Raum und unterstreicht die Wechselwirkung zwischen Ort und der Struktur physischer Objekte. Es wird erörtert, ob Ort ein räumliches Substrat oder eine Form ist und welche Bedeutung die Lokalisierung und ihr Einfluss auf Körper haben. Spätere neuplatonische Kommentare, insbesondere die von Simplikios, haben Aristoteles' Ideen zu diesen Themen kritisch bewertet und weiterentwickelt. [Introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/gefH5Atxe7LieDs |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"451","_score":null,"_source":{"id":451,"authors_free":[{"id":605,"entry_id":451,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":606,"entry_id":451,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":352,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Irmscher, Johannes","free_first_name":"Johannes","free_last_name":"Irmscher","norm_person":{"id":352,"first_name":"Johannes","last_name":"Irmscher","full_name":"Irmscher, Johannes","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119489201","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":607,"entry_id":451,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":353,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"M\u00fcller, Reimar","free_first_name":"Reimar","free_last_name":"M\u00fcller","norm_person":{"id":353,"first_name":"Reimar","last_name":"M\u00fcller","full_name":"M\u00fcller, Reimar","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/106717707","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Ort und Raum nach Aristoteles und Simplikios. Eine philosophische Topologie","main_title":{"title":"Ort und Raum nach Aristoteles und Simplikios. Eine philosophische Topologie"},"abstract":"Der Text diskutiert die aristotelische Perspektive zu Ort und Raum sowie die Interpretationen, die Simplikios in sp\u00e4teren neuplatonischen Kommentaren dazu geliefert hat. Die Studie widmet sich drei Hauptfragen bez\u00fcglich des Orts: ob er ein Bestandteil von K\u00f6rpern ist, ob er ein Zwischenraum zwischen umgebenden K\u00f6rpern ist und welche Bedeutung der Ort hat und welchen Einfluss er auf die Dinge hat. Die aristotelische Physik strebt nach einer grundlegenden Erkl\u00e4rung der sinnlichen Welt und untersucht die Essenz der Bewegung, die Zusammensetzung physischer K\u00f6rper, Notwendigkeit, Zufall, Unendlichkeit, Ort und Zeit. Der Artikel vergleicht zudem Physik und Metaphysik und betont, dass beide nach umfassenden Erkl\u00e4rungen der Realit\u00e4t streben. Die Untersuchung beleuchtet das aristotelische Verst\u00e4ndnis von Ort und Raum und unterstreicht die Wechselwirkung zwischen Ort und der Struktur physischer Objekte. Es wird er\u00f6rtert, ob Ort ein r\u00e4umliches Substrat oder eine Form ist und welche Bedeutung die Lokalisierung und ihr Einfluss auf K\u00f6rper haben. Sp\u00e4tere neuplatonische Kommentare, insbesondere die von Simplikios, haben Aristoteles' Ideen zu diesen Themen kritisch bewertet und weiterentwickelt. [Introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1983","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/gefH5Atxe7LieDs","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":352,"full_name":"Irmscher, Johannes","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":353,"full_name":"M\u00fcller, Reimar","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":451,"section_of":325,"pages":"113-122","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":325,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles als Wissenschaftstheoretiker. Eine Aufsatzsammlung","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Irmscher_M\u00fcller1983","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1983","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1983","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/A1XXLVpd3w2XvXY","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":325,"pubplace":"Berlin","publisher":"Akademie-Verlag","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Ort und Raum nach Aristoteles und Simplikios. Eine philosophische Topologie"]}
Title | Parmenides, Fr. 8, 5 |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1971 |
Published in | God Time Being: Two Studies in the Transcendental Tradition in Greek Philosophy |
Pages | 16-32 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Whittaker, John H. |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
I would conclude that no knowledge of the teaching of the historical Parmenides can be safely derived from the versions of fr. 8, 5 which have survived. One can, however, assert with complete conviction, as was shown at the outset, that the doctrine of non-durational eternity, which Neoplatonists associated with both versions of the line, was not taught by the historical Parmenides. [conclusion p. 24] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/otytaZVpHsVfMmh |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"439","_score":null,"_source":{"id":439,"authors_free":[{"id":589,"entry_id":439,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":411,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Whittaker, John H.","free_first_name":"John H.","free_last_name":"Whittaker","norm_person":{"id":411,"first_name":"John H.","last_name":"Whittaker","full_name":"Whittaker, John H.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/124441203","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Parmenides, Fr. 8, 5","main_title":{"title":"Parmenides, Fr. 8, 5"},"abstract":"I would conclude that no knowledge of the teaching of the historical \r\nParmenides can be safely derived from the versions of fr. 8, 5 which \r\nhave survived. One can, however, assert with complete conviction, as \r\nwas shown at the outset, that the doctrine of non-durational eternity, \r\nwhich Neoplatonists associated with both versions of the line, was not \r\ntaught by the historical Parmenides. [conclusion p. 24]","btype":2,"date":"1971","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/otytaZVpHsVfMmh","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":411,"full_name":"Whittaker, John H.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":439,"section_of":144,"pages":"16-32","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":144,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":1,"language":"en","title":"God Time Being: Two Studies in the Transcendental Tradition in Greek Philosophy","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Whittaker1971b","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1971","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1971","abstract":"Es geht um die im Platonismus entwickelte Vorstellung einer Gottheit eigenen\r\nzeitlosen, zeit3berlegenen Ewigkeit, die von Plotin aus (Enneaden III 7) die abend-\r\nlindische Theologie und Mystik stark beeinfluf3t hat. Zugrunde liegt Platons\r\nSpekulation 3ber Aion und Chronos, Timaios 73 c-38 c; ausformuliert ist die\r\nThese vom ewigen Jetzt fur unsere Kenntnis erstmals im mittleren Platonismus\r\n(Plutarch, De E ap. Delph. 393 A-C). Doch hat sie der Neuplatonismus - sicher-\r\nlich zu Unrecht - bereits in ein beruhmtes Parmenides-Fragment (8, 5 D.-Kr., wo\r\nes vom Sein heift, dag ,alles jetzt zusammen ist\", nach U. Hoelscher) hinein-\r\ngelesen. Der Verf., der diese Oberlieferungsverhiltnisse klarend darlegt, unterzieht\r\ndas Fragment im ersten Teil seiner Arbeit einer scharfsinnigen, reich dokumen-\r\ntierten Analyse. Dabei wird die Ansicht begrundet, dai3 die Texte unserer spht-\r\nantiken Zeugen (Simplikios einerseits, die vier alexandrinischen Ausleger andrer-\r\nseits) nicht iber jeden Zweifel erhaben sind. Es k6nnte sein, daf3 bei Simplikios\r\n- dem die modernen Ausgaben zu folgen pflegen - eine neuplatonische Adaption\r\ndes parmenideischen Wortlauts vorliegt, so daf die uberlieferte Form von Parm.\r\n8, 5 fur die Ermittlung der Lehre des grof3enEleaten ausscheiden muf3te - ein fur\r\ndie Vorsokratikerforschung recht erhebliches Ergebnis. - In einer zweiten Unter-\r\nsuchung geht der Verf. dem gleichen Motiv (,Gottes ewiges Heute': der Leser der\r\naugustinischen Confessionen hat es aus dem grofartigen Lobpreis XI 13 in Erinne-\r\nrung) bei Philon von Alexandria nach, wobei sich ein belehrender Einblick in die\r\nplatonistisdhe Tradition ergibt (verwunderlich, daf3 Clemens von Alexandria nach\r\nMigne's Patrologie, Maximos von Tyros nach der alten Dibner'sdlen Ausgabe\r\nzitiert werden). Auch aristotelische und stoische Einflusse werden gepruft. W. stellt\r\nfest, daf3 die meisten Philonstellen, die man bisher im Sinn der neuplatonischen\r\nLehre von einer zeit\u00fcberlegenen Ewigkeit gedeutet hatte, anders zu erklaren\r\nsind; eine Ausnahme scheint in einer allegorischen Auslegung des Alten Testaments\r\n(zu Levit. 2, 14) vorzuliegen (de sacrif. 76). Es bleibt dabei, daf3 das weitreidiende\r\nThema in voller Klarheit erstmals in Plutarchs ob. gen. Dialog angesprochen wird;\r\ner hangt sicher mit dem seit Ende des 1. Jh. v. Chr. wieder rege gewordenen\r\nStudium des platonischen Timaios zusammen, welches in dem Kommentar des\r\nAlexandriners Eudoros, eines pythagoreisierenden Platonikers, moglicherweiseeine\r\nQuelle Plutarchs hervorgebracht hat (hier ware auf eine den Problemen des mitt-\r\nleren Platonismus gewidmete Arbeit H. Dbrrie's hinzuweisen gewesen, in: Les\r\nSourdes de Plotin, Entresiens sur L'Antiquite Classique, t. V, 1957 193 it).\" (Review, H. Strohm)","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/gmCTvOKY6YxDRe4","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":144,"pubplace":"Oslo","publisher":"Universitetsforlaget","series":"Symbolae Osloenses","volume":"23","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Parmenides, Fr. 8, 5"]}
Title | Parménide d'Élée chez les Néoplatoniciens |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Études sur Parménide, Tome II: Problèmes d’interprétation |
Pages | 294-313 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Guérard, Christian |
Editor(s) | Aubenque, Pierre |
Translator(s) |
«Le néoplatonisme, écrit J. Trouillard, succède au ‘moyen platonisme’ le jour où les platoniciens se mettent à chercher dans le Parménide le secret de la philosophie de Platon»¹. Effectivement, en paraphrasant Proclus, on peut même dire que la lecture néoplatonicienne du dialogue, et avant tout de la première hypothèse, est le Néoplatonisme lui-même². Sans revenir davantage sur le rôle considérable du Parménide chez Plotin³, bornons-nous à rappeler qu’il a été commenté de façon systématique par Porphyre⁴, puis, comme en témoigne Proclus⁵, par Amélius, Théodore d’Asiné, Jamblique, l’obscur philosophe de Rhodes, Plutarque d’Athènes et Syrianus. À son tour, le Lycien a rédigé un commentaire probablement complet du dialogue qu’il a repris dans son ouvrage final, la Théologie platonicienne. De même, les deux œuvres rassemblées par C.E. Ruelle sous le titre Dubitationes et solutiones de primis principiis in Platonis Parmenidem⁶ montrent l’importance du dialogue chez Damascius. Cette relecture du Parménide a posé bien des questions aux historiens de la philosophie. On a alors invoqué l’influence d’idées orientales. Il fallait, semble-t-il, excuser des esprits aussi exceptionnels d’avoir « sombré dans l’irrationalisme ». Une telle attitude, déjà fort visible chez V. Cousin⁷, l’éditeur même de Proclus, malheureusement demeure⁸. En fait, chez Plotin, l’orientalisme se limiterait au plus à l’aspiration mystique⁹ : la définition du Bien (épékeina tês ousias) est dans la République, VI 509B9, et les spéculations néopythagoriciennes avaient reconnu dans l’Un du Parménide le Principe de tout¹⁰. Il ne restait qu’à faire le lien, peut-être en retrouvant ainsi la pensée de Speusippe¹¹, mais, sans aucun doute, en s’opposant au platonisme de l’époque. Au IIᵉ siècle notamment, le Parménide était considéré comme une œuvre « logique », un exercice éristique ou un pastiche de la sophistique mégarique. C’était l’opinion des aristotéliciens dont Alexandre d’Aphrodise¹², et aussi celle d’Albinus¹³, par exemple. Pour presque tous¹⁴, le dialogue n’était qu’un jeu discursif employant la méthode des Topiques d’Aristote¹⁵. Il était admis qu’il s’agissait d’une réfutation de l’éléatisme, et, dans la première hypothèse en particulier, d’une réplique ironique de Gorgias¹⁶. La conception néoplatonicienne n’était pas très aisée à soutenir : si le dialogue porte sur des réalités sublimes, pourquoi les faire exposer par Parménide ? D’ailleurs, l’hypothèse est-elle celle de l’Éléate¹⁷ ? Enfin, connaissait-il l’Un avant l’être et la théologie négative ? Comment donc admettre que le dialogue puisse révéler les choses les plus hautes si le Parménide du Poème n’a rien à voir avec le personnage de Platon ? Devant ces questions, la figure de l’Éléate prenait un relief nouveau nécessitant à son tour une lecture nouvelle. Nous allons tenter de montrer comment, principalement chez Plotin et Proclus, Parménide allait s’inscrire dans la perspective historique propre au néoplatonisme, et qui, d’une certaine manière, le définit. [introduction p. 294-295] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/8WXrV6XuPyldosH |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"530","_score":null,"_source":{"id":530,"authors_free":[{"id":746,"entry_id":530,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":150,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Gu\u00e9rard, Christian","free_first_name":"Christian","free_last_name":"Gu\u00e9rard","norm_person":{"id":150,"first_name":"Christian","last_name":"Gu\u00e9rard","full_name":"Gu\u00e9rard, Christian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":747,"entry_id":530,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":149,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","free_first_name":"Pierre","free_last_name":"Aubenque","norm_person":{"id":149,"first_name":"Pierre","last_name":"Aubenque","full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118919458","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Parm\u00e9nide d'\u00c9l\u00e9e chez les N\u00e9oplatoniciens","main_title":{"title":"Parm\u00e9nide d'\u00c9l\u00e9e chez les N\u00e9oplatoniciens"},"abstract":"\u00abLe n\u00e9oplatonisme, \u00e9crit J. Trouillard, succ\u00e8de au \u2018moyen platonisme\u2019 le jour o\u00f9 les platoniciens se mettent \u00e0 chercher dans le Parm\u00e9nide le secret de la philosophie de Platon\u00bb\u00b9. Effectivement, en paraphrasant Proclus, on peut m\u00eame dire que la lecture n\u00e9oplatonicienne du dialogue, et avant tout de la premi\u00e8re hypoth\u00e8se, est le N\u00e9oplatonisme lui-m\u00eame\u00b2.\r\n\r\nSans revenir davantage sur le r\u00f4le consid\u00e9rable du Parm\u00e9nide chez Plotin\u00b3, bornons-nous \u00e0 rappeler qu\u2019il a \u00e9t\u00e9 comment\u00e9 de fa\u00e7on syst\u00e9matique par Porphyre\u2074, puis, comme en t\u00e9moigne Proclus\u2075, par Am\u00e9lius, Th\u00e9odore d\u2019Asin\u00e9, Jamblique, l\u2019obscur philosophe de Rhodes, Plutarque d\u2019Ath\u00e8nes et Syrianus. \u00c0 son tour, le Lycien a r\u00e9dig\u00e9 un commentaire probablement complet du dialogue qu\u2019il a repris dans son ouvrage final, la Th\u00e9ologie platonicienne. De m\u00eame, les deux \u0153uvres rassembl\u00e9es par C.E. Ruelle sous le titre Dubitationes et solutiones de primis principiis in Platonis Parmenidem\u2076 montrent l\u2019importance du dialogue chez Damascius.\r\n\r\nCette relecture du Parm\u00e9nide a pos\u00e9 bien des questions aux historiens de la philosophie. On a alors invoqu\u00e9 l\u2019influence d\u2019id\u00e9es orientales. Il fallait, semble-t-il, excuser des esprits aussi exceptionnels d\u2019avoir \u00ab sombr\u00e9 dans l\u2019irrationalisme \u00bb. Une telle attitude, d\u00e9j\u00e0 fort visible chez V. Cousin\u2077, l\u2019\u00e9diteur m\u00eame de Proclus, malheureusement demeure\u2078.\r\n\r\nEn fait, chez Plotin, l\u2019orientalisme se limiterait au plus \u00e0 l\u2019aspiration mystique\u2079 : la d\u00e9finition du Bien (\u00e9p\u00e9keina t\u00eas ousias) est dans la R\u00e9publique, VI 509B9, et les sp\u00e9culations n\u00e9opythagoriciennes avaient reconnu dans l\u2019Un du Parm\u00e9nide le Principe de tout\u00b9\u2070. Il ne restait qu\u2019\u00e0 faire le lien, peut-\u00eatre en retrouvant ainsi la pens\u00e9e de Speusippe\u00b9\u00b9, mais, sans aucun doute, en s\u2019opposant au platonisme de l\u2019\u00e9poque.\r\n\r\nAu II\u1d49 si\u00e8cle notamment, le Parm\u00e9nide \u00e9tait consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme une \u0153uvre \u00ab logique \u00bb, un exercice \u00e9ristique ou un pastiche de la sophistique m\u00e9garique. C\u2019\u00e9tait l\u2019opinion des aristot\u00e9liciens dont Alexandre d\u2019Aphrodise\u00b9\u00b2, et aussi celle d\u2019Albinus\u00b9\u00b3, par exemple. Pour presque tous\u00b9\u2074, le dialogue n\u2019\u00e9tait qu\u2019un jeu discursif employant la m\u00e9thode des Topiques d\u2019Aristote\u00b9\u2075. Il \u00e9tait admis qu\u2019il s\u2019agissait d\u2019une r\u00e9futation de l\u2019\u00e9l\u00e9atisme, et, dans la premi\u00e8re hypoth\u00e8se en particulier, d\u2019une r\u00e9plique ironique de Gorgias\u00b9\u2076.\r\n\r\nLa conception n\u00e9oplatonicienne n\u2019\u00e9tait pas tr\u00e8s ais\u00e9e \u00e0 soutenir : si le dialogue porte sur des r\u00e9alit\u00e9s sublimes, pourquoi les faire exposer par Parm\u00e9nide ? D\u2019ailleurs, l\u2019hypoth\u00e8se est-elle celle de l\u2019\u00c9l\u00e9ate\u00b9\u2077 ? Enfin, connaissait-il l\u2019Un avant l\u2019\u00eatre et la th\u00e9ologie n\u00e9gative ? Comment donc admettre que le dialogue puisse r\u00e9v\u00e9ler les choses les plus hautes si le Parm\u00e9nide du Po\u00e8me n\u2019a rien \u00e0 voir avec le personnage de Platon ?\r\n\r\nDevant ces questions, la figure de l\u2019\u00c9l\u00e9ate prenait un relief nouveau n\u00e9cessitant \u00e0 son tour une lecture nouvelle. Nous allons tenter de montrer comment, principalement chez Plotin et Proclus, Parm\u00e9nide allait s\u2019inscrire dans la perspective historique propre au n\u00e9oplatonisme, et qui, d\u2019une certaine mani\u00e8re, le d\u00e9finit. [introduction p. 294-295]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/8WXrV6XuPyldosH","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":150,"full_name":"Gu\u00e9rard, Christian","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":149,"full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":530,"section_of":372,"pages":"294-313","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":372,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"\u00c9tudes sur Parm\u00e9nide, Tome II: Probl\u00e8mes d\u2019interpr\u00e9tation","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Aubenque1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ojgpMQbpMPY4GeV","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":372,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Vrin","series":"Biblioth\u00e8que d\u2019histoire de la philosophie","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Parm\u00e9nide d'\u00c9l\u00e9e chez les N\u00e9oplatoniciens"]}
Title | Philoponus and the Rise of Preclassical Dynamics |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science |
Pages | 84-120 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Wolff, Michael |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
If we are prepared to assume that the basic presuppositions of impetus theory can be traced back not to observational experience which Aristotle missed, but rather to a certain concept of man and to certain ethical principles, we need not attempt to explain the emergence of the theory solely by reference to new observations of falling bodies and the like. Is it not more appropriate to ask about the origin and kind of ethical problem to which impetus theory originally helped to provide an answer? The experience that forces are exhausted in all physical activities of human beings could have been just such a problem. Earlier society, which had left this experience chiefly to slaves, could not really have had such a problem. But, by the close of Antiquity, times were changing. [Conclusion p. 120] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/L1tFbjfO8UrPnAp |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"720","_score":null,"_source":{"id":720,"authors_free":[{"id":1073,"entry_id":720,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":364,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wolff, Michael","free_first_name":"Michael","free_last_name":"Wolff","norm_person":{"id":364,"first_name":"Michael","last_name":"Wolff","full_name":"Wolff, Michael","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/131523120","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1074,"entry_id":720,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Philoponus and the Rise of Preclassical Dynamics","main_title":{"title":"Philoponus and the Rise of Preclassical Dynamics"},"abstract":"If we are prepared to assume that the basic presuppositions of impetus theory \r\ncan be traced back not to observational experience which Aristotle missed, \r\nbut rather to a certain concept of man and to certain ethical principles, we \r\nneed not attempt to explain the emergence of the theory solely by reference to \r\nnew observations of falling bodies and the like. Is it not more appropriate to \r\nask about the origin and kind of ethical problem to which impetus theory \r\noriginally helped to provide an answer? The experience that forces are \r\nexhausted in all physical activities of human beings could have been just such \r\na problem. Earlier society, which had left this experience chiefly to slaves, \r\ncould not really have had such a problem. But, by the close of Antiquity, \r\ntimes were changing. [Conclusion p. 120]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/L1tFbjfO8UrPnAp","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":364,"full_name":"Wolff, Michael","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":720,"section_of":1383,"pages":"84-120","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1383,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sorabij1987d","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"All the chapters in this book are new, except for the inaugural lecture (Chapter 9), which I apologise for reprinting virtually unrevised and with the original lecture context still apparent. It seemed desirable, however, that so crucial a part ofthe controversy should be represented. The collection originated in a conference on Philoponus held at the Institute of Classical Studies in London in June 1983, which provided an opportunity for interested parties to pool knowledge from the many different disciplines that are relevant to his work. Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 6 are drawn from the conference, while two other conference papers, those of Henry Blumenthal and Richard Sorabji, are being incorporated into books in preparation (see Bibliography). Sorabji's main suggestions, however, are included in Chapter I in the discussion of matter and extension (pp 18 and 23). The remairnng chapters, apart from the inaugural lecture, were solicited or written for the volume, two of them (5 and 12) having been delivered first at a seminar on Ancient Science at the Institute of Classical Studies. [preface, p. ix-x]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/buhMZZl0djmIx9v","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1383,"pubplace":"Ithaca, New York","publisher":"Cornell University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"1","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Philoponus and the Rise of Preclassical Dynamics"]}
Title | Philoponus' Commentary on Aristotle's Physics in the Sixtheenth Century |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science. Second Edition |
Pages | 210-230 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Schmitt, Charles Bernard |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
As it is generally accepted, the term ‘Renaissance’ refers to a historical period in which there was a revival of interest in the literature, styles, and forms of Classical Antiquity. Though the ‘revival’ is usually understood to refer specifically to ancient ‘literary’ texts, there can be no doubt that the specialized technical treatises of philosophy, natural science, mathematics, and medicine played a role equally important, if not more important, in the cultural and intellectual life of the Renaissance. In addition to the rediscovery of the integral texts of Homer and the Greek dramatists, Cicero’s Letters to Atticus, Quintilian, and Lucretius, the fifteenth century also saw the recovery of much of Galen, Theophrastus, Plato, Plotinus, and Proclus, Pappus, Diogenes Laertius, and Sextus Empiricus, as well as many additional classical authors of specialized literature. Indeed, the ‘Renaissance’ was a revival of the technical knowledge bequeathed by Antiquity as much as of works of recognized literary and rhetorical quality. One aspect of the influence of ancient literature on the Renaissance which has received little attention until fairly recently is the role of the Greek commentators on Aristotle. In that vast corpus, most of which is conveniently assembled for us in the Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca, there is a wealth of interpretative and supplementary material, which is of great use not only for an understanding of the Aristotelian text itself but also for understanding its historical context and the philosophical positions that were in competition with those of Aristotle in antiquity. A certain number of the Greek commentaries were known in the Middle Ages, both in the Islamic and in the Christian worlds, but such knowledge was very fragmentary. Only a small portion of the extant commentaries was available in Latin before the sixteenth century. Some of these attained a degree of importance and played a central role in the thirteenth- and fourteenth-century discussions of the soul, for example. These medieval versions are presently being edited in a critical fashion by a group of scholars at Louvain; this series should take its place alongside the Greek texts produced in the last century by the Berlin Academy of Sciences. So far, editions of commentaries by Themistius, Ammonius, Philoponus, Simplicius, Alexander, and Eustratius have appeared. But it remained for the sixteenth century to make accessible most of the material. For example, less than half of the works attributed to Alexander of Aphrodisias contained in the CAG and Supplementum Aristotelicum were available in the Middle Ages, and, among the expositions of Philoponus, only the commentary on the De Anima was available. The need for a comprehensive publication of all of the Greek commentaries on Aristotle was already noted and made a program for the future in Aldo Manuzio’s prefatory letter to the first volume of his editio princeps of Aristotle in 1495. Although Aldo himself did not live to achieve his aim, he did initiate it, and between that date and 1540 nearly the entire Greek corpus was made available to European scholars. Parallel with the publication of the Greek texts—and generally delayed by only a few years—was the publication of Latin translations of the same texts, thus making the material accessible to a much wider readership than the rather restricted group who could cope effectively with the Greek text of the commentators. Most of the Greek editions themselves, as well as the majority of the translations, issued from Venetian presses, though Paris and Lyon served as secondary publication centers. By mid-century essentially everything could be read in Latin, and the impact of the new material can be traced in the Aristotelian literature of the period. In reading the many commentaries on Aristotle and other philosophical works of the sixteenth century, one clearly discerns the rising tide of interest in these expositions across a spectrum of philosophical and scientific topics. Hitherto, the impact of these new sources of information has only imperfectly been charted, primarily with regard to discussions of the soul. Nardi’s fundamental work on Simplicius, the more recent studies on Alexander by Cranz, and on the general Neoplatonism of the commentaries by Mahoney have served to draw attention to the rich vein of material there to be mined. The range of the impact—in logic, natural philosophy, metaphysics, and psychology—has scarcely been charted, nor has the interplay between Greek, Arabic, Hebrew, and medieval and Renaissance Latin interpretations of Aristotle been evaluated and analyzed. During the second half of the sixteenth century, those who wanted to understand Aristotle—which for them meant philosophy tout court—frequently tried to relate the text of the Stagirite to the varying interpretations of Philoponus, Simplicius, Averroes (1126–98), Thomas Aquinas (c. 1225–74), John of Jandun (died 1328), Pomponazzi (1462–1525), and Soto (1494/5–1560), among many others. Particularly little studied has been the impact of the newly available Greek commentators on the Physics. Here is meant primarily Simplicius and Philoponus, both of whom left behind extensive and detailed expositions of that work, neither of which was known directly to Latin writers of the Middle Ages but which were to become available in the sixteenth century. As long ago as Wohlwill and Duhem, it has been known that some of the criticisms and alternative positions put forward in the commentaries on the Physics by the two sixth-century writers later attained importance in the history of the development of physical thought. Moreover, it was also realized by the same historians that the critiques of Aristotle put forward by Simplicius and Philoponus were very similar to some of the positions that became central in the formulation of the ‘new science’ of the seventeenth century. Thus far, however, there has been little systematic attempt to consider the reaction of the sixteenth century as a whole to the reorientation made possible by the availability of Simplicius and Philoponus. The story is not simple, and it cannot be covered comprehensively here, though I hope to be able to indicate some lines further research might take. What I shall do is to focus upon Philoponus, whose significance in the story is possibly less than that of Simplicius, but without a full story of the fortune of the Physics of both authors a valid conclusion regarding their relative merits is not possible. Before turning to a consideration of the impact of the Grammarian’s partial commentary on the Physics (only the first four books are integrally extant), I should like to deal briefly with two other points. First, I should like to sketch a portrait of Philoponus as a commentator, emphasizing why what he had to say was of potential importance for the sixteenth century. Secondly, I shall say something general about the recovery and assimilation of his philosophical works in the West down to the sixteenth century. [introduction p. 210-213] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/Ub0AryY729JHN5w |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1037","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1037,"authors_free":[{"id":1571,"entry_id":1037,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":284,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Schmitt, Charles Bernard","free_first_name":"Charles Bernard","free_last_name":"Schmitt","norm_person":{"id":284,"first_name":"Charles Bernard","last_name":"Schmitt","full_name":"Schmitt, Charles Bernard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118846744","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1572,"entry_id":1037,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Philoponus' Commentary on Aristotle's Physics in the Sixtheenth Century","main_title":{"title":"Philoponus' Commentary on Aristotle's Physics in the Sixtheenth Century"},"abstract":"As it is generally accepted, the term \u2018Renaissance\u2019 refers to a historical period in which there was a revival of interest in the literature, styles, and forms of Classical Antiquity. Though the \u2018revival\u2019 is usually understood to refer specifically to ancient \u2018literary\u2019 texts, there can be no doubt that the specialized technical treatises of philosophy, natural science, mathematics, and medicine played a role equally important, if not more important, in the cultural and intellectual life of the Renaissance. In addition to the rediscovery of the integral texts of Homer and the Greek dramatists, Cicero\u2019s Letters to Atticus, Quintilian, and Lucretius, the fifteenth century also saw the recovery of much of Galen, Theophrastus, Plato, Plotinus, and Proclus, Pappus, Diogenes Laertius, and Sextus Empiricus, as well as many additional classical authors of specialized literature. Indeed, the \u2018Renaissance\u2019 was a revival of the technical knowledge bequeathed by Antiquity as much as of works of recognized literary and rhetorical quality.\r\n\r\nOne aspect of the influence of ancient literature on the Renaissance which has received little attention until fairly recently is the role of the Greek commentators on Aristotle. In that vast corpus, most of which is conveniently assembled for us in the Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca, there is a wealth of interpretative and supplementary material, which is of great use not only for an understanding of the Aristotelian text itself but also for understanding its historical context and the philosophical positions that were in competition with those of Aristotle in antiquity. A certain number of the Greek commentaries were known in the Middle Ages, both in the Islamic and in the Christian worlds, but such knowledge was very fragmentary. Only a small portion of the extant commentaries was available in Latin before the sixteenth century. Some of these attained a degree of importance and played a central role in the thirteenth- and fourteenth-century discussions of the soul, for example. These medieval versions are presently being edited in a critical fashion by a group of scholars at Louvain; this series should take its place alongside the Greek texts produced in the last century by the Berlin Academy of Sciences. So far, editions of commentaries by Themistius, Ammonius, Philoponus, Simplicius, Alexander, and Eustratius have appeared.\r\n\r\nBut it remained for the sixteenth century to make accessible most of the material. For example, less than half of the works attributed to Alexander of Aphrodisias contained in the CAG and Supplementum Aristotelicum were available in the Middle Ages, and, among the expositions of Philoponus, only the commentary on the De Anima was available.\r\n\r\nThe need for a comprehensive publication of all of the Greek commentaries on Aristotle was already noted and made a program for the future in Aldo Manuzio\u2019s prefatory letter to the first volume of his editio princeps of Aristotle in 1495. Although Aldo himself did not live to achieve his aim, he did initiate it, and between that date and 1540 nearly the entire Greek corpus was made available to European scholars. Parallel with the publication of the Greek texts\u2014and generally delayed by only a few years\u2014was the publication of Latin translations of the same texts, thus making the material accessible to a much wider readership than the rather restricted group who could cope effectively with the Greek text of the commentators. Most of the Greek editions themselves, as well as the majority of the translations, issued from Venetian presses, though Paris and Lyon served as secondary publication centers. By mid-century essentially everything could be read in Latin, and the impact of the new material can be traced in the Aristotelian literature of the period.\r\n\r\nIn reading the many commentaries on Aristotle and other philosophical works of the sixteenth century, one clearly discerns the rising tide of interest in these expositions across a spectrum of philosophical and scientific topics. Hitherto, the impact of these new sources of information has only imperfectly been charted, primarily with regard to discussions of the soul. Nardi\u2019s fundamental work on Simplicius, the more recent studies on Alexander by Cranz, and on the general Neoplatonism of the commentaries by Mahoney have served to draw attention to the rich vein of material there to be mined. The range of the impact\u2014in logic, natural philosophy, metaphysics, and psychology\u2014has scarcely been charted, nor has the interplay between Greek, Arabic, Hebrew, and medieval and Renaissance Latin interpretations of Aristotle been evaluated and analyzed.\r\n\r\nDuring the second half of the sixteenth century, those who wanted to understand Aristotle\u2014which for them meant philosophy tout court\u2014frequently tried to relate the text of the Stagirite to the varying interpretations of Philoponus, Simplicius, Averroes (1126\u201398), Thomas Aquinas (c. 1225\u201374), John of Jandun (died 1328), Pomponazzi (1462\u20131525), and Soto (1494\/5\u20131560), among many others.\r\n\r\nParticularly little studied has been the impact of the newly available Greek commentators on the Physics. Here is meant primarily Simplicius and Philoponus, both of whom left behind extensive and detailed expositions of that work, neither of which was known directly to Latin writers of the Middle Ages but which were to become available in the sixteenth century. As long ago as Wohlwill and Duhem, it has been known that some of the criticisms and alternative positions put forward in the commentaries on the Physics by the two sixth-century writers later attained importance in the history of the development of physical thought. Moreover, it was also realized by the same historians that the critiques of Aristotle put forward by Simplicius and Philoponus were very similar to some of the positions that became central in the formulation of the \u2018new science\u2019 of the seventeenth century.\r\n\r\nThus far, however, there has been little systematic attempt to consider the reaction of the sixteenth century as a whole to the reorientation made possible by the availability of Simplicius and Philoponus. The story is not simple, and it cannot be covered comprehensively here, though I hope to be able to indicate some lines further research might take. What I shall do is to focus upon Philoponus, whose significance in the story is possibly less than that of Simplicius, but without a full story of the fortune of the Physics of both authors a valid conclusion regarding their relative merits is not possible.\r\n\r\nBefore turning to a consideration of the impact of the Grammarian\u2019s partial commentary on the Physics (only the first four books are integrally extant), I should like to deal briefly with two other points. First, I should like to sketch a portrait of Philoponus as a commentator, emphasizing why what he had to say was of potential importance for the sixteenth century. Secondly, I shall say something general about the recovery and assimilation of his philosophical works in the West down to the sixteenth century. [introduction p. 210-213]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Ub0AryY729JHN5w","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":284,"full_name":"Schmitt, Charles Bernard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1037,"section_of":184,"pages":"210-230","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":184,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science. Second Edition","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sorabji1987c","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2010","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Richard Sorabji is the editor of a vast and growing number of translations of ancient\r\ncommentaries on Aristotle and the editor of several excellent collections of studies on the\r\nAristotelian tradition. Philoponus, a 6th century Christian thinker who was originally trained as\r\na Neoplatonist, is best remembered today for his attack on Aristotle's 'physics'; his influence on\r\nlater philosophers and scientists and his role in the reevaluation of Aristotelian science and\r\nnatural philosophy are indeed remarkable. The second edition of Philoponus and the Rejection\r\nof Aristotelian Science includes a new two-part introduction which offers a survey of the\r\nrapidly expanding scholarship on Philoponus and of recent archeological discoveries (such as\r\nthe lecture rooms of the 6th century Alexandrian school), as well as new insights into the\r\ninteraction between Greek paganism and Christianity in connection with Philoponus and his\r\nmilieu. The twelve chapters included in this collection are written by very prominent scholars\r\nand tackle topics such as Philoponus' corollaries on space and time, the differences between his\r\ntheological views (e.g. on the three hypostases) and the prevailing dogmas of the time, the\r\nrelation between his theory about impetus and later treatments of impetus and related\r\nconcepts in a number of Arab thinkers and in Galileo. This collection is one of the most reliable\r\nand wide-ranging introductions to Philoponus' views and influence, and those interested in late\r\nancient philosophy and its interactions with Christian thought will find this to be a most\r\nvaluable resource. [Review by Tiberiu Popa]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/CJSIbOOK7lIAB00","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":184,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Institute of Classical Studies, School of Advanced Study, University of London","series":"BICS Supplement","volume":"103","edition_no":"2","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Philoponus' Commentary on Aristotle's Physics in the Sixtheenth Century"]}
Title | Pietro d’Abano e l’utilizzazione della traduzione di Guglielmo di Moerbeke del Commento di Simplicio al II libro del De Caelo di Aristotele |
Type | Book Section |
Language | Italian |
Date | 1989 |
Published in | Guillaume de Moerbeke. Recueil d’études à l’occasion du 700e anniversaire de sa mort (1286) |
Pages | 83-112 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Federici-Vescovini, Graziella |
Editor(s) | Brams, Jozef , Vanhamel, Willy |
Translator(s) |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/Km4PwTvVAXA9uOv |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1136","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1136,"authors_free":[{"id":1710,"entry_id":1136,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":487,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Federici-Vescovini, Graziella","free_first_name":"Graziella","free_last_name":"Federici-Vescovini","norm_person":{"id":487,"first_name":"Graziella","last_name":"Federici-Vescovini","full_name":"Federici-Vescovini, Graziella","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/128950552","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2478,"entry_id":1136,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":337,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Brams, Jozef","free_first_name":"Jozef","free_last_name":"Brams","norm_person":{"id":337,"first_name":"Jozef","last_name":"Brams","full_name":"Brams, Jozef","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1145645712","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2479,"entry_id":1136,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":338,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","free_first_name":"Willy","free_last_name":"Vanhamel","norm_person":{"id":338,"first_name":"Willy","last_name":"Vanhamel","full_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/141109661","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Pietro d\u2019Abano e l\u2019utilizzazione della traduzione di Guglielmo di Moerbeke del Commento di Simplicio al II libro del De Caelo di Aristotele","main_title":{"title":"Pietro d\u2019Abano e l\u2019utilizzazione della traduzione di Guglielmo di Moerbeke del Commento di Simplicio al II libro del De Caelo di Aristotele"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"1989","language":"Italian","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Km4PwTvVAXA9uOv","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":487,"full_name":"Federici-Vescovini, Graziella","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":337,"full_name":"Brams, Jozef","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":338,"full_name":"Vanhamel, Willy","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1136,"section_of":326,"pages":"83-112","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":326,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Guillaume de Moerbeke. Recueil d\u2019\u00e9tudes \u00e0 l\u2019occasion du 700e anniversaire de sa mort (1286)","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Brams1989","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1989","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1989","abstract":"T h e following articles are included in this volume: \"Moerbeke, traducteur et inter-\r\nprete: Un texte et une pensee\" by Gerard Verbeke (pp. 1-21); \"Guillaume de Moer-\r\nbeke et la cour pontificale\" by Agostino Paravicini Bagliani (pp. 23-52); \"Note con-\r\ncernant certaines missions qui auraient ete confiees a Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by\r\nWilly Vanhamel (pp. 53-56); \"Guillaume de Moerbeke et saint Thomas\" by Carlos\r\nSteel (pp. 57-82); \"Pietro d'Abano e l'utilizzazione della traduzione di Guglielmo di\r\nMoerbeke del commento di Simplicio al \/\/ De caelo di Aristotele\" by Graziella Federici\r\nVescovini (pp. 83-106); \"Quelques utilisateurs des textes rares de Moerbeke\r\n(Philopon, Tria opuscula) et particulierement Jacques de Viterbe\" by Louis Jacques\r\nBataillon (pp. 107-12); \"Quelques remarques codicologiques et paleographiques\r\nau sujet du ms. Vaticano Ottob. lat. 1850\" by Robert Wielockx (pp. 113-33);\r\n\"La liste des ceuvres d'Hippocrate dans le Vindobonensis phil. gr. 100: Un\r\nautographe de Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Gudrun Vuillemin-Diem (pp. 135-83);\r\n\"Note concernant la collation d'un deuxieme manuscrit grec de la Physique\r\npar Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Jozef Brams and Gudrun Vuillemin-Diem (pp.\r\n185-92); \"La 'Recensio Matritensis' de la Physique\" by Jozef Brams (pp. 193-220);\r\n\"La Translatio anonyma e la Translatio Guillelmi del De partibus animalium (Analisi del\r\nlibro I)\" by Pietro Rossi (pp. 221-45); \"L'attribution de la Translatio nova du De\r\ngenerations et corruptione a Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Joanna Judycka (pp. 247-51);\r\n\"Iudicialia ad Syrum: Une traduction de Guillaume de Moerbeke du Quadripartitum\r\nde Cl. Ptol\u00a3mee\" by Luc Anthonis (pp. 253-55); \"Methode de traduction et\r\nproblemes de chronologie\" by Fernand Bossier (pp. 257-94); \"L'usage des mots\r\nhybrides greco-latins par Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Louis Jacques Bataillon (pp.\r\n295-99); and \"Biobibliographie de Guillaume de Moerbeke\" by Willy Vanhamel\r\n(pp. 301-83).","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/kM52uB2YgiCytgt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":326,"pubplace":"Leuven","publisher":"Leuven University Press","series":"Ancient and Medieval Philosophy de Wulf-Mansion Centre, Series 1","volume":"7","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Pietro d\u2019Abano e l\u2019utilizzazione della traduzione di Guglielmo di Moerbeke del Commento di Simplicio al II libro del De Caelo di Aristotele"]}
Title | Plotinus in later Platonism |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1981 |
Published in | Neoplatonism and early Christian thought: Essays in honour of A.H. Armstrong |
Pages | 212-222 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | , Blumenthal, Henry J. |
Editor(s) | Blumenthal, Henry J. , Markus, R. A. |
Translator(s) |
We have seen, then, that in some areas later Neoplatonists introduced Plotinus’ views to corroborate their own. This was equally true of his opinions as a Platonist and, as they understood him, as an interpreter of Aristotle. These agreements are most often found in relatively uncontroversial areas of their thought. However, at the extremes of the metaphysical world and in those other areas where difficulties were likely to arise, we do find substantial differences. We must, however, be cautious about interpreting these differences in terms of chronological changes. The later Neoplatonists continued to disagree among themselves, and the process we have examined was not one of linear development away from Plotinus. [conclusion p. 220] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/ydcrCuFuFOAFW6r |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"873","_score":null,"_source":{"id":873,"authors_free":[{"id":1282,"entry_id":873,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1283,"entry_id":873,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":403,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Markus, R. A.","free_first_name":"R. A.","free_last_name":"Markus","norm_person":{"id":403,"first_name":"R. A.","last_name":"Markus","full_name":"Markus, R. A.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/121838862","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2229,"entry_id":873,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Plotinus in later Platonism","main_title":{"title":"Plotinus in later Platonism"},"abstract":"We have seen, then, that in some areas later Neoplatonists introduced Plotinus\u2019 views to corroborate their own. This was equally true of his opinions as a Platonist and, as they understood him, as an interpreter of Aristotle. These agreements are most often found in relatively uncontroversial areas of their thought.\r\n\r\nHowever, at the extremes of the metaphysical world and in those other areas where difficulties were likely to arise, we do find substantial differences. We must, however, be cautious about interpreting these differences in terms of chronological changes. The later Neoplatonists continued to disagree among themselves, and the process we have examined was not one of linear development away from Plotinus. [conclusion p. 220]","btype":2,"date":"1981","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/ydcrCuFuFOAFW6r","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":403,"full_name":"Markus, R. A.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":873,"section_of":131,"pages":"212-222","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":131,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Neoplatonism and early Christian thought: Essays in honour of A.H. Armstrong","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Blumenthal\/Markus1981a","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1981","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1981","abstract":"The studies collected in this book are all concerned with aspects of the Platonic tradition, either in its own internal development in the Hellenistic age and the period of the Roman Empire, or with the influence of Platonism, in one or other of its forms, on other spiritual traditions, especially that of Christianity. [offical abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/PcJka3NQUzhA8jZ","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":131,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Variorum","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Plotinus in later Platonism"]}
Title | Plotinus, Porphyry and the Neoplatonic Interpretation of the ‘Categories’ |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. 2. Teilband: Philosophie |
Pages | 955-974 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Strange, Steven, K. |
Editor(s) | Haase, Wolfgang |
Translator(s) |
The claim is often made that the most extensive of Plotinus’ treatises, On the Genera of Being (Περὶ τῶν γενῶν τοῦ ὄντος, Enn. VI.1-3), contains a polemical attack on Aristotle’s theory of categories. This claim would seem to be well-grounded, given that in the first part of the work (VI.1.1–24), Plotinus proceeds through the list of categories given by Aristotle and systematically raises a series of powerful objections to claims Aristotle makes about them in the text of the Categories. At the same time, Plotinus’ student Porphyry is rightly given credit for establishing Aristotle's Categories, along with the rest of the Aristotelian logical treatises usually referred to as the Organon, as the fundamental texts for logical doctrines in the Neoplatonic scholastic tradition, and through this tradition later for medieval philosophy, by means of his Isagoge or introduction to the Categories and his commentaries on that work. Taken together, these two propositions tend to give the impression that there was deep and substantive disagreement between master and pupil about the value of the theory found in the Categories. This impression is reinforced by the implication in the introduction to the extant commentaries on the Categories of Dexippus (5.1–12) and Simplicius (2.3–8) that Porphyry, in the massive commentary on the Categories which he dedicated to Gedalius, probably one of his students, replied in detail to Plotinus’ objections against the Categories. Indeed, in Porphyry’s extant catechism-commentary and throughout Dexippus’ and Simplicius’ commentaries, both of which seem to be following closely either Porphyry’s lost To Gedalius or Iamblichus’ lost commentary, itself based on To Gedalius, we can see Porphyry doing precisely this. Moreover, it is clear from the text of Simplicius that many of the objections Plotinus raises against the Categories in On the Genera of Being he got from a work or works of Lucius and Nicostratus, who were certainly hostile to Aristotle. Nevertheless, I am convinced that this simple way of putting the matter is more than a little misleading: it both misrepresents the nature and originality of Porphyry’s contribution to the history of logic and metaphysics and distorts our view of the fundamental Neoplatonic problem of the relationship between Plato and Aristotle. My purpose in the following essay will be to try to sharpen the statement of the historical situation by examining some of the connections between Porphyry’s interpretation of the Categories and Plotinus’ discussion of the problem of the nature of the categories, especially the category of substance, in On the Genera of Being. I will be suggesting that Plotinus’ and Porphyry’s attitudes toward the Categories are much closer to one another than has previously been supposed, and that in particular Porphyry’s position on the nature of categories has been deeply influenced by Plotinus’ arguments. The consequence of this is that Plotinus ought to be accorded a much more prominent place than he standardly has been in the history of the Neoplatonic interpretation of Aristotle, in which the problem of the proper interpretation of the Categories plays an important role. My discussion will fall into four parts. In the next section, I will look at some of the more important features of Porphyry’s interpretation of the Categories that enabled him to downplay the evidently anti-Platonic metaphysical elements that the work contains and to turn it into a basic textbook of logic for his revived school-Platonism. Here, I will be relying heavily upon an important and seminal paper by A. C. Lloyd. Then I will turn to the main arguments that Plotinus employs against what was in his day the standard interpretation of Aristotle’s Categories, and their implications for his view of the nature of that work and its relation to Platonism. In the final section of the paper, we will be able to see some important connections between Plotinus’ position and Porphyry’s which throw light on the metaphysical issues connected with the important Neoplatonic thesis of the fundamental harmony of the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle. [introduction p. 955-957] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/AVNTI4tBsipTJL7 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1151","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1151,"authors_free":[{"id":1726,"entry_id":1151,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":324,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Strange, Steven, K.","free_first_name":"Steven, K.","free_last_name":"Strange","norm_person":{"id":324,"first_name":"Steven K.","last_name":"Strange","full_name":"Strange, Steven K.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/111772655X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2412,"entry_id":1151,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":325,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Haase, Wolfgang","free_first_name":"Wolfgang","free_last_name":"Haase","norm_person":{"id":325,"first_name":"Wolfgang","last_name":"Haase","full_name":"Haase, Wolfgang","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117757527","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Plotinus, Porphyry and the Neoplatonic Interpretation of the \u2018Categories\u2019","main_title":{"title":"Plotinus, Porphyry and the Neoplatonic Interpretation of the \u2018Categories\u2019"},"abstract":"The claim is often made that the most extensive of Plotinus\u2019 treatises, On the Genera of Being (\u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, Enn. VI.1-3), contains a polemical attack on Aristotle\u2019s theory of categories. This claim would seem to be well-grounded, given that in the first part of the work (VI.1.1\u201324), Plotinus proceeds through the list of categories given by Aristotle and systematically raises a series of powerful objections to claims Aristotle makes about them in the text of the Categories.\r\n\r\nAt the same time, Plotinus\u2019 student Porphyry is rightly given credit for establishing Aristotle's Categories, along with the rest of the Aristotelian logical treatises usually referred to as the Organon, as the fundamental texts for logical doctrines in the Neoplatonic scholastic tradition, and through this tradition later for medieval philosophy, by means of his Isagoge or introduction to the Categories and his commentaries on that work. Taken together, these two propositions tend to give the impression that there was deep and substantive disagreement between master and pupil about the value of the theory found in the Categories.\r\n\r\nThis impression is reinforced by the implication in the introduction to the extant commentaries on the Categories of Dexippus (5.1\u201312) and Simplicius (2.3\u20138) that Porphyry, in the massive commentary on the Categories which he dedicated to Gedalius, probably one of his students, replied in detail to Plotinus\u2019 objections against the Categories. Indeed, in Porphyry\u2019s extant catechism-commentary and throughout Dexippus\u2019 and Simplicius\u2019 commentaries, both of which seem to be following closely either Porphyry\u2019s lost To Gedalius or Iamblichus\u2019 lost commentary, itself based on To Gedalius, we can see Porphyry doing precisely this.\r\n\r\nMoreover, it is clear from the text of Simplicius that many of the objections Plotinus raises against the Categories in On the Genera of Being he got from a work or works of Lucius and Nicostratus, who were certainly hostile to Aristotle. Nevertheless, I am convinced that this simple way of putting the matter is more than a little misleading: it both misrepresents the nature and originality of Porphyry\u2019s contribution to the history of logic and metaphysics and distorts our view of the fundamental Neoplatonic problem of the relationship between Plato and Aristotle.\r\n\r\nMy purpose in the following essay will be to try to sharpen the statement of the historical situation by examining some of the connections between Porphyry\u2019s interpretation of the Categories and Plotinus\u2019 discussion of the problem of the nature of the categories, especially the category of substance, in On the Genera of Being. I will be suggesting that Plotinus\u2019 and Porphyry\u2019s attitudes toward the Categories are much closer to one another than has previously been supposed, and that in particular Porphyry\u2019s position on the nature of categories has been deeply influenced by Plotinus\u2019 arguments.\r\n\r\nThe consequence of this is that Plotinus ought to be accorded a much more prominent place than he standardly has been in the history of the Neoplatonic interpretation of Aristotle, in which the problem of the proper interpretation of the Categories plays an important role.\r\n\r\nMy discussion will fall into four parts. In the next section, I will look at some of the more important features of Porphyry\u2019s interpretation of the Categories that enabled him to downplay the evidently anti-Platonic metaphysical elements that the work contains and to turn it into a basic textbook of logic for his revived school-Platonism. Here, I will be relying heavily upon an important and seminal paper by A. C. Lloyd.\r\n\r\nThen I will turn to the main arguments that Plotinus employs against what was in his day the standard interpretation of Aristotle\u2019s Categories, and their implications for his view of the nature of that work and its relation to Platonism.\r\n\r\nIn the final section of the paper, we will be able to see some important connections between Plotinus\u2019 position and Porphyry\u2019s which throw light on the metaphysical issues connected with the important Neoplatonic thesis of the fundamental harmony of the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle. [introduction p. 955-957]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/AVNTI4tBsipTJL7","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":324,"full_name":"Strange, Steven K.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":325,"full_name":"Haase, Wolfgang","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1151,"section_of":335,"pages":"955-974","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":335,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aufstieg und Niedergang der r\u00f6mischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Teil II: Principat, Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. 2. Teilband: Philosophie","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Haase1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"AUFSTIEG UND NIEDERGANG DER R\u00d6MISCHEN WELT (ANRW) ist ein internationales Gemeinschaftswerk historischer Wissenschaften. Seine Aufgabe besteht darin, alle wichtigen Aspekte der antiken r\u00f6mischen Welt sowie ihres Fortwirkens und Nachlebens in Mittelalter und Neuzeit nach dem gegenw\u00e4rtigen Stand der Forschung in Einzelbeitr\u00e4gen zu behandeln. Das Werk ist in 3 Teile gegliedert:\r\nI. Von den Anf\u00e4ngen Roms bis zum Ausgang der Republik\r\nII. Principat\r\nIII. Sp\u00e4tantike\r\nJeder der drei Teile umfa\u00dft sechs systematische Rubriken, zwischen denen es vielfache \u00dcberschneidungen gibt: 1. Politische Geschichte, 2. Recht, 3. Religion, 4. Sprache und Literatur, 5. Philosophie und Wissenschaften, 6. K\u00fcnste.\r\n\r\nANRW ist ein handbuchartiges \u00dcbersichtswerk zu den r\u00f6mischen Studien im weitesten Sinne, mit Einschlu\u00df der Rezeptions- und Wirkungsgeschichte bis in die Gegenwart. Bei den Beitr\u00e4gen handelt es sich entweder um zusammenfassende Darstellungen mit Bibliographie oder um Problem- und Forschungsberichte bzw. thematisch breit angelegte exemplarische Untersuchungen. Die Artikel erscheinen in deutscher, englischer, franz\u00f6sischer oder italienischer Sprache.\r\n\r\nZum Mitarbeiterstab geh\u00f6ren rund 1000 Gelehrte aus 35 L\u00e4ndern. Der Vielfalt der Themen entsprechend geh\u00f6ren die Autoren haupts\u00e4chlich folgenden Fachrichtungen an: Alte, Mittelalterliche und Neue Geschichte; Byzantinistik, Slavistik; Klassische, Mittellateinische, Romanische und Orientalische Philologie; Klassische, Orientalische und Christliche Arch\u00e4ologie und Kunstgeschichte; Rechtswissenschaft; Religionswissenschaft und Theologie, besonders Kirchengeschichte und Patristik.\r\n\r\nIn Vorbereitung sind:\r\nTeil II, Bd. 26,4: Religion - Vorkonstantinisches Christentum: Neues Testament - Sachthemen, Fortsetzung\r\nTeil II, Bd. 37,4: Wissenschaften: Medizin und Biologie, Fortsetzung. [official abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/vkva8h1vt1Po53c","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":335,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"De Gruyter","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Plotinus, Porphyry and the Neoplatonic Interpretation of the \u2018Categories\u2019"]}
Title | Porphyre, Commentateur de la Physique d'Aristote |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1985 |
Published in | Aristotelica: Mélanges offerts à Marcel de Corte |
Pages | 227-239 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Moraux, Paul |
Editor(s) | Motte, André , Rutten, Christian |
Translator(s) |
Comme nous l’avons vu, il ne semble pas que Simplicius ait utilisé systématiquement la synopsis des livres V à VIII. Celle-ci a-t-elle laissé des traces ailleurs dans la littérature tardive ? Nous n’en avons aucune preuve formelle. Je voudrais pourtant attirer l’attention sur un passage du commentaire de Macrobe au Somnium Scipionis de Cicéron. Il s’agit d’une discussion de la thèse platonicienne selon laquelle l’âme est immortelle parce qu’elle est automotrice. Macrobe note qu’Aristote a contesté la légitimité de cette thèse et affirmé que l’âme ne peut se mouvoir elle-même et ne peut même subir aucun mouvement. Aristote montrait d’abord qu’il y a, dans la nature, quelque chose d’immobile. Ensuite, il cherchait à prouver que tout ce qui est mû l’est par quelque chose d’autre. Puis il établissait l’existence d’un premier moteur non mû. Contre Platon, il montrait alors que tout principe de mouvement est immobile, et que donc, si l’âme est principe de mouvement, elle doit être immobile. Pour illustrer ces diverses thèses d’Aristote, Macrobe reproduit, sous une forme assez squelettique, des arguments présentés par Aristote au livre VIII de la Physique. Il ne s’agit pas là de citations ou d’extraits littéraux, mais bien de résumés où la substance des développements d’Aristote est réduite à l’essentiel, donc d’une sorte d’epidromê ou de synopsis des passages utilisés. Or, nous savons que de tous les néoplatoniciens, Porphyre est l’un de ceux que Macrobe, qui dépend d’ordinaire de sources plus anciennes, utilise le plus volontiers et le plus fréquemment. Dans son ensemble, la critique moderne admet comme très probable l’hypothèse selon laquelle Macrobe aurait emprunté au traité de Porphyre Peri Psychês pros Boêthon les développements qu’il consacre au passage du Phèdre, traduit par Cicéron, sur l’automotricité et l’immortalité de l’âme. La question se pose donc de savoir si les objections d’Aristote ont été tirées de la même source, ou si Macrobe les a trouvées ailleurs, chez un péripatéticien, par exemple. Si l’on tient compte du fait que Porphyre connaissait très bien Aristote, dont il avait en partie commenté et en partie résumé la Physique, on pourra, ce me semble, fort bien imaginer que, dans son ouvrage sur l’âme, il s’était attaché non seulement à présenter les vues de Platon, mais aussi à les défendre contre les objections auxquelles elles pouvaient se heurter. Il est donc tout naturel que Porphyre se soit assez longuement étendu sur les difficultés que les théories aristotéliciennes du mouvement et du premier moteur suscitaient contre les arguments de Platon sur l’automotricité de l’âme. À cet effet, Porphyre avait exploité surtout le dernier livre de la Physique. Et comme il avait résumé sous la forme d’une synopsis les livres V à VIII, tout nous invite à croire qu’il avait largement utilisé cette synopsis en rédigeant son propre Peri Psychês. Mais pour le dire en toute franchise, cette hypothèse, tout alléchante qu’elle est, ne dépasse pas la vraisemblance. Nous ne disposons pas de fragments certains du résumé porphyrien du huitième livre de la Physique et, dès lors, nous ne sommes pas en mesure de prouver, par voie de comparaison, que les objections d’Aristote présentées par Macrobe remontent bien, en dernière analyse, à la synopsis qui a fait l’objet de la présente étude. [conclusion p. 237-239] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/HITY0gikmySrLA8 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"494","_score":null,"_source":{"id":494,"authors_free":[{"id":681,"entry_id":494,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":137,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Moraux, Paul","free_first_name":"Paul","free_last_name":"Moraux","norm_person":{"id":137,"first_name":"Paul ","last_name":"Moraux","full_name":"Moraux, Paul ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117755591","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2115,"entry_id":494,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":468,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Motte, Andre\u0301","free_first_name":"Andr\u00e9","free_last_name":"Motte","norm_person":{"id":468,"first_name":"Andr\u00e9","last_name":"Motte","full_name":"Motte, Andr\u00e9","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/124510663","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2409,"entry_id":494,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":469,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Rutten, Christian","free_first_name":"Christian","free_last_name":"Rutten","norm_person":{"id":469,"first_name":"Christian","last_name":"Rutten","full_name":"Rutten, Christian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119515512","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Porphyre, Commentateur de la Physique d'Aristote","main_title":{"title":"Porphyre, Commentateur de la Physique d'Aristote"},"abstract":"Comme nous l\u2019avons vu, il ne semble pas que Simplicius ait utilis\u00e9 syst\u00e9matiquement la synopsis des livres V \u00e0 VIII. Celle-ci a-t-elle laiss\u00e9 des traces ailleurs dans la litt\u00e9rature tardive ? Nous n\u2019en avons aucune preuve formelle. Je voudrais pourtant attirer l\u2019attention sur un passage du commentaire de Macrobe au Somnium Scipionis de Cic\u00e9ron. Il s\u2019agit d\u2019une discussion de la th\u00e8se platonicienne selon laquelle l\u2019\u00e2me est immortelle parce qu\u2019elle est automotrice.\r\n\r\nMacrobe note qu\u2019Aristote a contest\u00e9 la l\u00e9gitimit\u00e9 de cette th\u00e8se et affirm\u00e9 que l\u2019\u00e2me ne peut se mouvoir elle-m\u00eame et ne peut m\u00eame subir aucun mouvement. Aristote montrait d\u2019abord qu\u2019il y a, dans la nature, quelque chose d\u2019immobile. Ensuite, il cherchait \u00e0 prouver que tout ce qui est m\u00fb l\u2019est par quelque chose d\u2019autre. Puis il \u00e9tablissait l\u2019existence d\u2019un premier moteur non m\u00fb. Contre Platon, il montrait alors que tout principe de mouvement est immobile, et que donc, si l\u2019\u00e2me est principe de mouvement, elle doit \u00eatre immobile.\r\n\r\nPour illustrer ces diverses th\u00e8ses d\u2019Aristote, Macrobe reproduit, sous une forme assez squelettique, des arguments pr\u00e9sent\u00e9s par Aristote au livre VIII de la Physique. Il ne s\u2019agit pas l\u00e0 de citations ou d\u2019extraits litt\u00e9raux, mais bien de r\u00e9sum\u00e9s o\u00f9 la substance des d\u00e9veloppements d\u2019Aristote est r\u00e9duite \u00e0 l\u2019essentiel, donc d\u2019une sorte d\u2019epidrom\u00ea ou de synopsis des passages utilis\u00e9s. Or, nous savons que de tous les n\u00e9oplatoniciens, Porphyre est l\u2019un de ceux que Macrobe, qui d\u00e9pend d\u2019ordinaire de sources plus anciennes, utilise le plus volontiers et le plus fr\u00e9quemment.\r\n\r\nDans son ensemble, la critique moderne admet comme tr\u00e8s probable l\u2019hypoth\u00e8se selon laquelle Macrobe aurait emprunt\u00e9 au trait\u00e9 de Porphyre Peri Psych\u00eas pros Bo\u00eathon les d\u00e9veloppements qu\u2019il consacre au passage du Ph\u00e8dre, traduit par Cic\u00e9ron, sur l\u2019automotricit\u00e9 et l\u2019immortalit\u00e9 de l\u2019\u00e2me. La question se pose donc de savoir si les objections d\u2019Aristote ont \u00e9t\u00e9 tir\u00e9es de la m\u00eame source, ou si Macrobe les a trouv\u00e9es ailleurs, chez un p\u00e9ripat\u00e9ticien, par exemple.\r\n\r\nSi l\u2019on tient compte du fait que Porphyre connaissait tr\u00e8s bien Aristote, dont il avait en partie comment\u00e9 et en partie r\u00e9sum\u00e9 la Physique, on pourra, ce me semble, fort bien imaginer que, dans son ouvrage sur l\u2019\u00e2me, il s\u2019\u00e9tait attach\u00e9 non seulement \u00e0 pr\u00e9senter les vues de Platon, mais aussi \u00e0 les d\u00e9fendre contre les objections auxquelles elles pouvaient se heurter. Il est donc tout naturel que Porphyre se soit assez longuement \u00e9tendu sur les difficult\u00e9s que les th\u00e9ories aristot\u00e9liciennes du mouvement et du premier moteur suscitaient contre les arguments de Platon sur l\u2019automotricit\u00e9 de l\u2019\u00e2me.\r\n\r\n\u00c0 cet effet, Porphyre avait exploit\u00e9 surtout le dernier livre de la Physique. Et comme il avait r\u00e9sum\u00e9 sous la forme d\u2019une synopsis les livres V \u00e0 VIII, tout nous invite \u00e0 croire qu\u2019il avait largement utilis\u00e9 cette synopsis en r\u00e9digeant son propre Peri Psych\u00eas. Mais pour le dire en toute franchise, cette hypoth\u00e8se, tout all\u00e9chante qu\u2019elle est, ne d\u00e9passe pas la vraisemblance. Nous ne disposons pas de fragments certains du r\u00e9sum\u00e9 porphyrien du huiti\u00e8me livre de la Physique et, d\u00e8s lors, nous ne sommes pas en mesure de prouver, par voie de comparaison, que les objections d\u2019Aristote pr\u00e9sent\u00e9es par Macrobe remontent bien, en derni\u00e8re analyse, \u00e0 la synopsis qui a fait l\u2019objet de la pr\u00e9sente \u00e9tude. [conclusion p. 237-239]","btype":2,"date":"1985","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/HITY0gikmySrLA8","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":137,"full_name":"Moraux, Paul ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":468,"full_name":"Motte, Andr\u00e9","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":469,"full_name":"Rutten, Christian","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":494,"section_of":297,"pages":"227-239","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":297,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aristotelica: M\u00e9langes offerts \u00e0 Marcel de Corte","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Motte1985","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1985","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1985","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/vbTKdtbzJ5KxKIX","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":297,"pubplace":"Bruxelles \u2013 Lie\u0300ge","publisher":"E\u0301ditions Ousia \u2013 Presses universitaires","series":"Cahiers de philosophie ancienne","volume":"3","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Porphyre, Commentateur de la Physique d'Aristote"]}
Title | Proklos und die Form des philosophischen Kommentars |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1985 |
Published in | Proclus, lecteur et interprète des anciens. Actes du colloque international du CNRS, Paris (2-4 octobre 1985) |
Pages | 1-20 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Lamberz, Erich |
Editor(s) | Pépin, Jean , Saffrey, Henri Dominique |
Translator(s) |
In den bisherigen Untersuchungen zur Form der Kommentare des Proklos und der Neuplatoniker im allgemeinen ist vor allem Gewicht darauf gelegt worden, daß die Kommentare aus der mündlichen Exegese der Texte hervorgegangen sind und die Formen dieser mündlichen Exegese sich in den schriftlich fixierten Werken widerspiegeln. Neben Spuren mündlicher Ausdrucksformen und Reflexen von Schuldiskussionen gehört zu diesen Formen vor allem die Gliederung der Exegese in Abschnitte, die Vorlesungseinheiten (praxeis) entsprechen, und die Unterteilung der einzelnen Abschnitte in Allgemeinerklärung (theôria) und Einzelerklärung (lexis). Bis jetzt blieb jedoch weitgehend die Frage außer B etracht, ob und wie sich die von den Exegeten selbst redigierten Kommentare von Vorlesungsnachschriften unterscheiden. Es erscheint deshalb sinnvoll, den Blickwinkel einmal umzukehren und zu fragen, welche spezifischen Formelemente sich in den Kommentaren des Proklos und anderer Neuplatoniker aufzeigen lassen, wenn man sie in erster Linie als literarische Erzeugnisse und nicht als Niederschlag mündlicher Exegese betrachtet. Im folgenden soll zu diesem Zweck nach einigen terminologischen Voruntersuchungen die Form der Lemmata, deren Einfügung in den Kom m entartext und der Aufbau der einzelnen Kommentarabschnitte besprochen werden. [Introduction, p. 1-2] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/WFCq8CflnlIPypA |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1191","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1191,"authors_free":[{"id":1762,"entry_id":1191,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":226,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Lamberz, Erich","free_first_name":"Erich","free_last_name":"Lamberz","norm_person":{"id":226,"first_name":"Erich","last_name":"Lamberz","full_name":"Lamberz, Erich","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/125040709","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2057,"entry_id":1191,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":227,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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}},{"id":2058,"entry_id":1191,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":228,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","free_first_name":"Henri Dominique","free_last_name":"Saffrey","norm_person":{"id":228,"first_name":"Henri Dominique","last_name":"Saffrey","full_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130160059","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Proklos und die Form des philosophischen Kommentars","main_title":{"title":"Proklos und die Form des philosophischen Kommentars"},"abstract":"In den bisherigen Untersuchungen zur Form der Kommentare des Proklos und der Neuplatoniker im allgemeinen ist vor allem Gewicht darauf gelegt worden, da\u00df die Kommentare aus der m\u00fcndlichen Exegese der Texte hervorgegangen sind und die Formen dieser m\u00fcndlichen \r\nExegese sich in den schriftlich fixierten Werken widerspiegeln. Neben Spuren m\u00fcndlicher Ausdrucksformen und Reflexen von Schuldiskussio\u00adnen geh\u00f6rt zu diesen Formen vor allem die Gliederung der Exegese in Abschnitte, die Vorlesungseinheiten (praxeis) entsprechen, und die \r\nUnterteilung der einzelnen Abschnitte in Allgemeinerkl\u00e4rung (the\u00f4ria) und Einzelerkl\u00e4rung (lexis). Bis jetzt blieb jedoch weitgehend die Frage au\u00dfer B etracht, ob und wie sich die von den Exegeten selbst redigierten \r\nKommentare von Vorlesungsnachschriften unterscheiden. Es erscheint \r\ndeshalb sinnvoll, den Blickwinkel einmal umzukehren und zu fragen, welche spezifischen Formelemente sich in den Kommentaren des Proklos \r\nund anderer Neuplatoniker aufzeigen lassen, wenn man sie in erster Linie als literarische Erzeugnisse und nicht als Niederschlag m\u00fcndlicher Exegese betrachtet. Im folgenden soll zu diesem Zweck nach einigen \r\nterminologischen Voruntersuchungen die Form der Lemmata, deren Einf\u00fcgung in den Kom m entartext und der Aufbau der einzelnen \r\nKommentarabschnitte besprochen werden. [Introduction, p. 1-2]","btype":2,"date":"1985","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/WFCq8CflnlIPypA","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":226,"full_name":"Lamberz, Erich","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":227,"full_name":"P\u00e9pin, Jean","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":228,"full_name":"Saffrey, Henri Dominique","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1191,"section_of":159,"pages":"1-20","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":159,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Proclus, lecteur et interpr\u00e8te des anciens. Actes du colloque international du CNRS, Paris (2-4 octobre 1985)","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"P\u00e9pin-Saffrey1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Du 5e si\u00e8cle jusqu'au d\u00e9but du 19e si\u00e8cle, Proclus fut consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme l'h\u00e9ritier par excellence de Platon, celui qui avait su tirer des dialogues un expos\u00e9 syst\u00e9matique et coh\u00e9rent de la philosophie platonicienne. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/QluMshmjYrV5JtV","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":159,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Centre national de la recherche scientifique","series":"Colloques internationaux du Centre national de la recherche scientifique","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Proklos und die Form des philosophischen Kommentars"]}
Title | Prolegomena to the Study of Philoponus' contra Aristotelem |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science |
Pages | 197-209 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Wildberg, Christian |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
Judging from the number and content of his commentaries, Philoponus was a thinker in the Aristotelian tradition. One of his major achievements lies in the fact that as a commentator he accepted and developed the heritage of his teacher Ammonius. For that reason alone it is remarkable that he composed a treatise which attacked vital topics of Aristotle’s philosophy with little compromise. Although it is true that throughout Antiquity many philosophers ventured to criticise the great Aristotle, one may agree that Philoponus did so, as Cesare Cremonini put it in 1616, ‘more sharply than anyone’ (acerrime omnium).' Where does this attack fit into the context of Philoponus’doctrinal development? No doubt his outspoken critique of Aristotle in the de Aetemitate Mundi contra Aristotelem somehow swayed Philoponus to desert the philosophical and join the theological camp. But the story is probably more complex. The general point of dissent was, as the title indicates, the doctrine of the eternity of the world. Being a Christian, Philoponus perhaps possessed a particular motivation for launching his attack - as a feat of praeparatio evangélica. This fact has been sufficiently recognised and appreciated. Less appreciated and studied, however, has been the philosophical side, i.e. the actual argument and structure of the treatise in question. Since it has not survived the content must be reconstructed from a number of substantial fragments found mainly in the commentaries of Philoponus’ adversary Simplicius. An adequate treatment of the double controversy Simplicius v Philoponus v Aristotle would fill a volume on its own and cannot be the subject of this chapter.2 Instead, I will attempt to revise apparently firmly established views about the treatise, in particular its composition and date. This, it is hoped, may lead to a revised view of that treatise and at the same time encourage a more advanced study of Philoponus’ doctrinal development in general. [introduction p. 197-198] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/dbFxqr9z9aZi48i |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"430","_score":null,"_source":{"id":430,"authors_free":[{"id":580,"entry_id":430,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":360,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wildberg, Christian","free_first_name":"Christian","free_last_name":"Wildberg","norm_person":{"id":360,"first_name":"Christian","last_name":"Wildberg","full_name":"Wildberg, Christian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/139018964","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":581,"entry_id":430,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Prolegomena to the Study of Philoponus' contra Aristotelem","main_title":{"title":"Prolegomena to the Study of Philoponus' contra Aristotelem"},"abstract":"Judging from the number and content of his commentaries, Philoponus was a thinker in the Aristotelian tradition. One of his major achievements lies in \r\nthe fact that as a commentator he accepted and developed the heritage of his teacher Ammonius. For that reason alone it is remarkable that he composed a treatise which attacked vital topics of Aristotle\u2019s philosophy with little compromise. Although it is true that throughout Antiquity many philosophers ventured to criticise the great Aristotle, one may agree that Philoponus did so, as Cesare Cremonini put it in 1616, \u2018more sharply than anyone\u2019 (acerrime omnium).' Where does this attack fit into the context of Philoponus\u2019doctrinal development? No doubt his outspoken critique of Aristotle in the de Aetemitate Mundi contra Aristotelem somehow swayed Philoponus to desert the philosophical and join the theological camp. But the story is probably more complex. The general point of dissent was, as the title indicates, the doctrine of the eternity of the world. Being a Christian, Philoponus perhaps possessed a \r\nparticular motivation for launching his attack - as a feat of praeparatio evang\u00e9lica. This fact has been sufficiently recognised and appreciated. Less appreciated and studied, however, has been the philosophical side, i.e. the actual argument and structure of the treatise in question. Since it has not survived the content must be reconstructed from a number of substantial fragments found mainly in the commentaries of Philoponus\u2019 adversary Simplicius. An adequate treatment of the double controversy Simplicius v Philoponus v Aristotle would fill a volume on its own and cannot be the subject of this chapter.2 Instead, I will attempt to revise apparently firmly established views about the treatise, in particular its composition and date. This, it is hoped, may lead to a revised view of that treatise and at the same time encourage a more advanced study of Philoponus\u2019 doctrinal development in general. [introduction p. 197-198]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/dbFxqr9z9aZi48i","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":360,"full_name":"Wildberg, Christian","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":430,"section_of":1383,"pages":"197-209","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1383,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sorabij1987d","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"All the chapters in this book are new, except for the inaugural lecture (Chapter 9), which I apologise for reprinting virtually unrevised and with the original lecture context still apparent. It seemed desirable, however, that so crucial a part ofthe controversy should be represented. The collection originated in a conference on Philoponus held at the Institute of Classical Studies in London in June 1983, which provided an opportunity for interested parties to pool knowledge from the many different disciplines that are relevant to his work. Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 6 are drawn from the conference, while two other conference papers, those of Henry Blumenthal and Richard Sorabji, are being incorporated into books in preparation (see Bibliography). Sorabji's main suggestions, however, are included in Chapter I in the discussion of matter and extension (pp 18 and 23). The remairnng chapters, apart from the inaugural lecture, were solicited or written for the volume, two of them (5 and 12) having been delivered first at a seminar on Ancient Science at the Institute of Classical Studies. [preface, p. ix-x]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/buhMZZl0djmIx9v","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1383,"pubplace":"Ithaca, New York","publisher":"Cornell University Press","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"1","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Prolegomena to the Study of Philoponus' contra Aristotelem"]}
Title | Puzzles about Identity. Aristotle and his Greek Commentators |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1985 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 1: Aristoteles und seine Schule |
Pages | 57-97 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Mignucci, Mario |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
Aristotle’s conception of identity is too large a subject to be analyzed in a single article. I will try to discuss here just one of the many problems raised by his views on sameness. It is not, perhaps, the most stimulating question one could wish to see treated, but it is a question about logic, where I feel a little more at ease than among the complicated and obscure riddles of metaphysics. My subject will be Aristotle’s references to what is nowadays called ‘Leibniz’s Law’ (LL): if two objects x and y are the same, they both share all the same properties. A formal version of it could be: (1) x=y ⟹ ∀F(F(x) ⟺ F(y))x=y⟹∀F(F(x)⟺F(y)) It is perhaps worth remembering that (LL) must be distinguished from what is normally called the ‘principle of substitutivity’ (SP), according to which substitution of expressions that are said to be the same is truth-preserving. As has been shown, (LL) does not entail (SP), since there are counterexamples to (SP) that do not falsify (LL). Not only (SP), but also (LL) has been doubted by some modern logicians. The question is far from being settled, and it is perhaps of interest to examine how ancient logicians tried to manage this problem. First, I will consider Aristotle’s statements about (LL) and the analyses he gives of some supposed counterexamples to this principle. Secondly, the interpretations of his view among his Greek commentators will be taken into account, and their distance from the position of the master evaluated. As Professor Moraux has taught us, the study of the Aristotelian tradition often gives us the opportunity of understanding Aristotle’s own meaning better. [introduction p. 57-58] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/VYZdFzrmNGSDth4 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"959","_score":null,"_source":{"id":959,"authors_free":[{"id":1439,"entry_id":959,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":259,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mignucci, Mario","free_first_name":"Mario","free_last_name":"Mignucci","norm_person":{"id":259,"first_name":"Mignucci","last_name":"Mario","full_name":"Mignucci, Mario","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1194188885","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2083,"entry_id":959,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Puzzles about Identity. Aristotle and his Greek Commentators","main_title":{"title":"Puzzles about Identity. Aristotle and his Greek Commentators"},"abstract":"Aristotle\u2019s conception of identity is too large a subject to be analyzed in a single article. I will try to discuss here just one of the many problems raised by his views on sameness. It is not, perhaps, the most stimulating question one could wish to see treated, but it is a question about logic, where I feel a little more at ease than among the complicated and obscure riddles of metaphysics. My subject will be Aristotle\u2019s references to what is nowadays called \u2018Leibniz\u2019s Law\u2019 (LL): if two objects x and y are the same, they both share all the same properties. A formal version of it could be:\r\n\r\n (1) x=y\u2005\u200a\u27f9\u2005\u200a\u2200F(F(x)\u2005\u200a\u27fa\u2005\u200aF(y))x=y\u27f9\u2200F(F(x)\u27faF(y))\r\n\r\nIt is perhaps worth remembering that (LL) must be distinguished from what is normally called the \u2018principle of substitutivity\u2019 (SP), according to which substitution of expressions that are said to be the same is truth-preserving. As has been shown, (LL) does not entail (SP), since there are counterexamples to (SP) that do not falsify (LL). Not only (SP), but also (LL) has been doubted by some modern logicians. The question is far from being settled, and it is perhaps of interest to examine how ancient logicians tried to manage this problem.\r\n\r\nFirst, I will consider Aristotle\u2019s statements about (LL) and the analyses he gives of some supposed counterexamples to this principle. Secondly, the interpretations of his view among his Greek commentators will be taken into account, and their distance from the position of the master evaluated. As Professor Moraux has taught us, the study of the Aristotelian tradition often gives us the opportunity of understanding Aristotle\u2019s own meaning better. [introduction p. 57-58]","btype":2,"date":"1985","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/VYZdFzrmNGSDth4","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":259,"full_name":"Mignucci, Mario","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":959,"section_of":190,"pages":"57-97","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":190,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 1: Aristoteles und seine Schule","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Plezia\/Verdenius\/P\u00e9pin1985","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1985","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1985","abstract":"Der hier vorgelegte erste Band eines zweiteiligen Werkes, das \r\nAristoteles und dem Aristotelismus gewidmet ist, enth\u00e4lt 31 Origi-\r\nnalbeitr\u00e4ge zum Corpus Aristotelicum und zum alten Peripatos. \r\nKommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles bil-\r\nden das Thema des zweiten Bandes, der so bald als m\u00f6glich folgen \r\nwird. [Vorwort]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/fo2YolqZedXU2Im","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":190,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"","volume":"1","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Puzzles about Identity. Aristotle and his Greek Commentators"]}
Title | Qu'est-ce qu'une figure? Une difficulté de la doctrine aristotélicienne de la qualité (Aristote Catégories 8, 10 b 26-11 a 14) |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1980 |
Published in | Concepts et catégories dans la pensée antique |
Pages | 197-216 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Narcy, Michel |
Editor(s) | Aubenque, Pierre |
Translator(s) |
Au chapitre 8 des Catégories, consacré à la qualité (poiotes), Aristote, comme il l’a fait à propos des catégories précédentes (substance, quantité, relation), fait suivre son exposé de l’examen de deux questions : savoir si, dans l’ordre de la qualité, se trouvent contrariété (enantiótes) et accroissement ou diminution (to mallon kai to héttion). On peut noter d’ailleurs qu’à la réponse à ces deux questions se limiteront, au chapitre 9, les indications fournies au sujet des catégories de l’action et de la passion. Questions dont on a pu reconnaître qu’elles constituent comme l’application aux catégories aristotéliciennes d’un système catégorial plus ancien, provenant de l’Académie et dérivé, à travers le platonisme, du pythagorisme. Il peut paraître étrange de délimiter ici, en vue d’une étude de la catégorie de qualité, un passage d’allure adventice, où vient pour ainsi dire s’entrecroiser avec le fil de l’exposé d’Aristote, et contredire l’assurance de sa classification, une problématique qui semble d’autant moins lui appartenir en propre qu’elle contribue surtout à jeter le doute sur la cohérence de l’exposé qui précède. À chacune des deux questions, en effet, Aristote donne tout d’abord une réponse affirmative (contrariété : 10 b 12 ; accroissement et diminution : 10 b 26), mais c’est pour noter ensuite, à la règle ainsi posée, des exceptions. Ainsi, donnant comme exemple de contrariété le blanc et le noir (10 b 13), il remarque un peu plus bas que d’autres couleurs, telles que le rouge et le jaune, n’ont pas de contraires (10 b 16-17). De même, dans le passage qui va nous occuper, affirme-t-il qu’à la différence des autres qualités, la figure n’est pas susceptible de plus et de moins : exception de taille, cette fois, puisque c’est ainsi l’une des quatre subdivisions de la qualité qui se voit assigner un statut à part. Rejoignant là l’objection que fait Plotin au principe même d’une division au sein de la qualité, on ne peut éviter de se demander pourquoi la figure est rangée sous cette catégorie. Soit donc que, dans la rencontre avec le système catégorial académique, Aristote se trouve confronté à une difficulté dont il ne vient pas à bout, soit qu’il souligne ainsi l’inadéquation de la « grille » qu’il abandonne, ce passage peut sembler rien moins que central dans le chapitre. À moins que se révèlent, dans la difficulté précisément, pour autant qu’elle est comme une trace de la cassure opérée, et à moins que, pourquoi pas, dans cette cassure se constituent, la signification et la raison d’être de la catégorie aristotélicienne de la qualité, et avec elle, la doctrine des catégories. L’exception constituée par la figure, en effet, n’est pas une faiblesse qui se laisse seulement apercevoir : Aristote, au contraire, loin de la masquer ou de la mentionner sans plus, comme il fait du rouge et du jaune à propos de la contrariété, non seulement l’expose avec un soin particulier, mais produit une argumentation à l’appui. Ce qui doit d’autant plus retenir l’attention, qu’il a tout d’abord travaillé à réduire une première exception, celle que constitueraient des dispositions telles que la justice ou la santé (10 b 30-11 a 5). Le soin égal apporté, d’abord à réduire une première exception, puis à en produire une autre, donne à croire qu’à entendre au plus près la difficulté, on a chance d’y saisir une ligne de force de la doctrine. Examinons donc tout d’abord la première partie de notre passage (10 b 26-11 a 5). C’est l’affirmation que les qualités (tà poià) reçoivent « le plus et le moins » (tà mallon kai tà héttion) : « du blanc, en effet : l’un est dit plus et moins qu’un autre. Et du juste : l’un qu’un autre, plus ». [introduction p. 197-198] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/qCqUG7AShSYKtrM |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"792","_score":null,"_source":{"id":792,"authors_free":[{"id":1169,"entry_id":792,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":277,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Narcy, Michel","free_first_name":"Michel","free_last_name":"Narcy","norm_person":{"id":277,"first_name":"Michel","last_name":"Narcy","full_name":"Narcy, Michel","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/129449512","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1170,"entry_id":792,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":149,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","free_first_name":"Pierre","free_last_name":"Aubenque","norm_person":{"id":149,"first_name":"Pierre","last_name":"Aubenque","full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118919458","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Qu'est-ce qu'une figure? Une difficult\u00e9 de la doctrine aristot\u00e9licienne de la qualit\u00e9 (Aristote Cat\u00e9gories 8, 10 b 26-11 a 14)","main_title":{"title":"Qu'est-ce qu'une figure? Une difficult\u00e9 de la doctrine aristot\u00e9licienne de la qualit\u00e9 (Aristote Cat\u00e9gories 8, 10 b 26-11 a 14)"},"abstract":"Au chapitre 8 des Cat\u00e9gories, consacr\u00e9 \u00e0 la qualit\u00e9 (poiotes), Aristote, comme il l\u2019a fait \u00e0 propos des cat\u00e9gories pr\u00e9c\u00e9dentes (substance, quantit\u00e9, relation), fait suivre son expos\u00e9 de l\u2019examen de deux questions : savoir si, dans l\u2019ordre de la qualit\u00e9, se trouvent contrari\u00e9t\u00e9 (enanti\u00f3tes) et accroissement ou diminution (to mallon kai to h\u00e9ttion). On peut noter d\u2019ailleurs qu\u2019\u00e0 la r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 ces deux questions se limiteront, au chapitre 9, les indications fournies au sujet des cat\u00e9gories de l\u2019action et de la passion. Questions dont on a pu reconna\u00eetre qu\u2019elles constituent comme l\u2019application aux cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes d\u2019un syst\u00e8me cat\u00e9gorial plus ancien, provenant de l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie et d\u00e9riv\u00e9, \u00e0 travers le platonisme, du pythagorisme.\r\n\r\nIl peut para\u00eetre \u00e9trange de d\u00e9limiter ici, en vue d\u2019une \u00e9tude de la cat\u00e9gorie de qualit\u00e9, un passage d\u2019allure adventice, o\u00f9 vient pour ainsi dire s\u2019entrecroiser avec le fil de l\u2019expos\u00e9 d\u2019Aristote, et contredire l\u2019assurance de sa classification, une probl\u00e9matique qui semble d\u2019autant moins lui appartenir en propre qu\u2019elle contribue surtout \u00e0 jeter le doute sur la coh\u00e9rence de l\u2019expos\u00e9 qui pr\u00e9c\u00e8de. \u00c0 chacune des deux questions, en effet, Aristote donne tout d\u2019abord une r\u00e9ponse affirmative (contrari\u00e9t\u00e9 : 10 b 12 ; accroissement et diminution : 10 b 26), mais c\u2019est pour noter ensuite, \u00e0 la r\u00e8gle ainsi pos\u00e9e, des exceptions. Ainsi, donnant comme exemple de contrari\u00e9t\u00e9 le blanc et le noir (10 b 13), il remarque un peu plus bas que d\u2019autres couleurs, telles que le rouge et le jaune, n\u2019ont pas de contraires (10 b 16-17). De m\u00eame, dans le passage qui va nous occuper, affirme-t-il qu\u2019\u00e0 la diff\u00e9rence des autres qualit\u00e9s, la figure n\u2019est pas susceptible de plus et de moins : exception de taille, cette fois, puisque c\u2019est ainsi l\u2019une des quatre subdivisions de la qualit\u00e9 qui se voit assigner un statut \u00e0 part.\r\n\r\nRejoignant l\u00e0 l\u2019objection que fait Plotin au principe m\u00eame d\u2019une division au sein de la qualit\u00e9, on ne peut \u00e9viter de se demander pourquoi la figure est rang\u00e9e sous cette cat\u00e9gorie. Soit donc que, dans la rencontre avec le syst\u00e8me cat\u00e9gorial acad\u00e9mique, Aristote se trouve confront\u00e9 \u00e0 une difficult\u00e9 dont il ne vient pas \u00e0 bout, soit qu\u2019il souligne ainsi l\u2019inad\u00e9quation de la \u00ab grille \u00bb qu\u2019il abandonne, ce passage peut sembler rien moins que central dans le chapitre. \u00c0 moins que se r\u00e9v\u00e8lent, dans la difficult\u00e9 pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment, pour autant qu\u2019elle est comme une trace de la cassure op\u00e9r\u00e9e, et \u00e0 moins que, pourquoi pas, dans cette cassure se constituent, la signification et la raison d\u2019\u00eatre de la cat\u00e9gorie aristot\u00e9licienne de la qualit\u00e9, et avec elle, la doctrine des cat\u00e9gories.\r\n\r\nL\u2019exception constitu\u00e9e par la figure, en effet, n\u2019est pas une faiblesse qui se laisse seulement apercevoir : Aristote, au contraire, loin de la masquer ou de la mentionner sans plus, comme il fait du rouge et du jaune \u00e0 propos de la contrari\u00e9t\u00e9, non seulement l\u2019expose avec un soin particulier, mais produit une argumentation \u00e0 l\u2019appui. Ce qui doit d\u2019autant plus retenir l\u2019attention, qu\u2019il a tout d\u2019abord travaill\u00e9 \u00e0 r\u00e9duire une premi\u00e8re exception, celle que constitueraient des dispositions telles que la justice ou la sant\u00e9 (10 b 30-11 a 5). Le soin \u00e9gal apport\u00e9, d\u2019abord \u00e0 r\u00e9duire une premi\u00e8re exception, puis \u00e0 en produire une autre, donne \u00e0 croire qu\u2019\u00e0 entendre au plus pr\u00e8s la difficult\u00e9, on a chance d\u2019y saisir une ligne de force de la doctrine.\r\n\r\nExaminons donc tout d\u2019abord la premi\u00e8re partie de notre passage (10 b 26-11 a 5). C\u2019est l\u2019affirmation que les qualit\u00e9s (t\u00e0 poi\u00e0) re\u00e7oivent \u00ab le plus et le moins \u00bb (t\u00e0 mallon kai t\u00e0 h\u00e9ttion) : \u00ab du blanc, en effet : l\u2019un est dit plus et moins qu\u2019un autre. Et du juste : l\u2019un qu\u2019un autre, plus \u00bb. [introduction p. 197-198]","btype":2,"date":"1980","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/qCqUG7AShSYKtrM","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":277,"full_name":"Narcy, Michel","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":149,"full_name":"Aubenque, Pierre","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":792,"section_of":302,"pages":"197-216","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":302,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Concepts et cat\u00e9gories dans la pens\u00e9e antique","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Aubenque1980b","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1980","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1980","abstract":"Depuis Aristote, on entend par cat\u00e9gories des concepts tr\u00e8s g\u00e9n\u00e9raux, dont la g\u00e9n\u00e9ralit\u00e9 ne d\u00e9rive pas de l\u2019exp\u00e9rience, mais en quelque sorte la pr\u00e9c\u00e8de, puisque c\u2019est eux et eux seuls qui nous permettent de l\u2019organiser et de la penser. Ces concepts \u2013 substance, quantit\u00e9, relation, qualit\u00e9, lieu, temps, action, passion, situation, avoir \u2013 sont-ils des structures universelles de toute pens\u00e9e ou bien sont-ils li\u00e9s aux particularit\u00e9s s\u00e9mantiques ou syntaxiques d\u2019un syst\u00e8me linguistique particulier, en l\u2019occurrence de la langue grecque, \u00e0 l\u2019int\u00e9rieur de laquelle ils ont \u00e9t\u00e9 pour la premi\u00e8re fois \u00e9nonc\u00e9s et rassembl\u00e9s?\r\nLes \u00e9tudes ici r\u00e9unies, issues d\u2019un s\u00e9minaire qui s\u2019est poursuivi durant plusieurs ann\u00e9es au Centre de recherche sur la Pens\u00e9e antique de l\u2019Universit\u00e9 de Paris-Sorbonne, associ\u00e9 au C.N.R.S. (Centre L\u00e9on-Robin), s\u2019efforcent d\u2019apporter des \u00e9l\u00e9ments de r\u00e9ponse \u00e0 cette grande question, qui demeure au centre des discussions contemporaines sur les rapports de la philosophie et du langage. Leur apport sp\u00e9cifique consiste dans une ex\u00e9g\u00e8se rigoureuse des analyses du trait\u00e9 aristot\u00e9licien des Cat\u00e9gories, \u00e9clair\u00e9 par les d\u00e9veloppements ult\u00e9rieurs de la doctrine, tels que nous les connaissons notamment \u00e0 travers le Commentaire du N\u00e9oplatonicien Simplicius. Certaines de ces \u00e9tudes examinent l\u2019influence ou les transformations des cat\u00e9gories aristot\u00e9liciennes chez les Sto\u00efciens, les grammairiens grecs de la fin de l\u2019Antiquit\u00e9, les N\u00e9oplatoniciens tardifs, les P\u00e8res de l\u2019\u00c9glise et dans la tradition latine antique et m\u00e9di\u00e9vale. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/FGpf7U5Cy1dboYI","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":302,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Vrin","series":"Bibliotheque d\u2019histoire de la philosophie","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Qu'est-ce qu'une figure? Une difficult\u00e9 de la doctrine aristot\u00e9licienne de la qualit\u00e9 (Aristote Cat\u00e9gories 8, 10 b 26-11 a 14)"]}
Title | Recherches sur les fragments du commentaire de Simplicius sur la Métaphysique d’Aristote |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 225-245 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
The text discusses research on the fragments of Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's Metaphysics. It focuses on a scholia found in Codex Regius (Paris, gr. 1853) that mentions Simplicius as the author of a commentary on Aristotle's work. The scholia refers to a specific passage in Metaphysics I, 983 b 8, where the interpretation of the term "eidos" creates difficulties. The scholia contrasts the interpretations proposed by Alexandre d'Aphrodise and Simplicius, highlighting their differing views on the meaning of "eidos." The author argues that the scholia indicates familiarity with Simplicius' commentary, suggesting that Simplicius was known and studied in the first half of the 13th century. The scholia also mentions Michel d'Ephese and Jean Italos, providing clues about the context and potential dating of the scholia's composition. [introduction] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/R2DUCY7PTorhIy2 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"669","_score":null,"_source":{"id":669,"authors_free":[{"id":980,"entry_id":669,"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}},{"id":981,"entry_id":669,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Recherches sur les fragments du commentaire de Simplicius sur la M\u00e9taphysique d\u2019Aristote","main_title":{"title":"Recherches sur les fragments du commentaire de Simplicius sur la M\u00e9taphysique d\u2019Aristote"},"abstract":"The text discusses research on the fragments of Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's Metaphysics. It focuses on a scholia found in Codex Regius (Paris, gr. 1853) that mentions Simplicius as the author of a commentary on Aristotle's work. The scholia refers to a specific passage in Metaphysics I, 983 b 8, where the interpretation of the term \"eidos\" creates difficulties. The scholia contrasts the interpretations proposed by Alexandre d'Aphrodise and Simplicius, highlighting their differing views on the meaning of \"eidos.\" The author argues that the scholia indicates familiarity with Simplicius' commentary, suggesting that Simplicius was known and studied in the first half of the 13th century. The scholia also mentions Michel d'Ephese and Jean Italos, providing clues about the context and potential dating of the scholia's composition. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/R2DUCY7PTorhIy2","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":669,"section_of":171,"pages":"225-245","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Recherches sur les fragments du commentaire de Simplicius sur la M\u00e9taphysique d\u2019Aristote"]}
Title | Simplicios, commentateur représentatif d’Aristote dans le néoplatonisme tardif |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1981 |
Published in | Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Thessaloniki August 7-14 1978 |
Pages | 250 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Vamvoukakis, Nicolas |
Editor(s) | Theodōrakopulos, Iōannēs N. |
Translator(s) |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/UItMYMORGj0gHKz |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1460","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1460,"authors_free":[{"id":2524,"entry_id":1460,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":344,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Vamvoukakis, Nicolas","free_first_name":"Nicolas","free_last_name":"Vamvoukakis","norm_person":{"id":344,"first_name":"Nicolas","last_name":"Vamvoukakis","full_name":"Vamvoukakis, Nicolas","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2525,"entry_id":1460,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":514,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Theod\u014drakopulos, I\u014dann\u0113s N.","free_first_name":"I\u014dann\u0113s N.","free_last_name":"Theod\u014drakopulos,","norm_person":{"id":514,"first_name":" Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","last_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos","full_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos, Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117302619","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicios, commentateur repr\u00e9sentatif d\u2019Aristote dans le n\u00e9oplatonisme tardif","main_title":{"title":"Simplicios, commentateur repr\u00e9sentatif d\u2019Aristote dans le n\u00e9oplatonisme tardif"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"1981","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/UItMYMORGj0gHKz","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":344,"full_name":"Vamvoukakis, Nicolas","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":514,"full_name":"Theodo\u0304rakopoulos, Io\u0304anne\u0304s Nikolaou ","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1460,"section_of":1459,"pages":"250","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1459,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"bibliography","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Proceedings of the World Congress on Aristotle, Thessaloniki August 7-14 1978","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Theod\u014drakopulos1981","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1981","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/I0bn1qB2TUZcu8q","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1459,"pubplace":"Athen","publisher":"Athe\u0304na : Ministry of Culture and Sciences","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Simplicios, commentateur repr\u00e9sentatif d\u2019Aristote dans le n\u00e9oplatonisme tardif"]}
Title | Simplicius |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1975 |
Published in | Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Volume XII: IBN RUSHD - JEAN-SERVAIS STAS |
Pages | 440-443 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Verbeke, Gérard |
Editor(s) | Gillispie, Charles Coulston |
Translator(s) |
Simplicius was one of the most famous representatives of Neoplatonism in the sixth century. An outstanding scholar, he was the author of extensive commentaries on Aristotle that contain much valuable information on previous Greek philosophy, including the pre-Socratics. Very little is known of his life. According to Agathias (History, 11,30,3), he was born in Cilicia. He received his first philosophical education in Alexandria at the school of Ammonius Hermiae, the author of a large commentary on the Peri Hermeneias and on some other logical, physical, and metaphysical treatises of Aristotle. These works strongly influenced not only the commentaries of Simplicius but also those written by the philosophers of the Alexandrian School: Asclepius, Philoponus, and Olympiodorus. Simplicius also studied philosophy at Athens in the school of Damascius, the author of Problems and Solutions About the First Principles, known for his doctrine of the Ineffable First Principle. According to Damascius, no name is capable of expressing adequately the nature of that Principle, not even the Plotinian name of "the One." Damascius was the last pagan Neoplatonist in the unbroken succession of the Athenian school, where he was teaching when Justinian closed it in 529. Simplicius, who at that time was a member of Damascius’ circle, left Athens with him and five other philosophers and moved to Persia (531-532). Their exile was only temporary, for they returned to the empire after the treaty of peace between the Byzantines and the Persians (533). According to Agathias (History, 11,31,4), the terms of the treaty would have guaranteed to the philosophers full security in their own environment: they were not to be compelled to accept anything against their personal conviction, and they were never to be prevented from living according to their own philosophical doctrine. There are grounds for supposing that Simplicius settled in Athens after returning from Persia. Presumably, he was not allowed to deliver public lectures and thus could devote all his time to research and writing. Hence his commentaries are not related to any teaching activity; rather, they show the character of written expositions that carefully analyze the Aristotelian text and interpret it in the light of the whole history of Greek philosophy. Simplicius always endeavored to harmonize and reconcile Plato and Aristotle by reducing the differences between them to a question of vocabulary, point of view, or even misunderstanding of some Platonic theories by the Stagirite. Simplicius was not the first to take this approach. According to W. Jaeger, this trend can be traced to Posidonius and to Neoplatonic philosophy in general. The same method was certainly used by Ammonius, who always attempted to reduce the opposition between Plato and Aristotle to different viewpoints. For example, in dealing with Aristotle’s criticism of the theory of Ideas, Ammonius believed this criticism to concern not the authentic doctrine of Plato, but rather the opinion of some philosophers who attributed to the Ideas an independent subsistence, separate from the Intellect of the Demiurge (Asclepius, In Metaphysicorum, 69,24-27; 73,27). Apparently, Simplicius was persuaded that this approach was in agreement with the attitude of the philopatheis and that it uncovered the true meaning of philosophical doctrines. At first glance, he said, some theories seem to be quite contradictory, but a more accurate inquiry shows them to be reconcilable (In de Caelo, 159,3-9). Moreover, in explaining a philosophical text, one should not be biased for or against its author. Hence Simplicius opposed the method of Alexander, who from the beginning is suspicious of Plato in the same way that others are inspired with prejudice against Aristotle (In de Caelo, 297,1-4). Since agreement on an opinion, even a prephilosophical one, has often been considered a criterion of truth, Aristotle and the Stoics frequently used the argument of universal agreement. Therefore, having to cope with the increasing influence of Christianity, late Neoplatonic philosophers wanted to argue against the presumed disaccord between the main representatives of Greek philosophy, Plato and Aristotle, in order to enhance their own doctrine. As a Christian, Philoponus did not have the same motives for harmonizing Plato and Aristotle; he firmly opposed attempts to reconcile them and called this interpretation a kind of mythology. Aristotle, he held, did not argue against those who misunderstood Plato but against the authentic Platonic doctrine. As a commentator, Simplicius did not overestimate his own contributions but was quite aware of his debt to other philosophers, especially to Alexander, Iamblichus, and Porphyry (In Categorias, 3,10-13). He did not hesitate to call his own commentaries a mere introduction to the writings of these famous masters (In Categorias, 3,13-17), nor did he cling fanatically to his own interpretations; he was happy to exchange them for better explanations (In Categorias, 350,8-9). On the other hand, the work of a commentator is far from being a neutral undertaking or a question of mere erudition; it is chiefly an opportunity to become more familiar with the text under consideration and to elucidate some intricate passages (In Enchiridion, Praefatio, 2,24-29; In de Caelo, 102,15; 166,14-16; In Categorias, 3,4-6). Hence Simplicius’ constant concern to obtain reliable documents and to check the historical value of this information, as when he verified the information provided by Alexander about the squaring of the circle according to Hippocrates of Chios (In Physicorum, 60,22-68, 32). Simplicius adhered to the Aristotelian doctrine of the eternity of the world, as a theory that fits perfectly into the Neoplatonic ontology insofar as the eternal movement of the heavens is a necessary link between the pure eternity of the intelligible reality and the temporal character of material beings. With respect to this question, Simplicius strongly opposed Philoponus, who asserted the beginning of the world through divine creation. Philoponus, however, did not argue as a Christian, nor did he base his refutation of the Aristotelian doctrine on arguments drawn from his Christian faith. According to him, God is the principle of whatever exists: if time is infinite, nothing may ever come to be, because an infinite number of conditions of possibility are to be fulfilled before anything could begin to exist—which is clearly impossible. Simplicius’ notion of “infinite” is different; it does not mean an infinity existing at once, but a possibility of transcending any boundary. Consequently, the conception of time exposed by both authors is not the same. Simplicius professed a cyclical conception; Philoponus adhered to a linear view without regular return of the same events. Philoponus also substantiated divine creation in time, without preexisting matter; whereas Simplicius maintained that although heaven, the first and highest corporeal reality, is totally dependent upon God, it has never come to exist; it must be eternal because it springs immediately from God. [introduction p. 440-441] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/dKqS8TkSYL9fWNO |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1393","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1393,"authors_free":[{"id":2163,"entry_id":1393,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2165,"entry_id":1393,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":354,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Gillispie, Charles Coulston","free_first_name":"Charles Coulston","free_last_name":"Gillispie","norm_person":{"id":354,"first_name":"Charles Coulston","last_name":"Gillispie","full_name":"Gillispie, Charles Coulston","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/117710539","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius"},"abstract":"Simplicius was one of the most famous representatives of Neoplatonism in the sixth century. An outstanding scholar, he was the author of extensive commentaries on Aristotle that contain much valuable information on previous Greek philosophy, including the pre-Socratics.\r\n\r\nVery little is known of his life. According to Agathias (History, 11,30,3), he was born in Cilicia. He received his first philosophical education in Alexandria at the school of Ammonius Hermiae, the author of a large commentary on the Peri Hermeneias and on some other logical, physical, and metaphysical treatises of Aristotle. These works strongly influenced not only the commentaries of Simplicius but also those written by the philosophers of the Alexandrian School: Asclepius, Philoponus, and Olympiodorus.\r\n\r\nSimplicius also studied philosophy at Athens in the school of Damascius, the author of Problems and Solutions About the First Principles, known for his doctrine of the Ineffable First Principle. According to Damascius, no name is capable of expressing adequately the nature of that Principle, not even the Plotinian name of \"the One.\" Damascius was the last pagan Neoplatonist in the unbroken succession of the Athenian school, where he was teaching when Justinian closed it in 529. Simplicius, who at that time was a member of Damascius\u2019 circle, left Athens with him and five other philosophers and moved to Persia (531-532). Their exile was only temporary, for they returned to the empire after the treaty of peace between the Byzantines and the Persians (533). According to Agathias (History, 11,31,4), the terms of the treaty would have guaranteed to the philosophers full security in their own environment: they were not to be compelled to accept anything against their personal conviction, and they were never to be prevented from living according to their own philosophical doctrine.\r\n\r\nThere are grounds for supposing that Simplicius settled in Athens after returning from Persia. Presumably, he was not allowed to deliver public lectures and thus could devote all his time to research and writing. Hence his commentaries are not related to any teaching activity; rather, they show the character of written expositions that carefully analyze the Aristotelian text and interpret it in the light of the whole history of Greek philosophy. Simplicius always endeavored to harmonize and reconcile Plato and Aristotle by reducing the differences between them to a question of vocabulary, point of view, or even misunderstanding of some Platonic theories by the Stagirite.\r\n\r\nSimplicius was not the first to take this approach. According to W. Jaeger, this trend can be traced to Posidonius and to Neoplatonic philosophy in general. The same method was certainly used by Ammonius, who always attempted to reduce the opposition between Plato and Aristotle to different viewpoints. For example, in dealing with Aristotle\u2019s criticism of the theory of Ideas, Ammonius believed this criticism to concern not the authentic doctrine of Plato, but rather the opinion of some philosophers who attributed to the Ideas an independent subsistence, separate from the Intellect of the Demiurge (Asclepius, In Metaphysicorum, 69,24-27; 73,27).\r\n\r\nApparently, Simplicius was persuaded that this approach was in agreement with the attitude of the philopatheis and that it uncovered the true meaning of philosophical doctrines. At first glance, he said, some theories seem to be quite contradictory, but a more accurate inquiry shows them to be reconcilable (In de Caelo, 159,3-9). Moreover, in explaining a philosophical text, one should not be biased for or against its author. Hence Simplicius opposed the method of Alexander, who from the beginning is suspicious of Plato in the same way that others are inspired with prejudice against Aristotle (In de Caelo, 297,1-4). Since agreement on an opinion, even a prephilosophical one, has often been considered a criterion of truth, Aristotle and the Stoics frequently used the argument of universal agreement. Therefore, having to cope with the increasing influence of Christianity, late Neoplatonic philosophers wanted to argue against the presumed disaccord between the main representatives of Greek philosophy, Plato and Aristotle, in order to enhance their own doctrine. As a Christian, Philoponus did not have the same motives for harmonizing Plato and Aristotle; he firmly opposed attempts to reconcile them and called this interpretation a kind of mythology. Aristotle, he held, did not argue against those who misunderstood Plato but against the authentic Platonic doctrine.\r\n\r\nAs a commentator, Simplicius did not overestimate his own contributions but was quite aware of his debt to other philosophers, especially to Alexander, Iamblichus, and Porphyry (In Categorias, 3,10-13). He did not hesitate to call his own commentaries a mere introduction to the writings of these famous masters (In Categorias, 3,13-17), nor did he cling fanatically to his own interpretations; he was happy to exchange them for better explanations (In Categorias, 350,8-9). On the other hand, the work of a commentator is far from being a neutral undertaking or a question of mere erudition; it is chiefly an opportunity to become more familiar with the text under consideration and to elucidate some intricate passages (In Enchiridion, Praefatio, 2,24-29; In de Caelo, 102,15; 166,14-16; In Categorias, 3,4-6). Hence Simplicius\u2019 constant concern to obtain reliable documents and to check the historical value of this information, as when he verified the information provided by Alexander about the squaring of the circle according to Hippocrates of Chios (In Physicorum, 60,22-68, 32).\r\n\r\nSimplicius adhered to the Aristotelian doctrine of the eternity of the world, as a theory that fits perfectly into the Neoplatonic ontology insofar as the eternal movement of the heavens is a necessary link between the pure eternity of the intelligible reality and the temporal character of material beings. With respect to this question, Simplicius strongly opposed Philoponus, who asserted the beginning of the world through divine creation. Philoponus, however, did not argue as a Christian, nor did he base his refutation of the Aristotelian doctrine on arguments drawn from his Christian faith. According to him, God is the principle of whatever exists: if time is infinite, nothing may ever come to be, because an infinite number of conditions of possibility are to be fulfilled before anything could begin to exist\u2014which is clearly impossible. Simplicius\u2019 notion of \u201cinfinite\u201d is different; it does not mean an infinity existing at once, but a possibility of transcending any boundary. Consequently, the conception of time exposed by both authors is not the same. Simplicius professed a cyclical conception; Philoponus adhered to a linear view without regular return of the same events. Philoponus also substantiated divine creation in time, without preexisting matter; whereas Simplicius maintained that although heaven, the first and highest corporeal reality, is totally dependent upon God, it has never come to exist; it must be eternal because it springs immediately from God. [introduction p. 440-441]","btype":2,"date":"1975","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/dKqS8TkSYL9fWNO","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":354,"full_name":"Gillispie, Charles Coulston","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1393,"section_of":1394,"pages":"440-443","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1394,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Volume XII: IBN RUSHD - JEAN-SERVAIS STAS","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1975","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Pt8Q1J4Rc3TbiFs","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1394,"pubplace":"New York","publisher":"Charles Scriber\u2019s Sons","series":"","volume":"XII","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Simplicius"]}
Title | Simplicius and others on Aristotle’s discussions of reason |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1988 |
Published in | Gonimos: Neoplatonic and Byzantine Studies presented to Leendert G. Westerink at 75 |
Pages | 103-119 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Blumenthal, Henry J. |
Editor(s) | Duffy, John , Peradotto, John J. |
Translator(s) |
What I want to do in this paper is to look at how Aristotle’s successors treated some points in his discussions of reason, and in particular the discussion in the De anima. bout their handling of relevant parts of the Nichomachaean Ethics we know very little, for unlike the De anima that treatise was not a major subject of study in the philosophical lectures and seminars of late antiquity. Though a commentary on some of it had been written by Aspasius, and notes by other, probably pre-Neoplatonic, hands survive,8 exposition of the Nicomachean Ethics seems to have been one of the gaps that the group of Aristotelians around Anna Comnena in twelfth-century Constantinople felt that they needed to fill. [pp. 104 f.] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/fYDdU8vNuJj4BJd |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"784","_score":null,"_source":{"id":784,"authors_free":[{"id":1154,"entry_id":784,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2428,"entry_id":784,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":109,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Duffy, John","free_first_name":"John","free_last_name":"Duffy","norm_person":{"id":109,"first_name":"John","last_name":"Duffy","full_name":"Duffy, John","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1032769092","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2429,"entry_id":784,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":110,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Peradotto, John J.","free_first_name":"John J.","free_last_name":"Peradotto","norm_person":{"id":110,"first_name":"John J.","last_name":"Peradotto","full_name":"Peradotto, John J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/172304636","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius and others on Aristotle\u2019s discussions of reason","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius and others on Aristotle\u2019s discussions of reason"},"abstract":"What I want to do in this paper is to look at how Aristotle\u2019s \r\nsuccessors treated some points in his discussions of reason, and in \r\nparticular the discussion in the De anima. bout their handling of \r\nrelevant parts of the Nichomachaean Ethics we know very little, for \r\nunlike the De anima that treatise was not a major subject of study in \r\nthe philosophical lectures and seminars of late antiquity. Though a \r\ncommentary on some of it had been written by Aspasius, and notes by \r\nother, probably pre-Neoplatonic, hands survive,8 exposition of the \r\nNicomachean Ethics seems to have been one of the gaps that the group \r\nof Aristotelians around Anna Comnena in twelfth-century Constantinople felt that they needed to fill. [pp. 104 f.]","btype":2,"date":"1988","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/fYDdU8vNuJj4BJd","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":109,"full_name":"Duffy, John","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":110,"full_name":"Peradotto, John J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":784,"section_of":35,"pages":"103-119","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":35,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Gonimos: Neoplatonic and Byzantine Studies presented to Leendert G. Westerink at 75","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Duffy1988","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1988","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1988","abstract":"This volume, dedicated to the scholar Leendert G. Westerink, comprises 16 articles across two main areas of his research interests: Neo-Platonic and Byzantine studies. The six Neo-Platonic articles explore subjects such as manuscript histories, philosophical debates, and influences of figures like Porphyry, Iamblichus, and Proclus. Notably, Father Saffrey investigates an anonymous commentary on Parmenides, while other authors delve into Neo-Platonic mathematics, hymns, and commentaries on Aristotle\u2019s discussions of reason.\r\n\r\nThe ten Byzantine studies articles cover a diverse range of historical and cultural insights. Topics include Byzantine letter-writing practices, with George Dennis highlighting humor in personal correspondence, and Cyril Mango examining the collapse of St. Sophia. Further articles focus on figures such as Psellus, Patriarch Cosmas, and fourteenth-century scholar Georgios Karbones, alongside explorations of political and religious tensions in the Ionian Islands under various European rulers. This collection offers an in-depth look at both Neo-Platonic philosophy and Byzantine cultural dynamics, illustrating the intellectual legacy of Westerink\u2019s scholarship. [summary of Lucas Siorvanes' Review]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/QCXOrqqEdxnvWCD","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":35,"pubplace":"Buffalo \u2013 New York","publisher":"Arethusa","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Simplicius and others on Aristotle\u2019s discussions of reason"]}
Title | Simplicius et l'école' éléate |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 166-182 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Cordero, Néstor-Luis |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
This text discusses the concept of the Eleatic school of philosophy, which is attributed to the philosophers Parmenides and Xenophanes. The author argues that the school may not have actually existed as a unified movement, but rather was an invention to help classify the philosophical systems of ancient Greece. The author discusses the historical development of the Eleatic school from Plato to Simplicius and analyzes the presentation of the four Eleatic philosophers by Simplicius. The author concludes that Simplicius, like Plato and Aristotle before him, considers Parmenides to be the central figure of the Eleatic school. The text also examines the reasons why the Eleatic school has been characterized as monistic, and argues that this may be due to a misinterpretation of the works of Parmenides and Melissus. [introduction/conclusion] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/TmkANfK25JZ4wfH |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1278","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1278,"authors_free":[{"id":1867,"entry_id":1278,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":54,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Cordero, N\u00e9stor-Luis","free_first_name":"N\u00e9stor-Luis","free_last_name":"Cordero","norm_person":{"id":54,"first_name":"N\u00e9stor-Luis","last_name":"Cordero","full_name":"Cordero, N\u00e9stor-Luis","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1055808973","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2346,"entry_id":1278,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Simplicius et l'\u00e9cole' \u00e9l\u00e9ate","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius et l'\u00e9cole' \u00e9l\u00e9ate"},"abstract":"This text discusses the concept of the Eleatic school of philosophy, which is attributed to the philosophers Parmenides and Xenophanes. The author argues that the school may not have actually existed as a unified movement, but rather was an invention to help classify the philosophical systems of ancient Greece. The author discusses the historical development of the Eleatic school from Plato to Simplicius and analyzes the presentation of the four Eleatic philosophers by Simplicius. The author concludes that Simplicius, like Plato and Aristotle before him, considers Parmenides to be the central figure of the Eleatic school. The text also examines the reasons why the Eleatic school has been characterized as monistic, and argues that this may be due to a misinterpretation of the works of Parmenides and Melissus. [introduction\/conclusion]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/TmkANfK25JZ4wfH","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":54,"full_name":"Cordero, N\u00e9stor-Luis","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1278,"section_of":171,"pages":"166-182","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Simplicius et l'\u00e9cole' \u00e9l\u00e9ate"]}
Title | Simplicius' Testimony Concerning Anaxagoras |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1989 |
Published in | Ionian Philosophy |
Pages | 369-374 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Sylvestre, Maria Luisa |
Editor(s) | Boudouris, Konstantin, J. |
Translator(s) |
This text discusses Simplicius' testimony concerning Anaxagoras and the authenticity of the fragments attributed to Anaxagoras, which are mostly preserved by Simplicius. While scholars have debated the authenticity of Simplicius' fragments, the author believes in Simplicius' faithfulness to the true doctrine of Anaxagoras. However, the author notes that Simplicius wrote about a thousand years after Anaxagoras, was a pupil of Proclus, and a neo-Platonist himself. The text highlights the importance of comparing Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle with the corresponding text of Aristotle to understand his personal interpretation of Anaxagoras. Finally, the text briefly discusses Anaxagoras' concept of nous and its interpretation by Plato, Aristotle, and Simplicius. [introduction/conclusion] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/gJ3DXudfcNprrxr |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1385","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1385,"authors_free":[{"id":2137,"entry_id":1385,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":327,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sylvestre, Maria Luisa","free_first_name":"Maria Luisa","free_last_name":"Sylvestre","norm_person":{"id":327,"first_name":"Maria Luisa","last_name":"Sylvestre","full_name":"Sylvestre, Maria Luisa","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2138,"entry_id":1385,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":328,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Boudouris, Konstantin, J.","free_first_name":"Konstantin, J.","free_last_name":"Boudouris","norm_person":{"id":328,"first_name":"Konstantin J.","last_name":"Boudouris,","full_name":"Boudouris, Konstantin J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1041800053","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius' Testimony Concerning Anaxagoras","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius' Testimony Concerning Anaxagoras"},"abstract":"This text discusses Simplicius' testimony concerning Anaxagoras and the authenticity of the fragments attributed to Anaxagoras, which are mostly preserved by Simplicius. While scholars have debated the authenticity of Simplicius' fragments, the author believes in Simplicius' faithfulness to the true doctrine of Anaxagoras. However, the author notes that Simplicius wrote about a thousand years after Anaxagoras, was a pupil of Proclus, and a neo-Platonist himself. The text highlights the importance of comparing Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle with the corresponding text of Aristotle to understand his personal interpretation of Anaxagoras. Finally, the text briefly discusses Anaxagoras' concept of nous and its interpretation by Plato, Aristotle, and Simplicius. [introduction\/conclusion]","btype":2,"date":"1989","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/gJ3DXudfcNprrxr","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":327,"full_name":"Sylvestre, Maria Luisa","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":328,"full_name":"Boudouris, Konstantin J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1385,"section_of":238,"pages":"369-374","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":238,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Ionian Philosophy","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Boudouris1989","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1989","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1989","abstract":"\u2018The articles in this volume are, in the main, the texts of papers read either in full or in part at the First International Conference on Greek Philosophy (Samos 1988)\u2019 (from the editor\u2019s Preface). Appropriately to such a first conference, it was devoted to the beginnings of philosophy in Greece and, more specifically, in Ionia itself. The volume includes forty- seven papers dealing with all the major figures of Ionian philosophy, from the Milesians to Anaxagoras. Pythagoras, the most illustrious native of Samos, and the Pythagoreans (technically considered an \u2018Italian\u2019 sect, but included by courtesy in the theme of the conference), attract the attention of seven scholars. The other notable Samian, Melissus, is the subject of only one contribution, by D. Furley, possibly because Melissus is usually\r\nBOOK REVIEWS 141classified by the doxographers as an Eleatic. Xenophanes of Colophon is dealt with in five of the articles. Perhaps not surprisingly, almost half of the papers deal with Heraclitus of Ephesus, just across the water from Samos. Among those excluded from this book are the Italians Parmenides, Zeno and Empedocles, and the atomists of Abdera\" [Review Scolnicov]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/9oSZ8qRrH4iopVv","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":238,"pubplace":"Athen","publisher":"International Association for Greek Philosophy and Center for Greek Philosophy and Culture","series":"Studies in Greek Philosophy","volume":"1","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Simplicius' Testimony Concerning Anaxagoras"]}
Title | Simplicius' polemics. Some aspects of Simplicius‘ polemical writings against John Philoponus: From invective to a reaffirmation of the transcendence of the heavens |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science. Second Edition |
Pages | 97-123 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hoffmann, Philippe |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
I am not entirely comfortable finding myself introducing a discordant note into a collection intended to celebrate the refreshing originality of Philoponus’ ideas. I shall, however, be speaking for Simplicius, vindictive pagan that he was, and shall hope to be an effective counterweight to what is said in other chapters. I shall be talking within the framework of a general interpretation of Simplicius’ commentary on Aristotle’s De caelo. The commentary is an exegetical work undertaken as a paean to the Creator or ‘Demiurge.’ Its basic theory on the physical structure of celestial matter is that this matter is a combination of the superior parts (akrotêtes) of the four elements, dominated by the purely luminous superior part of fire. My aim will be to show how this theory can be seen as a reaction to the theories of John Philoponus. Philoponus had turned to the Timaeus for support in his Contra Aristotelem and had attacked the Aristotelian doctrine that the heavens are made of a fifth element and that the world is eternal. Well before Copernicus, Philoponus denied that there was any substantial difference between the heavens and the sublunary world. In his reply to the Contra Aristotelem, Simplicius reaffirms the divinity, the transcendence, and the eternal nature of the heavens. His exegesis aims to connect, rather than contrast, Plato’s Timaeus and Aristotle’s De caelo. It is, moreover, a religious act, a spiritual exercise designed to turn the soul (both Simplicius’ and his reader’s) towards the Demiurge. This conversion is our initiation into the grandeur of the universe and of the heavens, and his description of the physical nature of the heavens is one of the most valuable aspects of the revelation. Those readers still under Philoponus’ spell cannot achieve this revelation until they have undergone a preliminary act of purification, which is the refutation of the arguments of Philoponus’ Contra Aristotelem. In this way, Simplicius’ attack is directed at a target that is simultaneously philosophical and religious. A correct reading and interpretation of Aristotle’s De caelo leads not only to the acquisition of intellectual knowledge but also, and above all, to our elevation through thought (a thought that we live) to the whole universe and to the Demiurge. It is a form of prayer addressed to them. The sacrilegious blasphemy of the Christian Philoponus is countered by the Neoplatonist liturgy, a rightful celebration of their God. [introduction p. 97-98] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/RJi3pyBneebP54s |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"712","_score":null,"_source":{"id":712,"authors_free":[{"id":1062,"entry_id":712,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":138,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe","free_first_name":"Philippe","free_last_name":"Hoffmann","norm_person":{"id":138,"first_name":"Philippe ","last_name":"Hoffmann","full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/189361905","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2012,"entry_id":712,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius' polemics. Some aspects of Simplicius\u2018 polemical writings against John Philoponus: From invective to a reaffirmation of the transcendence of the heavens","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius' polemics. Some aspects of Simplicius\u2018 polemical writings against John Philoponus: From invective to a reaffirmation of the transcendence of the heavens"},"abstract":"I am not entirely comfortable finding myself introducing a discordant note into a collection intended to celebrate the refreshing originality of Philoponus\u2019 ideas. I shall, however, be speaking for Simplicius, vindictive pagan that he was, and shall hope to be an effective counterweight to what is said in other chapters. I shall be talking within the framework of a general interpretation of Simplicius\u2019 commentary on Aristotle\u2019s De caelo. The commentary is an exegetical work undertaken as a paean to the Creator or \u2018Demiurge.\u2019 Its basic theory on the physical structure of celestial matter is that this matter is a combination of the superior parts (akrot\u00eates) of the four elements, dominated by the purely luminous superior part of fire.\r\n\r\nMy aim will be to show how this theory can be seen as a reaction to the theories of John Philoponus. Philoponus had turned to the Timaeus for support in his Contra Aristotelem and had attacked the Aristotelian doctrine that the heavens are made of a fifth element and that the world is eternal. Well before Copernicus, Philoponus denied that there was any substantial difference between the heavens and the sublunary world. In his reply to the Contra Aristotelem, Simplicius reaffirms the divinity, the transcendence, and the eternal nature of the heavens. His exegesis aims to connect, rather than contrast, Plato\u2019s Timaeus and Aristotle\u2019s De caelo.\r\n\r\nIt is, moreover, a religious act, a spiritual exercise designed to turn the soul (both Simplicius\u2019 and his reader\u2019s) towards the Demiurge. This conversion is our initiation into the grandeur of the universe and of the heavens, and his description of the physical nature of the heavens is one of the most valuable aspects of the revelation. Those readers still under Philoponus\u2019 spell cannot achieve this revelation until they have undergone a preliminary act of purification, which is the refutation of the arguments of Philoponus\u2019 Contra Aristotelem. In this way, Simplicius\u2019 attack is directed at a target that is simultaneously philosophical and religious.\r\n\r\nA correct reading and interpretation of Aristotle\u2019s De caelo leads not only to the acquisition of intellectual knowledge but also, and above all, to our elevation through thought (a thought that we live) to the whole universe and to the Demiurge. It is a form of prayer addressed to them. The sacrilegious blasphemy of the Christian Philoponus is countered by the Neoplatonist liturgy, a rightful celebration of their God. [introduction p. 97-98]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/RJi3pyBneebP54s","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":138,"full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":712,"section_of":184,"pages":"97-123","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":184,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science. Second Edition","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sorabji1987c","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2010","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Richard Sorabji is the editor of a vast and growing number of translations of ancient\r\ncommentaries on Aristotle and the editor of several excellent collections of studies on the\r\nAristotelian tradition. Philoponus, a 6th century Christian thinker who was originally trained as\r\na Neoplatonist, is best remembered today for his attack on Aristotle's 'physics'; his influence on\r\nlater philosophers and scientists and his role in the reevaluation of Aristotelian science and\r\nnatural philosophy are indeed remarkable. The second edition of Philoponus and the Rejection\r\nof Aristotelian Science includes a new two-part introduction which offers a survey of the\r\nrapidly expanding scholarship on Philoponus and of recent archeological discoveries (such as\r\nthe lecture rooms of the 6th century Alexandrian school), as well as new insights into the\r\ninteraction between Greek paganism and Christianity in connection with Philoponus and his\r\nmilieu. The twelve chapters included in this collection are written by very prominent scholars\r\nand tackle topics such as Philoponus' corollaries on space and time, the differences between his\r\ntheological views (e.g. on the three hypostases) and the prevailing dogmas of the time, the\r\nrelation between his theory about impetus and later treatments of impetus and related\r\nconcepts in a number of Arab thinkers and in Galileo. This collection is one of the most reliable\r\nand wide-ranging introductions to Philoponus' views and influence, and those interested in late\r\nancient philosophy and its interactions with Christian thought will find this to be a most\r\nvaluable resource. [Review by Tiberiu Popa]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/CJSIbOOK7lIAB00","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":184,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Institute of Classical Studies, School of Advanced Study, University of London","series":"BICS Supplement","volume":"103","edition_no":"2","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Simplicius' polemics. Some aspects of Simplicius\u2018 polemical writings against John Philoponus: From invective to a reaffirmation of the transcendence of the heavens"]}
Title | Simplicius: Corollarium de loco |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1979 |
Published in | L'Astronomie dans l'antiquité classique. Actes du Colloque tenu à l'Université de Toulouse-le-Mirail, 21–23 Octobre, 1977 |
Pages | 143-161 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hoffmann, Philippe |
Editor(s) | Aujac, Germaine , Soubiran, Jean |
Translator(s) |
En conclusion : La définition aristotélicienne du lieu comme « première limite immobile de l'enveloppant » tente de concilier deux exigences contradictoires : le lieu est une enveloppe et il est immobile. Aristote est contraint de dire que le Monde n'est pas en un lieu, puisqu'il n'est enveloppé par rien : s'il n'est nulle part, il ne peut non plus se mouvoir localement, ce qui est en contradiction avec l'« expérience » et avec d’autres exigences du système (la dignité du mouvement circulaire uniforme et éternel convient à la substance céleste). Proclus, sur la base de la problématique aristotélicienne, interprète l'enveloppement par le lieu du corps situé en lui comme une compénétration totale de l’un et de l'autre. Sa solution est plus physique et plus cosmologique que celle de Damascius : le lieu est une sphère corporelle de lumière pure en coïncidence parfaite avec la sphère cosmique. Le lieu est immobile, tandis que l'Univers se meut en lui. Damascius propose une solution plus métaphysique : le lieu est la mesure (incorporelle, quoique sensible) de la position. L'Univers a un lieu fixe, son lieu essentiel, d'où procèdent les lieux successifs qui sont les siens au cours de son mouvement. Proclus et Damascius, chacun à leur manière, établissent donc : que le Monde a un lieu (fixe) ; que le Monde se meut localement. Ils triomphent ainsi des apories dans lesquelles s'engageait la pensée d'Aristote. [conclusion p. 161] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/2CpsO1R1mVMqjay |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"510","_score":null,"_source":{"id":510,"authors_free":[{"id":707,"entry_id":510,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":138,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe","free_first_name":"Philippe","free_last_name":"Hoffmann","norm_person":{"id":138,"first_name":"Philippe ","last_name":"Hoffmann","full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/189361905","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":708,"entry_id":510,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":183,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Aujac, Germaine","free_first_name":"Germaine","free_last_name":"Aujac","norm_person":{"id":183,"first_name":"Germaine","last_name":"Aujac","full_name":"Aujac, Germaine","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/132761629","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":709,"entry_id":510,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":184,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Soubiran, Jean","free_first_name":"Jean","free_last_name":"Soubiran","norm_person":{"id":184,"first_name":"Jean","last_name":"Soubiran","full_name":"Soubiran, Jean","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/124279694","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius: Corollarium de loco","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius: Corollarium de loco"},"abstract":"En conclusion : La d\u00e9finition aristot\u00e9licienne du lieu comme \u00ab premi\u00e8re limite immobile de l'enveloppant \u00bb tente de concilier deux exigences contradictoires : le lieu est une enveloppe et il est immobile. Aristote est contraint de dire que le Monde n'est pas en un lieu, puisqu'il n'est envelopp\u00e9 par rien : s'il n'est nulle part, il ne peut non plus se mouvoir localement, ce qui est en contradiction avec l'\u00ab exp\u00e9rience \u00bb et avec d\u2019autres exigences du syst\u00e8me (la dignit\u00e9 du mouvement circulaire uniforme et \u00e9ternel convient \u00e0 la substance c\u00e9leste).\r\n\r\n Proclus, sur la base de la probl\u00e9matique aristot\u00e9licienne, interpr\u00e8te l'enveloppement par le lieu du corps situ\u00e9 en lui comme une comp\u00e9n\u00e9tration totale de l\u2019un et de l'autre. Sa solution est plus physique et plus cosmologique que celle de Damascius : le lieu est une sph\u00e8re corporelle de lumi\u00e8re pure en co\u00efncidence parfaite avec la sph\u00e8re cosmique. Le lieu est immobile, tandis que l'Univers se meut en lui.\r\n\r\n Damascius propose une solution plus m\u00e9taphysique : le lieu est la mesure (incorporelle, quoique sensible) de la position. L'Univers a un lieu fixe, son lieu essentiel, d'o\u00f9 proc\u00e8dent les lieux successifs qui sont les siens au cours de son mouvement.\r\n\r\nProclus et Damascius, chacun \u00e0 leur mani\u00e8re, \u00e9tablissent donc :\r\n\r\n que le Monde a un lieu (fixe) ;\r\n que le Monde se meut localement.\r\n\r\nIls triomphent ainsi des apories dans lesquelles s'engageait la pens\u00e9e d'Aristote. [conclusion p. 161]","btype":2,"date":"1979","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/2CpsO1R1mVMqjay","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":138,"full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":183,"full_name":"Aujac, Germaine","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":184,"full_name":"Soubiran, Jean","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":510,"section_of":140,"pages":"143-161","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":140,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"L'Astronomie dans l'antiquit\u00e9 classique. Actes du Colloque tenu \u00e0 l'Universit\u00e9 de Toulouse-le-Mirail, 21\u201323 Octobre, 1977","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Aujac\/Soubiran1979","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1979","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1979","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/TPeLfUa6KvbM1BN","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":140,"pubplace":"Paris","publisher":"Les Belles Lettres","series":"Collection d'\u00c9tudes Anciennes","volume":"","edition_no":null,"valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Simplicius: Corollarium de loco"]}
Title | Simplicius: Prime Matter as Extension |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 148-165 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
What conclusions can now be drawn? It is time to say that I do not think Aristotle reached the point of consciously thinking that extension would play the role of prime matter. It took the Neoplatonist Simplicius to interpret him that way, motivated by reasons of his own. The diffuseness of extension will have seemed important to Simplicius because it puts prime matter where it should be, at the opposite extreme from the unity of the One. He knew that Plato had been taken as identifying prime matter with space or with other kinds of extension, and, although he disagreed, he thought he found the justification for such an interpretation of Aristotle at least in Phys. 4,2, if not in the Metaphysics as well. But even if Simplicius' interpretation does not represent Aristotle's conscious thought, it opens new vistas. For one thing, I believe that extension would fit with Aristotle's conception of prime matter, and fit better than anything else that has been proposed. Furthermore, in considering how it would fit, we have been forced to consider a network of interlocking parts of Aristotle's philosophy. Some of the parts would require modification if extension were to be openly acknowledged as playing the role of prime matter, but the resulting modifications would yield a coherent view. Finally, views of the same general sort, which treat body as some kind of extension endowed with properties, have recurred through the ages, for example in Descartes, in Newton, and in twentieth-century physics. [conclusion p. 162-163] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/h6HONd1UnE1D8Vw |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"487","_score":null,"_source":{"id":487,"authors_free":[{"id":665,"entry_id":487,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":666,"entry_id":487,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Simplicius: Prime Matter as Extension","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius: Prime Matter as Extension"},"abstract":"What conclusions can now be drawn? It is time to say that I do not think Aristotle reached the point of consciously thinking that extension would play the role of prime matter. It took the Neoplatonist Simplicius to interpret him that way, motivated by reasons of his own.\r\n\r\nThe diffuseness of extension will have seemed important to Simplicius because it puts prime matter where it should be, at the opposite extreme from the unity of the One. He knew that Plato had been taken as identifying prime matter with space or with other kinds of extension, and, although he disagreed, he thought he found the justification for such an interpretation of Aristotle at least in Phys. 4,2, if not in the Metaphysics as well.\r\n\r\nBut even if Simplicius' interpretation does not represent Aristotle's conscious thought, it opens new vistas. For one thing, I believe that extension would fit with Aristotle's conception of prime matter, and fit better than anything else that has been proposed. Furthermore, in considering how it would fit, we have been forced to consider a network of interlocking parts of Aristotle's philosophy.\r\n\r\nSome of the parts would require modification if extension were to be openly acknowledged as playing the role of prime matter, but the resulting modifications would yield a coherent view. Finally, views of the same general sort, which treat body as some kind of extension endowed with properties, have recurred through the ages, for example in Descartes, in Newton, and in twentieth-century physics. [conclusion p. 162-163]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/h6HONd1UnE1D8Vw","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":487,"section_of":171,"pages":"148-165","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Simplicius: Prime Matter as Extension"]}
Title | Some Later Neoplatonic Views on Divine Creation and the Eternity of the World |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1981 |
Published in | Neoplatonism and Christian thought |
Pages | 45-53 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Verbeke, Gérard |
Editor(s) | O'Meara, Dominic J. |
Translator(s) |
The commentary of Simplicius on Aristotle’s Physics is particularly inter esting thanks to the rich information it provides concerning the doctrines of pre vious philosophers. His interpretation shows a great erudition, but it is not always faithful to the authentic thought of Aristotle. The first cause of Aristotle is not that of Simplicius and this is not the only case in which Simplicius gave to Aristotelian thought a turn that does not correspond to its original content. A similar distortion may be found in the interpretation of the intricate question of chance and fortune. It is more difficult to formulate a judgment about the commentary of Philoponus: to what extent does it reflect the teaching of Ammonius? In any case, the interpretation is very penetrating, especially in those passages where the author criticizes the doctrine of Aristotle and expresses manifestly his own ideas. Alfarabi takes Philoponus to task for settling a philosophical question with the help of religious doctrines:60 nothing is less true, as W. Wieland has already noticed. Philoponus, rather, uses Aristotelian philosophy in order to refute Aristotle.61 On the other hand he appeals to the concept of creation against the eternity of the world: he very sharply notices, perhaps also under the influence of Ammonius, that creation as an integral causation is not a movement and does not belong to the continuous process of coming-to-be and passing away. Thanks mainly to the concept of creation, the author escapes from the eternity of movement and time. [conclusion p. 52-53] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/QSUX1JffS4trd4H |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"450","_score":null,"_source":{"id":450,"authors_free":[{"id":603,"entry_id":450,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":348,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","free_first_name":"G\u00e9rard","free_last_name":"Verbeke","norm_person":{"id":348,"first_name":"G\u00e9rard","last_name":"Verbeke","full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/118947583","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":604,"entry_id":450,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":279,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","free_first_name":"Dominic J.","free_last_name":"O'Meara","norm_person":{"id":279,"first_name":"Dominic J.","last_name":"O'Meara","full_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/11180664X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Some Later Neoplatonic Views on Divine Creation and the Eternity of the World","main_title":{"title":"Some Later Neoplatonic Views on Divine Creation and the Eternity of the World"},"abstract":"The commentary of Simplicius on Aristotle\u2019s Physics is particularly inter\u00ad\r\nesting thanks to the rich information it provides concerning the doctrines of pre\u00ad\r\nvious philosophers. His interpretation shows a great erudition, but it is not always \r\nfaithful to the authentic thought of Aristotle. The first cause of Aristotle is not \r\nthat of Simplicius and this is not the only case in which Simplicius gave to \r\nAristotelian thought a turn that does not correspond to its original content. A similar \r\ndistortion may be found in the interpretation of the intricate question of chance \r\nand fortune. It is more difficult to formulate a judgment about the commentary \r\nof Philoponus: to what extent does it reflect the teaching of Ammonius? In any \r\ncase, the interpretation is very penetrating, especially in those passages where \r\nthe author criticizes the doctrine of Aristotle and expresses manifestly his own \r\nideas. Alfarabi takes Philoponus to task for settling a philosophical question with \r\nthe help of religious doctrines:60 nothing is less true, as W. Wieland has already \r\nnoticed. Philoponus, rather, uses Aristotelian philosophy in order to refute \r\nAristotle.61 On the other hand he appeals to the concept of creation against the eternity of the world: he very sharply notices, perhaps also under the influence of \r\nAmmonius, that creation as an integral causation is not a movement and does not \r\nbelong to the continuous process of coming-to-be and passing away. Thanks mainly \r\nto the concept of creation, the author escapes from the eternity of movement \r\nand time. [conclusion p. 52-53]","btype":2,"date":"1981","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/QSUX1JffS4trd4H","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":348,"full_name":"Verbeke, G\u00e9rard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":279,"full_name":"O'Meara, Dominic J.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":450,"section_of":12,"pages":"45-53","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":12,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Neoplatonism and Christian thought","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"O'Meara1982","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1982","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1981","abstract":"In this volume, the relationships between two of the most vital currents in Western thought are examined by a group of nineteen internationally known specialists in a variety of disciplines\u2014classics, patristics, philosophy, theology, history of ideas, literature. The contributing scholars discuss Neoplatonic theories about God, creation, man, and salvation, in relation to the ways in which they were adopted, adapted, or rejected by major Christian thinkers of five periods: Patristic, Later Greek and Byzantine, Medieval, Renaissance, and Modern. [a.a]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/8tb5ZmmacZhgjDn","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":12,"pubplace":"Albany","publisher":"State University of New York Press","series":"Studies in Neoplatonism: Ancient and Modern","volume":"3","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Some Later Neoplatonic Views on Divine Creation and the Eternity of the World"]}
Title | Strato’s theory of the void |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1985 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 1: Aristoteles und seine Schule |
Pages | 594-609 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Furley, David J. |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
At the beginning of his Corollary on Place (In Phys. 601, 14-24), Simplicius classifies theories about place, as follows. First, there is a distinction between those who make place a corporeal thing and those who suppose it is incorporeal. Only Proclus falls into the first class. O f the latter, some think it is without extension, the rest think it is extended. The first group consists of Plato, who said place is the material substrate of bodies, and Damascius, who said it is that which completes the nature of bodies. The second group is further subdivided, into those who held place to be extended in two dimen sions, “as Aristotle and the whole Peripatos did”, and those who gave it three dimensions. The latter can be subdivided again: on the one hand, there is the school of Democritus and Epicurus, who held that place is everywhere undifferentiated, and sometimes persists without any body in it, and on the other hand, “the famous Plato- nists and Strato of Lampsacus”, who said that place is an extended interval (diastema) that always contains body and is adapted to its particular occupant... [p. 594] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/67tMakGWPrXgZyV |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"785","_score":null,"_source":{"id":785,"authors_free":[{"id":1157,"entry_id":785,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":103,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Furley, David J. ","free_first_name":"David J. ","free_last_name":"Furley","norm_person":{"id":103,"first_name":"David J. ","last_name":"Furley","full_name":"Furley, David J. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/138978131","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2354,"entry_id":785,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Strato\u2019s theory of the void","main_title":{"title":"Strato\u2019s theory of the void"},"abstract":"At the beginning of his Corollary on Place (In Phys. 601, 14-24), \r\nSimplicius classifies theories about place, as follows. First, there is a \r\ndistinction between those who make place a corporeal thing and \r\nthose who suppose it is incorporeal. Only Proclus falls into the first \r\nclass. O f the latter, some think it is without extension, the rest think \r\nit is extended. The first group consists of Plato, who said place is the \r\nmaterial substrate of bodies, and Damascius, who said it is that \r\nwhich completes the nature of bodies. The second group is further \r\nsubdivided, into those who held place to be extended in two dimen\u00ad\r\nsions, \u201cas Aristotle and the whole Peripatos did\u201d, and those who \r\ngave it three dimensions. The latter can be subdivided again: on the \r\none hand, there is the school of Democritus and Epicurus, who held \r\nthat place is everywhere undifferentiated, and sometimes persists \r\nwithout any body in it, and on the other hand, \u201cthe famous Plato- \r\nnists and Strato of Lampsacus\u201d, who said that place is an extended \r\ninterval (diastema) that always contains body and is adapted to its \r\nparticular occupant... [p. 594]","btype":2,"date":"1985","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/67tMakGWPrXgZyV","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":103,"full_name":"Furley, David J. ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":785,"section_of":190,"pages":"594-609","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":190,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 1: Aristoteles und seine Schule","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Plezia\/Verdenius\/P\u00e9pin1985","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1985","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1985","abstract":"Der hier vorgelegte erste Band eines zweiteiligen Werkes, das \r\nAristoteles und dem Aristotelismus gewidmet ist, enth\u00e4lt 31 Origi-\r\nnalbeitr\u00e4ge zum Corpus Aristotelicum und zum alten Peripatos. \r\nKommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles bil-\r\nden das Thema des zweiten Bandes, der so bald als m\u00f6glich folgen \r\nwird. [Vorwort]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/fo2YolqZedXU2Im","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":190,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"","volume":"1","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Strato\u2019s theory of the void"]}
Title | Sur quelques aspects de la polémique de Simplicius contre Jean Philopon: de l’invective à la réaffirmation de la transcendance du ciel |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 183-221 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Hoffmann, Philippe |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
Le Commentaire de Simplicius au De caelo d'Aristote, vaste ouvrage exégétique conçu comme un hymne au Démiurge, présente une doctrine fondamentale sur la structure physique de la substance céleste : celle-ci, nous dit Simplicius, est un mélange des cimes (akrotêtes) des quatre éléments, c'est-à-dire un mélange des quatre éléments dans leur état le plus principiel et le plus pur, et dans ce mélange prédomine la cime, purement lumineuse, du feu. Cette doctrine n'est pas, quant à ses matériaux conceptuels, une création neuve ou originale de Simplicius, car de manière plus détaillée encore, on la rencontre dans le troisième livre du Commentaire de Proclus au Timée. Mais je voudrais montrer, dans le cadre d'une interprétation générale du Commentaire au De caelo, que Simplicius en donne une démonstration et en fait un usage qui lui sont propres, et qui se comprennent en grande partie comme une réaction face aux théories de Jean Philopon. Ce dernier s'était appuyé sur le Timée pour réfuter la doctrine aristotélicienne de la quintessence et de l'éternité du monde, et il niait, bien avant Copernic, toute différence substantielle entre les cieux et le monde sublunaire. Réfutant les théories du Contra Aristotelem de Philopon, Simplicius réaffirme la divinité, la transcendance et l’éternité du ciel, dans une exégèse qui vise à harmoniser (et non à opposer) le Timée et le De caelo. Cette exégèse est un acte religieux, un exercice spirituel qui convertit l'âme (celle de Simplicius et celle de son lecteur) vers le Démiurge. Cette conversion est une initiation aux grandeurs du monde et du ciel, et la description de la nature physique du ciel est l’un des contenus les plus précieux de la révélation. Celle-ci ne peut être procurée aux lecteurs momentanément abusés par Philopon qu’au terme d’une purification préparatoire, qui est la réfutation des analyses du Contra Aristotelem. Ainsi, la polémique de Simplicius est orientée vers une visée indissolublement philosophique et religieuse : lire et interpréter correctement le De caelo d’Aristote, ce n’est pas seulement acquérir des connaissances intellectuelles, c’est aussi, et surtout, s’élever par la pensée (mais de manière « vécue ») jusqu’au monde et au Démiurge, c’est leur adresser une prière. Au sacrilège blasphématoire du chrétien Philopon répond la liturgie néoplatonicienne, juste célébration du Dieu. [introduction p. 183-184] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/wBslsmZjGCgfHjc |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"688","_score":null,"_source":{"id":688,"authors_free":[{"id":1022,"entry_id":688,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":138,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe","free_first_name":"Philippe","free_last_name":"Hoffmann","norm_person":{"id":138,"first_name":"Philippe ","last_name":"Hoffmann","full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/189361905","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1023,"entry_id":688,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Sur quelques aspects de la pol\u00e9mique de Simplicius contre Jean Philopon: de l\u2019invective \u00e0 la r\u00e9affirmation de la transcendance du ciel","main_title":{"title":"Sur quelques aspects de la pol\u00e9mique de Simplicius contre Jean Philopon: de l\u2019invective \u00e0 la r\u00e9affirmation de la transcendance du ciel"},"abstract":"Le Commentaire de Simplicius au De caelo d'Aristote, vaste ouvrage ex\u00e9g\u00e9tique con\u00e7u comme un hymne au D\u00e9miurge, pr\u00e9sente une doctrine fondamentale sur la structure physique de la substance c\u00e9leste : celle-ci, nous dit Simplicius, est un m\u00e9lange des cimes (akrot\u00eates) des quatre \u00e9l\u00e9ments, c'est-\u00e0-dire un m\u00e9lange des quatre \u00e9l\u00e9ments dans leur \u00e9tat le plus principiel et le plus pur, et dans ce m\u00e9lange pr\u00e9domine la cime, purement lumineuse, du feu.\r\n\r\nCette doctrine n'est pas, quant \u00e0 ses mat\u00e9riaux conceptuels, une cr\u00e9ation neuve ou originale de Simplicius, car de mani\u00e8re plus d\u00e9taill\u00e9e encore, on la rencontre dans le troisi\u00e8me livre du Commentaire de Proclus au Tim\u00e9e. Mais je voudrais montrer, dans le cadre d'une interpr\u00e9tation g\u00e9n\u00e9rale du Commentaire au De caelo, que Simplicius en donne une d\u00e9monstration et en fait un usage qui lui sont propres, et qui se comprennent en grande partie comme une r\u00e9action face aux th\u00e9ories de Jean Philopon. Ce dernier s'\u00e9tait appuy\u00e9 sur le Tim\u00e9e pour r\u00e9futer la doctrine aristot\u00e9licienne de la quintessence et de l'\u00e9ternit\u00e9 du monde, et il niait, bien avant Copernic, toute diff\u00e9rence substantielle entre les cieux et le monde sublunaire.\r\n\r\nR\u00e9futant les th\u00e9ories du Contra Aristotelem de Philopon, Simplicius r\u00e9affirme la divinit\u00e9, la transcendance et l\u2019\u00e9ternit\u00e9 du ciel, dans une ex\u00e9g\u00e8se qui vise \u00e0 harmoniser (et non \u00e0 opposer) le Tim\u00e9e et le De caelo. Cette ex\u00e9g\u00e8se est un acte religieux, un exercice spirituel qui convertit l'\u00e2me (celle de Simplicius et celle de son lecteur) vers le D\u00e9miurge. Cette conversion est une initiation aux grandeurs du monde et du ciel, et la description de la nature physique du ciel est l\u2019un des contenus les plus pr\u00e9cieux de la r\u00e9v\u00e9lation. Celle-ci ne peut \u00eatre procur\u00e9e aux lecteurs momentan\u00e9ment abus\u00e9s par Philopon qu\u2019au terme d\u2019une purification pr\u00e9paratoire, qui est la r\u00e9futation des analyses du Contra Aristotelem.\r\n\r\nAinsi, la pol\u00e9mique de Simplicius est orient\u00e9e vers une vis\u00e9e indissolublement philosophique et religieuse : lire et interpr\u00e9ter correctement le De caelo d\u2019Aristote, ce n\u2019est pas seulement acqu\u00e9rir des connaissances intellectuelles, c\u2019est aussi, et surtout, s\u2019\u00e9lever par la pens\u00e9e (mais de mani\u00e8re \u00ab v\u00e9cue \u00bb) jusqu\u2019au monde et au D\u00e9miurge, c\u2019est leur adresser une pri\u00e8re. Au sacril\u00e8ge blasph\u00e9matoire du chr\u00e9tien Philopon r\u00e9pond la liturgie n\u00e9oplatonicienne, juste c\u00e9l\u00e9bration du Dieu. [introduction p. 183-184]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wBslsmZjGCgfHjc","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":138,"full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":688,"section_of":171,"pages":"183-221","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Sur quelques aspects de la pol\u00e9mique de Simplicius contre Jean Philopon: de l\u2019invective \u00e0 la r\u00e9affirmation de la transcendance du ciel"]}
Title | Syrianus and Pseudo-Alexander’s Commentary on Metaph. E-N |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, Überlieferung, Nachleben |
Pages | 215-232 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Tarán, Leonardo |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
The main conclusions of this study are two: (a) Neither Ps.-Alexander nor Syrianus had access to Alexander’s lost commentary on Metaphysics E-N. (b) For his commentary on books M-N, Syrianus made use of Ps.-Alexander’s commentary, which he mistook for the work of Alexander himself. [conclusion p. 231] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/TQhCHWKXBejvsjI |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"797","_score":null,"_source":{"id":797,"authors_free":[{"id":1176,"entry_id":797,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":330,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo","free_first_name":"Leonardo","free_last_name":"Tar\u00e1n","norm_person":{"id":330,"first_name":"Tar\u00e1n","last_name":" Leonardo ","full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1168065100","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1177,"entry_id":797,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Syrianus and Pseudo-Alexander\u2019s Commentary on Metaph. E-N","main_title":{"title":"Syrianus and Pseudo-Alexander\u2019s Commentary on Metaph. E-N"},"abstract":"The main conclusions of this study are two: (a) Neither Ps.-Alexander nor Syrianus had access to Alexander\u2019s lost commentary on Metaphysics E-N. (b) For his commentary on books M-N, Syrianus made use of Ps.-Alexander\u2019s commentary, which he mistook for the work of Alexander himself. [conclusion p. 231]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/TQhCHWKXBejvsjI","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":330,"full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":797,"section_of":189,"pages":"215-232","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":189,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"de","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 2: Kommentierung, \u00dcberlieferung, Nachleben","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Lulofs\/Kollesch\/Nutton1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Kommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles sind das Thema dieses Bandes. Mit der Aristotelesrenaissance des 1. Jh. v.Chr. einsetzend, vermitteln die Beitr\u00e4ge, unter acht Hauptkapiteln zusammengefa\u00dft, ein eindrucksvolles Bild von der Rezeption zweier Jahrtausende. D a \u00df diese Rezeption kontinuierlich in ihren wichtigen Phasen illustriert werden kann, ist - wie schon im ersten Band - der freundlichen Kooperation der beteiligten Autoren zu verdanken. Als besonderer Gl\u00fccksfall mag gelten, da\u00df einige Beitr\u00e4ge sich in idealer Weise erg\u00e4nzen. So wird der Leser in zwei auf einanderfolgenden Artikeln die Interpretationsgeschichte der zentralen Kapitel Metaphysik \u039b 7 und 9 von Plotin und Themistios \u00fcber Maimonides und Gersonides bis Hegel verfolgen k\u00f6nnen. Dieses Bem\u00fchen um Aristoteles von der Antike bis in die Neuzeit ist etwa f\u00fcr De anima bei Alexander von Aphrodisias und Leibniz, f\u00fcr die \r\nKategorien bei Plotin und Peirce dokumentiert, wobei die Erstver\u00f6ffentlichung der Ubersetzung von Cat. 1 - 4 durch den bedeutenden amerikanischen Philosophen mit besonderer Freude angezeigt werden darf. \r\nVon den Autoren dieses Bandes weilen Paul Henry und Charles B. Schmitt nicht mehr unter uns. In ein Buch \u00fcber Plotins Entretiens sollte der hier ver\u00f6ffentlichte Beitrag von Paul Henry sp\u00e4ter einmal integriert werden; daraus erkl\u00e4ren sich gelegentliche Hinweise auf geplante Teile dieses nun nicht mehr vollendeten Werkes. Die Studie von Charles B.Schmitt \u00fcber die Aristoteles-Florilegien der Renaissance bietet die erste Gesamtdarstellung zu diesem Thema und enth\u00e4lt im Anhang ein Verzeichnis mit wichtigen Erg\u00e4nzungen zu seiner grundlegenden \u201eBibliography of Aristotle Editions, 1501-1600\". [Vorwort p. V-VI]\r\n","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Q1P6OhIp8zaE99c","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":189,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet","volume":"2","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Syrianus and Pseudo-Alexander\u2019s Commentary on Metaph. E-N"]}
Title | The Commentators on Aristotle's Categories and on Porphyry's Isagoge |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1973 |
Published in | Studies in Byzantine Rhetoric |
Pages | 101-126 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Kustas, George L. |
Editor(s) | |
Translator(s) |
Among the works edited in the Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca are a number of analyses of the Categories, Aristotle’s basic treatise on formal logic, as well as commentaries on Porphyry’s introduction to philosophy, the Isagoge, which is concerned with basic philosophical principles. Those which concern us belong to the fifth/sixth century and are the product of the Alexandrian school of Neoplatonism. The authors are Ammonius, son of Hermeias; his students, John Philoponus and Olympiodorus; and Olympiodorus’ students, Elias and David. To this list we may add Simplicius, who attended Ammonius’ lectures before emigrating to Athens. We are dealing with a common tradition of exegesis. The standard arrangement is several pages of prolegomena, in which the author lays out his purpose and defines his terms, followed by extensive scholia on individual passages. The commentators consistently make the claim that they are clearing up obscurities in the text. Hence the term dodelex appears often in their pages. Our interest, however, lies not here but in their analysis of what they regard as Aristotle’s deliberate use of obscurity as a quality of style designed with a specific end in view. We have therefore to examine in some detail what they say. [introduction p. 101] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/czKsHr75gQ60Xo4 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1514","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1514,"authors_free":[{"id":2630,"entry_id":1514,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":562,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Kustas, George L. ","free_first_name":"George L.","free_last_name":"Kustas","norm_person":{"id":562,"first_name":"George L. ","last_name":"Kustas","full_name":"Kustas, George L. ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The Commentators on Aristotle's Categories and on Porphyry's Isagoge","main_title":{"title":"The Commentators on Aristotle's Categories and on Porphyry's Isagoge"},"abstract":"Among the works edited in the Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca are a number of analyses of the Categories, Aristotle\u2019s basic treatise on formal logic, as well as commentaries on Porphyry\u2019s introduction to philosophy, the Isagoge, which is concerned with basic philosophical principles. Those which concern us belong to the fifth\/sixth century and are the product of the Alexandrian school of Neoplatonism. The authors are Ammonius, son of Hermeias; his students, John Philoponus and Olympiodorus; and Olympiodorus\u2019 students, Elias and David. To this list we may add Simplicius, who attended Ammonius\u2019 lectures before emigrating to Athens.\r\n\r\nWe are dealing with a common tradition of exegesis. The standard arrangement is several pages of prolegomena, in which the author lays out his purpose and defines his terms, followed by extensive scholia on individual passages. The commentators consistently make the claim that they are clearing up obscurities in the text. Hence the term dodelex appears often in their pages. Our interest, however, lies not here but in their analysis of what they regard as Aristotle\u2019s deliberate use of obscurity as a quality of style designed with a specific end in view. We have therefore to examine in some detail what they say. [introduction p. 101]","btype":2,"date":"1973","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/czKsHr75gQ60Xo4","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":562,"full_name":"Kustas, George L. ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1514,"section_of":1515,"pages":"101-126","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1515,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":1,"language":"en","title":"Studies in Byzantine Rhetoric","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Kustas_1973","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1973","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/rxJfkOyETAdcjhw","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1515,"pubplace":"Thessalonike ","publisher":"Patriarchikon Idruma Paterikon Meleton","series":"Analekta Vlatado\u0304n","volume":"17","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":{"id":1514,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Studies in Byzantine Rhetoric","volume":"","issue":"","pages":"101-126"}},"sort":["The Commentators on Aristotle's Categories and on Porphyry's Isagoge"]}
Title | The Text of Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 246-266 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Tarán, Leonardo |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
My main purpose here is to offer reasons why a new and truly critical edition of Simplicius' commentary is necessary. To do so, in what follows, I shall have to point out some of the shortcomings to be found in Diels' edition of this work. [p. 246] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/wSJkdX2PYdHh3n2 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"726","_score":null,"_source":{"id":726,"authors_free":[{"id":1085,"entry_id":726,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":330,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo","free_first_name":"Leonardo","free_last_name":"Tar\u00e1n","norm_person":{"id":330,"first_name":"Tar\u00e1n","last_name":" Leonardo ","full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1168065100","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1086,"entry_id":726,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"The Text of Simplicius\u2019 Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics","main_title":{"title":"The Text of Simplicius\u2019 Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics"},"abstract":"My main purpose here is to offer reasons why a new and truly critical edition of Simplicius' commentary is necessary. To do so, in what follows, I shall have to point out some of the shortcomings to be found in Diels' edition of this work. [p. 246]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wSJkdX2PYdHh3n2","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":330,"full_name":"Tar\u00e1n, Leonardo ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":726,"section_of":171,"pages":"246-266","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["The Text of Simplicius\u2019 Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics"]}
Title | The development of Philoponus’ thought and its chronology |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1990 |
Published in | Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence |
Pages | 233-274 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Verrycken, Koenraad |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
The position I should like to defend is to some extent intermediate between that of Gudeman and that of Ilvrard. I think Ilvrard is right in rejecting the hypothesis of Philoponus' conversion. But I also think Gudeman was right in assuming—more or less conjecturally—a duality in Philoponus’ philosophical work. Both Gudeman and Ilvrard, however, pose the problem wrongly in terms of ‘religious conviction’ only. If Philoponus did not develop a Christian philosophy in his first philosophical period, that does not show that he must have been a pagan at that time. And if he was born a Christian, that does not establish that his philosophy must always have been Christian in character. Philosophy is one thing, religion another. In my opinion, the problem should first be posed on the purely philosophical level: what does the author say? Only afterwards can one try to ‘project’ the results of the philosophical analysis onto the levels of biography and psychology. This is the method I employ. To start with, I shall outline very briefly the main characteristics of the philosophical systems of ‘Philoponus 1’ and ‘Philoponus 2’, as I shall call them. Then I shall try to piece together something of what can reasonably be said about Philoponus’ biography. Thirdly, I shall propose the first sketch of a new solution to the problem of the chronology of the author’s Aristotelian commentaries. I shall finish with some remarks on the development of Philoponus 2. [introduction p. 236] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/d1kiVpaSlWKa7uY |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"449","_score":null,"_source":{"id":449,"authors_free":[{"id":601,"entry_id":449,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":347,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Verrycken, Koenraad","free_first_name":"Koenraad","free_last_name":"Verrycken","norm_person":{"id":347,"first_name":"Koenraad","last_name":"Verrycken","full_name":"Verrycken, Koenraad","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1048689964","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":602,"entry_id":449,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The development of Philoponus\u2019 thought and its chronology","main_title":{"title":"The development of Philoponus\u2019 thought and its chronology"},"abstract":"The position I should like to defend is to some extent intermediate between that of Gudeman and that of Ilvrard. I think Ilvrard is right in rejecting the hypothesis of Philoponus' conversion. But I also think Gudeman was right in assuming\u2014more or less conjecturally\u2014a duality in Philoponus\u2019 philosophical work. Both Gudeman and Ilvrard, however, pose the problem wrongly in terms of \u2018religious conviction\u2019 only. If Philoponus did not develop a Christian philosophy in his first philosophical period, that does not show that he must have been a pagan at that time. And if he was born a Christian, that does not establish that his philosophy must always have been Christian in character. Philosophy is one thing, religion another.\r\n\r\nIn my opinion, the problem should first be posed on the purely philosophical level: what does the author say? Only afterwards can one try to \u2018project\u2019 the results of the philosophical analysis onto the levels of biography and psychology. This is the method I employ.\r\n\r\nTo start with, I shall outline very briefly the main characteristics of the philosophical systems of \u2018Philoponus 1\u2019 and \u2018Philoponus 2\u2019, as I shall call them. Then I shall try to piece together something of what can reasonably be said about Philoponus\u2019 biography. Thirdly, I shall propose the first sketch of a new solution to the problem of the chronology of the author\u2019s Aristotelian commentaries. I shall finish with some remarks on the development of Philoponus 2. [introduction p. 236]","btype":2,"date":"1990","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/d1kiVpaSlWKa7uY","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":347,"full_name":"Verrycken, Koenraad","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":449,"section_of":1453,"pages":"233-274","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1453,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1990","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"This book brings together twenty articles giving a comprehensive view of the work of the Aristotelian commentators. First published in 1990, the collection is now brought up to date with a new introduction by Richard Sorabji. New generations of scholars will benefit from this reissuing of classic essays, including seminal works by major scholars, and the volume gives a comprehensive background to the work of the project on the Ancient Commentators on Aristotle, which has published over 100 volumes of translations since 1987 and has disseminated these crucial texts to scholars worldwide.\r\n\r\nThe importance of the commentators is partly that they represent the thought and classroom teaching of the Aristotelian and Neoplatonist schools and partly that they provide a panorama of a thousand years of ancient Greek philosophy, revealing many original quotations from lost works. Even more significant is the profound influence - uncovered in some of the chapters of this book - that they exert on later philosophy, Islamic and Western. Not only did they preserve anti-Aristotelian material which helped inspire Medieval and Renaissance science, but they present Aristotle in a form that made him acceptable to the Christian church. It is not Aristotle, but Aristotle transformed and embedded in the philosophy of the commentators that so often lies behind the views of later thinkers. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/M8lXuAdHpDW8tvu","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1453,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"1","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["The development of Philoponus\u2019 thought and its chronology"]}
Title | The school of Alexander? |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1990 |
Published in | Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence |
Pages | 83-111 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Sharples, Robert W. |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
Alexander of Aphrodisias was appointed by the emperors as a public teacher of Aristotelian philosophy at some time between 198 and 209 AD. As a public teacher, it is likely that he had, in some sense, a school. But trying to establish what happened in that school and how it functioned is comparable to the task we would face if we had to determine what went on in a philosophy department in a modern university based on a selection of books by the professor, a confused collection of his papers, the notes from which he lectured, and the essays of his students, with no obvious indication of which was which. We know a considerable amount about the Neoplatonic schools of the fifth and sixth centuries AD and the study of Aristotle’s writings in them. We know the place they had in the curriculum, the order in which they were read, and we can compare the ways in which different commentators approached the question of the relationship between the works of Aristotle and those of Plato. We can trace relations between teachers and their pupils, and we are sometimes told that a particular text is a pupil’s record of his teacher’s utterances. The very organization of the commentaries sometimes reflects and clarifies the requirements of the teaching context—in the division of a commentary into separate lectures and the placing of a general summary of a section of argument before the discussion of particular points. For the medieval period, too, we have copious information on the organization of teaching and study. With Alexander, matters are very different. We know the names of some of his teachers, and his surviving works provide evidence for his disagreements with them. We also know something of his disagreements with other philosophers of his own generation or the generation before, and we can trace—however controversially—his influence on later thinkers. But we do not know the name of a single one of his immediate pupils, and for all that we can tell, the influence of other writers on him might have been largely, and his influence on other writers entirely, through the medium of writing rather than personal encounter. After all, we are explicitly told that Alexander’s commentaries were among those read in Plotinus’ school. It is, however, in principle unlikely that any thinker in the ancient world would have communicated entirely through the written, rather than the spoken, word. Some of the writings attributed to Alexander are most naturally seen in the context of his teaching activities or debates within his circle. These writings include commentaries on Aristotelian works, treatises or monographs on particular topics such as those On the Soul and On Fate, and numerous short discussions. Three books of these collected discussions are entitled phusikai skholikai aporiai kai luseis—‘School-discussion problems and solutions on nature’; a fourth is titled Problems on Ethics but sub-titled, no doubt in imitation of the preceding three books when it was united with them, skholikai êthikai aporiai kai luseis—‘School-discussion problems and solutions on ethics.’ A further collection was transmitted as the second book of Alexander’s treatise On the Soul and labeled mantissa or ‘makeweight’ by the Berlin editor Bruns. Other texts essentially similar to those in these collections survive in Arabic, though not in Greek, and there is evidence to suggest that there were other collections now lost. The circumstances in which these collections were put together are unclear; it was not always expertly done, and while some of the titles attached to particular pieces seem to preserve valuable additional information, others are inept or unhelpful. Nor is it clear at what date the collections were assembled. It is not my concern here to provide a full enumeration of the works attributed to Alexander or to classify them in detail. That has been done elsewhere by both myself and others. Rather, I will proceed to a discussion of what the works can tell us about the context in which they arose. It will be helpful to start with a consideration of the relation of Alexander’s works to those of his predecessors, teachers, and contemporaries. [introduction p. 83-85] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/wgzq8ffCF70YlYd |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1027","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1027,"authors_free":[{"id":1551,"entry_id":1027,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":42,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","free_first_name":"Robert W.","free_last_name":"Sharples","norm_person":{"id":42,"first_name":"Robert W.","last_name":"Sharples","full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/114269505","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1552,"entry_id":1027,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The school of Alexander?","main_title":{"title":"The school of Alexander?"},"abstract":"Alexander of Aphrodisias was appointed by the emperors as a public teacher of Aristotelian philosophy at some time between 198 and 209 AD.\r\nAs a public teacher, it is likely that he had, in some sense, a school. But trying to establish what happened in that school and how it functioned is comparable to the task we would face if we had to determine what went on in a philosophy department in a modern university based on a selection of books by the professor, a confused collection of his papers, the notes from which he lectured, and the essays of his students, with no obvious indication of which was which.\r\n\r\nWe know a considerable amount about the Neoplatonic schools of the fifth and sixth centuries AD and the study of Aristotle\u2019s writings in them. We know the place they had in the curriculum, the order in which they were read, and we can compare the ways in which different commentators approached the question of the relationship between the works of Aristotle and those of Plato. We can trace relations between teachers and their pupils, and we are sometimes told that a particular text is a pupil\u2019s record of his teacher\u2019s utterances. The very organization of the commentaries sometimes reflects and clarifies the requirements of the teaching context\u2014in the division of a commentary into separate lectures and the placing of a general summary of a section of argument before the discussion of particular points.\r\n\r\nFor the medieval period, too, we have copious information on the organization of teaching and study.\r\nWith Alexander, matters are very different. We know the names of some of his teachers, and his surviving works provide evidence for his disagreements with them. We also know something of his disagreements with other philosophers of his own generation or the generation before, and we can trace\u2014however controversially\u2014his influence on later thinkers.\r\n\r\nBut we do not know the name of a single one of his immediate pupils, and for all that we can tell, the influence of other writers on him might have been largely, and his influence on other writers entirely, through the medium of writing rather than personal encounter. After all, we are explicitly told that Alexander\u2019s commentaries were among those read in Plotinus\u2019 school.\r\n\r\nIt is, however, in principle unlikely that any thinker in the ancient world would have communicated entirely through the written, rather than the spoken, word. Some of the writings attributed to Alexander are most naturally seen in the context of his teaching activities or debates within his circle.\r\n\r\nThese writings include commentaries on Aristotelian works, treatises or monographs on particular topics such as those On the Soul and On Fate, and numerous short discussions. Three books of these collected discussions are entitled phusikai skholikai aporiai kai luseis\u2014\u2018School-discussion problems and solutions on nature\u2019; a fourth is titled Problems on Ethics but sub-titled, no doubt in imitation of the preceding three books when it was united with them, skholikai \u00eathikai aporiai kai luseis\u2014\u2018School-discussion problems and solutions on ethics.\u2019\r\n\r\nA further collection was transmitted as the second book of Alexander\u2019s treatise On the Soul and labeled mantissa or \u2018makeweight\u2019 by the Berlin editor Bruns. Other texts essentially similar to those in these collections survive in Arabic, though not in Greek, and there is evidence to suggest that there were other collections now lost.\r\n\r\nThe circumstances in which these collections were put together are unclear; it was not always expertly done, and while some of the titles attached to particular pieces seem to preserve valuable additional information, others are inept or unhelpful. Nor is it clear at what date the collections were assembled.\r\n\r\nIt is not my concern here to provide a full enumeration of the works attributed to Alexander or to classify them in detail. That has been done elsewhere by both myself and others. Rather, I will proceed to a discussion of what the works can tell us about the context in which they arose. It will be helpful to start with a consideration of the relation of Alexander\u2019s works to those of his predecessors, teachers, and contemporaries. [introduction p. 83-85]","btype":2,"date":"1990","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wgzq8ffCF70YlYd","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":42,"full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1027,"section_of":1453,"pages":"83-111","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1453,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1990","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"This book brings together twenty articles giving a comprehensive view of the work of the Aristotelian commentators. First published in 1990, the collection is now brought up to date with a new introduction by Richard Sorabji. New generations of scholars will benefit from this reissuing of classic essays, including seminal works by major scholars, and the volume gives a comprehensive background to the work of the project on the Ancient Commentators on Aristotle, which has published over 100 volumes of translations since 1987 and has disseminated these crucial texts to scholars worldwide.\r\n\r\nThe importance of the commentators is partly that they represent the thought and classroom teaching of the Aristotelian and Neoplatonist schools and partly that they provide a panorama of a thousand years of ancient Greek philosophy, revealing many original quotations from lost works. Even more significant is the profound influence - uncovered in some of the chapters of this book - that they exert on later philosophy, Islamic and Western. Not only did they preserve anti-Aristotelian material which helped inspire Medieval and Renaissance science, but they present Aristotle in a form that made him acceptable to the Christian church. It is not Aristotle, but Aristotle transformed and embedded in the philosophy of the commentators that so often lies behind the views of later thinkers. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/M8lXuAdHpDW8tvu","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1453,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"1","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["The school of Alexander?"]}
Title | Themistius: the last Peripatetic commentator on Aristotle? |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1990 |
Published in | Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence |
Pages | 113-123 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Blumenthal, Henry J. |
Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
Translator(s) |
[B]oth the content of Themistius’ works, and such evidence as we have of the commentators’ attitudes to him, show that he was predominantly a Peripatetic. In this he stood out against the tendencies of his time. His frequently expressed admiration for Plato does not invalidate this conclusion. Themistius may rightly claim to have been the last major figure in antiquity who was a genuine follower of Aristotle. For him, unlike his contemporaries, Plato does not surpass the master of those who know but he, and Socrates, ‘innanzi agli altri piu presso gli stanno’. [Conclusion, p. 123] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/j4M1Faq3An8bJ7v |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"875","_score":null,"_source":{"id":875,"authors_free":[{"id":1285,"entry_id":875,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":108,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","free_first_name":"Henry J.","free_last_name":"Blumenthal","norm_person":{"id":108,"first_name":"Henry J.","last_name":"Blumenthal","full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1051543967","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1286,"entry_id":875,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":133,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sorabji, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Sorabji","norm_person":{"id":133,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Sorabji","full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/130064165","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Themistius: the last Peripatetic commentator on Aristotle?","main_title":{"title":"Themistius: the last Peripatetic commentator on Aristotle?"},"abstract":"[B]oth the content of Themistius\u2019 works, and such evidence as we \r\nhave of the commentators\u2019 attitudes to him, show that he was \r\npredominantly a Peripatetic. In this he stood out against the tendencies \r\nof his time. His frequently expressed admiration for Plato does not \r\ninvalidate this conclusion. Themistius may rightly claim to have been the \r\nlast major figure in antiquity who was a genuine follower of Aristotle. For \r\nhim, unlike his contemporaries, Plato does not surpass the master of \r\nthose who know but he, and Socrates, \u2018innanzi agli altri piu presso gli \r\nstanno\u2019. [Conclusion, p. 123]","btype":2,"date":"1990","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/j4M1Faq3An8bJ7v","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":108,"full_name":"Blumenthal, Henry J.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":875,"section_of":1453,"pages":"113-123","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1453,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1990","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"This book brings together twenty articles giving a comprehensive view of the work of the Aristotelian commentators. First published in 1990, the collection is now brought up to date with a new introduction by Richard Sorabji. New generations of scholars will benefit from this reissuing of classic essays, including seminal works by major scholars, and the volume gives a comprehensive background to the work of the project on the Ancient Commentators on Aristotle, which has published over 100 volumes of translations since 1987 and has disseminated these crucial texts to scholars worldwide.\r\n\r\nThe importance of the commentators is partly that they represent the thought and classroom teaching of the Aristotelian and Neoplatonist schools and partly that they provide a panorama of a thousand years of ancient Greek philosophy, revealing many original quotations from lost works. Even more significant is the profound influence - uncovered in some of the chapters of this book - that they exert on later philosophy, Islamic and Western. Not only did they preserve anti-Aristotelian material which helped inspire Medieval and Renaissance science, but they present Aristotle in a form that made him acceptable to the Christian church. It is not Aristotle, but Aristotle transformed and embedded in the philosophy of the commentators that so often lies behind the views of later thinkers. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/M8lXuAdHpDW8tvu","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1453,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Duckworth","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"1","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Themistius: the last Peripatetic commentator on Aristotle?"]}
Title | Theophrastus on the Heavens |
Type | Book Section |
Language | English |
Date | 1985 |
Published in | Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 1: Aristoteles und seine Schule |
Pages | 577-593 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Sharples, Robert W. |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
In this paper, I shall be discussing two topics: firstly, whether Theophrastus followed Aristotle in holding that the heavens were made of a substance—the ether—distinct from the four sublunary elements, or whether, as some have argued, he held that the heavens were made of fire; and secondly, the exact interpretation of certain technical terms of astronomy attributed to Theophrastus. I am throughout indebted to the work of my colleagues in Project Theophrastus, and especially to Professor William Fortenbaugh and Mrs. Pamela Huby. It was an interest in the Peripatetic tradition generally that led me to work on Theophrastus, and that interest has been both formed and stimulated by the works of Professor Paul Moraux; the theme of the present paper is one that he has himself discussed. [author's abstract] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/V9G65AXaBlaZSt7 |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"1028","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1028,"authors_free":[{"id":1553,"entry_id":1028,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":42,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","free_first_name":"Robert W.","free_last_name":"Sharples","norm_person":{"id":42,"first_name":"Robert W.","last_name":"Sharples","full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/114269505","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1554,"entry_id":1028,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Theophrastus on the Heavens","main_title":{"title":"Theophrastus on the Heavens"},"abstract":"In this paper, I shall be discussing two topics: firstly, whether Theophrastus followed Aristotle in holding that the heavens were made of a substance\u2014the ether\u2014distinct from the four sublunary elements, or whether, as some have argued, he held that the heavens were made of fire; and secondly, the exact interpretation of certain technical terms of astronomy attributed to Theophrastus. I am throughout indebted to the work of my colleagues in Project Theophrastus, and especially to Professor William Fortenbaugh and Mrs. Pamela Huby. It was an interest in the Peripatetic tradition generally that led me to work on Theophrastus, and that interest has been both formed and stimulated by the works of Professor Paul Moraux; the theme of the present paper is one that he has himself discussed. [author's abstract]","btype":2,"date":"1985","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/V9G65AXaBlaZSt7","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":42,"full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1028,"section_of":190,"pages":"577-593","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":190,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"no language selected","title":"Aristoteles - Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux gewidmet. Bd. 1: Aristoteles und seine Schule","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner\/Plezia\/Verdenius\/P\u00e9pin1985","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1985","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1985","abstract":"Der hier vorgelegte erste Band eines zweiteiligen Werkes, das \r\nAristoteles und dem Aristotelismus gewidmet ist, enth\u00e4lt 31 Origi-\r\nnalbeitr\u00e4ge zum Corpus Aristotelicum und zum alten Peripatos. \r\nKommentierung, Uberlieferung und Nachleben des Aristoteles bil-\r\nden das Thema des zweiten Bandes, der so bald als m\u00f6glich folgen \r\nwird. [Vorwort]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/fo2YolqZedXU2Im","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":190,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"","volume":"1","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Theophrastus on the Heavens"]}
Title | Traductions latines et influences du commentaire in De caelo en occident (XlIIe- XIVe s.) |
Type | Book Section |
Language | French |
Date | 1987 |
Published in | Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985 |
Pages | 289-325 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Bossier, Fernand |
Editor(s) | Hadot, Ilsetraut |
Translator(s) |
Si l’on essaie d’évaluer l’influence exercée par un auteur grec sur l’Occident au XIIIe et XIVe s., l’on doit se tourner tout d’abord vers l’étude des traductions. En effet, bien que le nombre de ceux qui connaissaient le grec ait été plus élevé qu’on ne le croit d’ordinaire, la traduction n’en était pas moins, à cette époque et pour longtemps encore, le seul canal par lequel les idées des philosophes et savants grecs pouvaient atteindre les écoles ; le cas des dialogues de Platon est trop connu pour que nous nous y attardions longtemps. L’intention de notre communication, qui concerne la survie du commentaire In De caelo en Occident, sera donc double : d’une part, elle fera l’historique des traductions qui en ont été faites tout au long du XIIIe s. ; d’autre part, elle présentera les résultats d’une première reconnaissance d’un terrain très vaste et à peine défriché, à savoir celui de l’influence qu’ont eue ces traductions sur les traités médiévaux. [introduction p. 289] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/aFzlEmFULfnA7eU |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"568","_score":null,"_source":{"id":568,"authors_free":[{"id":806,"entry_id":568,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":12,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Bossier, Fernand","free_first_name":"Fernand","free_last_name":"Bossier","norm_person":{"id":12,"first_name":"Fernand ","last_name":"Bossier","full_name":"Bossier, Fernand ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1017981663","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":807,"entry_id":568,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":4,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":"Traductions latines et influences du commentaire in De caelo en occident (XlIIe- XIVe s.)","main_title":{"title":"Traductions latines et influences du commentaire in De caelo en occident (XlIIe- XIVe s.)"},"abstract":"Si l\u2019on essaie d\u2019\u00e9valuer l\u2019influence exerc\u00e9e par un auteur grec sur l\u2019Occident au XIIIe et XIVe s., l\u2019on doit se tourner tout d\u2019abord vers l\u2019\u00e9tude des traductions. En effet, bien que le nombre de ceux qui connaissaient le grec ait \u00e9t\u00e9 plus \u00e9lev\u00e9 qu\u2019on ne le croit d\u2019ordinaire, la traduction n\u2019en \u00e9tait pas moins, \u00e0 cette \u00e9poque et pour longtemps encore, le seul canal par lequel les id\u00e9es des philosophes et savants grecs pouvaient atteindre les \u00e9coles ; le cas des dialogues de Platon est trop connu pour que nous nous y attardions longtemps. L\u2019intention de notre communication, qui concerne la survie du commentaire In De caelo en Occident, sera donc double : d\u2019une part, elle fera l\u2019historique des traductions qui en ont \u00e9t\u00e9 faites tout au long du XIIIe s. ; d\u2019autre part, elle pr\u00e9sentera les r\u00e9sultats d\u2019une premi\u00e8re reconnaissance d\u2019un terrain tr\u00e8s vaste et \u00e0 peine d\u00e9frich\u00e9, \u00e0 savoir celui de l\u2019influence qu\u2019ont eue ces traductions sur les trait\u00e9s m\u00e9di\u00e9vaux. [introduction p. 289]","btype":2,"date":"1987","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/aFzlEmFULfnA7eU","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":12,"full_name":"Bossier, Fernand ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":4,"full_name":"Hadot, Ilsetraut","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":568,"section_of":171,"pages":"289-325","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":171,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"fr","title":"Simplicius. Sa vie, son \u0153uvre, sa survie: Actes du colloque international de Paris 28 sept. - 1er oct. 1985","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Hadot1987","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1987","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1987","abstract":"Depuis une quinzaine d'ann\u00e9es, on assiste en Allemagne, en Angleterre, en Am\u00e9rique et en France \u00e0 un renouveau des \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius. Diff\u00e9rents chercheurs, partis de probl\u00e9matiques et de pr\u00e9occupations diff\u00e9rentes, se sont rencontr\u00e9s dans ce domaine de recherche d'une importance capitale pour l'histoire de toute la philosophie antique. C'\u00e9tait donc pour faciliter une \u00e9tude coordonn\u00e9e et syst\u00e9matique \u00e0 la fois du texte et de la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius que la Recherche Coop\u00e9rative Programm\u00e9e 739 \"Recherches sur les \u0153uvres et la pens\u00e9e de Simplicius\" fut fond\u00e9e en 1982 dans le cadre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (C.N.R.S., Paris). Depuis cette date, ses recherches se d\u00e9roulent en \u00e9troite collaboration avec l'\u00e9quipe anglo-am\u00e9ricaine de recherche du professeur Richard Sorabji, intitul\u00e9e \"Ancient Commentators on Aristotle\", et avec l'Aristoteles-Archiv de la Freie Universit\u00e4t de Berlin-Ouest dirig\u00e9 par le professeur Dieter Harlfinger.\r\n\r\nPour permettre aux diff\u00e9rents membres de la R.C.P., dont plusieurs habitent \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, ainsi qu'\u00e0 d'autres savants int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par les \u00e9tudes sur Simplicius, d'entrer en contact personnel, de r\u00e9soudre oralement des questions diverses se rapportant \u00e0 l'organisation du travail, d'\u00e9changer entre eux les tout derniers r\u00e9sultats de leurs recherches et d'engager une discussion sur des probl\u00e8mes difficiles, j'ai organis\u00e9, dans le cadre de la R.C.P. 739, un colloque international qui s'est tenu \u00e0 Paris, \u00e0 la Fondation Hugot, du 28 septembre au 1er octobre 1985. Ce colloque a \u00e9t\u00e9 enti\u00e8rement financ\u00e9 par la Fondation Hugot du Coll\u00e8ge de France, \u00e0 laquelle j'exprime toute ma gratitude. Je tiens aussi \u00e0 remercier M. et Mme de Morant pour la sollicitude et la bienveillance avec laquelle ils ont accueilli les membres du colloque et veill\u00e9 \u00e0 leur procurer un merveilleux confort.\r\n\r\nLe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique a subventionn\u00e9 la parution des Actes du Colloque, et je remercie le professeur Dr. H. Wenzel d'avoir rendu possible leur parution dans la s\u00e9rie prestigieuse des Peripatoi de la maison d'\u00e9dition De Gruyter. [Pr\u00e9face]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/45BIqsODQJTdHmt","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":171,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New York","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Peripatoi. Philologisch-historische Studien zum Aristotelismus","volume":"15","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Traductions latines et influences du commentaire in De caelo en occident (XlIIe- XIVe s.)"]}
Title | Vorschläge zur Lösung des Problems der Xenophanesberichte von MXG und Simplikios |
Type | Book Section |
Language | German |
Date | 1974 |
Published in | PS.-Aristoteles, MXG : Der historische Wert des Xenophanesreferats. Beiträge zur Geschichte des Eleatismus |
Pages | 261-319 |
Categories | no categories |
Author(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Editor(s) | Wiesner, Jürgen |
Translator(s) |
Zwischen den Xenophanesreferaten von MXG und Simplikios besteht keine völlige Parallelität, weshalb inXG als Quelle von Simplikios ausscheidet. Denn während die MXG-Prädikate 1, 2, 3, 6 (977 a 14-36, 977 b 3-18; und Simpl.Phys. 22,31- 23,9 einer gemeinsamen Vorlage ent stammen, die wir wegen gewisser Eigenheiten als "spät- eleatische Quelle" bezeichneten, hat MXG zusätzlich einen Mittelteil (977 a 37- 977 b 2; mit formal vom Rest abweichenden (kürzere und einfachere Aussage ohne Dichotomie) und zu diesem teilweise widersprüchlichen Prädikaten (Unvereinbarkeit Kugel - Grenzantinomie;. Prädikate dieses MXG-Mittelteils findet Simplikios Phys. 23,16 ff. bei Alexander und greift sie an; da aber auch der zuverlässige Theophrastexzerptor hippolytos sie in gleicher Polge wie Alexander innerhalb einer Prädikat reihe für den Gott des Xenophanes nennt (Ref. I 14,2), geht also der Mittelteil des MXG-Referats auf dieselben Ausführungen des Eresiers zurück.Doch auch Simplikios gibt über das mit MXG Gemeinsame hinaus Auszüge aus Theophrast (dessen Dame Phys. 22,28- 29), die unverkennbar Elemente aus Aristoteles Metaphys. 986 b 10 ff. enthalten. [conclusion p. 319] |
Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/tEjo8iqE5bxx49Z |
{"_index":"sire","_id":"433","_score":null,"_source":{"id":433,"authors_free":[{"id":583,"entry_id":433,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2170,"entry_id":433,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":75,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","free_first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","free_last_name":"Wiesner","norm_person":{"id":75,"first_name":"J\u00fcrgen","last_name":"Wiesner","full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/140610847","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Vorschl\u00e4ge zur L\u00f6sung des Problems der Xenophanesberichte von MXG und Simplikios","main_title":{"title":"Vorschl\u00e4ge zur L\u00f6sung des Problems der Xenophanesberichte von MXG und Simplikios"},"abstract":"Zwischen den Xenophanesreferaten von MXG und Simplikios \r\nbesteht keine v\u00f6llige Parallelit\u00e4t, weshalb inXG als \r\nQuelle von Simplikios ausscheidet. Denn w\u00e4hrend die \r\nMXG-Pr\u00e4dikate 1, 2, 3, 6 (977 a 14-36, 977 b 3-18; und \r\nSimpl.Phys. 22,31- 23,9 einer gemeinsamen Vorlage ent\u00ad\r\nstammen, die wir wegen gewisser Eigenheiten als \"sp\u00e4t- \r\neleatische Quelle\" bezeichneten, hat MXG zus\u00e4tzlich \r\neinen Mittelteil (977 a 37- 977 b 2; mit formal vom \r\nRest abweichenden (k\u00fcrzere und einfachere Aussage ohne \r\nDichotomie) und zu diesem teilweise widerspr\u00fcchlichen \r\nPr\u00e4dikaten (Unvereinbarkeit Kugel - Grenzantinomie;. \r\nPr\u00e4dikate dieses MXG-Mittelteils findet Simplikios Phys. \r\n23,16 ff. bei Alexander und greift sie an; da aber auch \r\nder zuverl\u00e4ssige Theophrastexzerptor hippolytos sie in \r\ngleicher Polge wie Alexander innerhalb einer Pr\u00e4dikat\u00ad\r\nreihe f\u00fcr den Gott des Xenophanes nennt (Ref. I 14,2), \r\ngeht also der Mittelteil des MXG-Referats auf dieselben \r\nAusf\u00fchrungen des Eresiers zur\u00fcck.Doch auch Simplikios gibt \u00fcber das mit MXG Gemeinsame \r\nhinaus Ausz\u00fcge aus Theophrast (dessen Dame Phys. 22,28- \r\n29), die unverkennbar Elemente aus Aristoteles Metaphys. \r\n986 b 10 ff. enthalten. [conclusion p. 319]","btype":2,"date":"1974","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/tEjo8iqE5bxx49Z","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":75,"full_name":"Wiesner, J\u00fcrgen","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":433,"section_of":2,"pages":"261-319","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":2,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":1,"language":"de","title":"PS.-Aristoteles, MXG : Der historische Wert des Xenophanesreferats. Beitr\u00e4ge zur Geschichte des Eleatismus","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Wiesner1974a","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"1974","edition_no":null,"free_date":"1974","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/wvYIPOcDKdaOGFN","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":2,"pubplace":"Amsterdam","publisher":"Hakkert","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Vorschl\u00e4ge zur L\u00f6sung des Problems der Xenophanesberichte von MXG und Simplikios"]}