| Title | Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence |
| Type | Edited Book |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2016 |
| Publication Place | London |
| Publisher | Bloomsbury Academic |
| Edition No. | 2 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | |
| Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
| Translator(s) |
| The story of the ancient commentators on Aristotle has not previously been told at book length. Here it is assembled for the fi rst time by drawing both on some of the classic articles translated into English or revised and on the very latest research. Some of the chapters will be making revisionary suggestions unfamiliar even to specialists in the fi eld. Th e philosophical interest of the commentators has been illustrated elsewhere. 1 Th e aim here is not so much to do this again as to set out the background of the commentary tradition against which further philosophical discussion and discussions of other kinds can take place. Th e importance of the commentators lies partly in their representing the thought and classroom teaching of the Aristotelian and Neoplatonist schools, partly in the panorama they provide of the 1100 years of Ancient Greek philosophy, preserving as they do many original quotations from lost philosophical works. Still more signifi cant is their profound infl uence, uncovered in some of the chapters below, on subsequent philosophy, Islamic and European. Th is was due partly to their preserving anti-Aristotelian material which helped to inspire medieval and Renaissance science, but still more to their presenting an Aristotle transformed in ways which happened to make him acceptable to the Christian Church. It is not just Aristotle, but this Aristotle transformed and embedded in the philosophy of the commentators, that lies behind the views of later thinkers. [authors abstract] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/rc8z8z0DitsjROp |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"200","_score":null,"_source":{"id":200,"authors_free":[{"id":2155,"entry_id":200,"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":"Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence","main_title":{"title":"Aristotle Transformed. The ancient commentators and their influence"},"abstract":"The story of the ancient commentators on Aristotle has not previously been told \r\nat book length. Here it is assembled for the fi rst time by drawing both on some \r\nof the classic articles translated into English or revised and on the very latest \r\nresearch. Some of the chapters will be making revisionary suggestions unfamiliar \r\neven to specialists in the fi eld. Th e philosophical interest of the commentators \r\nhas been illustrated elsewhere. 1 Th e aim here is not so much to do this again as \r\nto set out the background of the commentary tradition against which further \r\nphilosophical discussion and discussions of other kinds can take place. \r\n Th e importance of the commentators lies partly in their representing the \r\nthought and classroom teaching of the Aristotelian and Neoplatonist schools, \r\npartly in the panorama they provide of the 1100 years of Ancient Greek \r\nphilosophy, preserving as they do many original quotations from lost philosophical \r\nworks. Still more signifi cant is their profound infl uence, uncovered in some of the \r\nchapters below, on subsequent philosophy, Islamic and European. Th is was due \r\npartly to their preserving anti-Aristotelian material which helped to inspire \r\nmedieval and Renaissance science, but still more to their presenting an Aristotle \r\ntransformed in ways which happened to make him acceptable to the Christian \r\nChurch. It is not just Aristotle, but this Aristotle transformed and embedded in \r\nthe philosophy of the commentators, that lies behind the views of later thinkers. [authors abstract]","btype":4,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/rc8z8z0DitsjROp","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":200,"pubplace":"London","publisher":"Bloomsbury Academic","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"2","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2016]}
| Title | Mixis: le problème du mélange dans la philosophie grecque d'Aristote à Simplicius |
| Type | Monograph |
| Language | French |
| Date | 2016 |
| Publication Place | Paris |
| Publisher | Belles lettres |
| Series | Anagôgê |
| Volume | 9 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Groisard, Jocelyn |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Que se passe-t-il quand de l'eau et du vin se melangent ? Comment les quatre elements simples du monde physique se melent-ils les uns aux autres pour former les choses qui nous entourent ? La multitude des couleurs vient-elle aussi d'un melange de couleurs simples ? Deux corps melanges sont-ils simplement juxtaposes a une echelle microscopique ou bien peuvent-ils se compenetrer de sorte qu'il y aurait deux corps dans le meme lieu ? L'union de l'ame et du corps est-elle un melange ? Telles sont quelques-unes des questions etonnamment diverses que croise cette histoire du probleme du melange dans la philosophie grecque. Le recit propose ici suit trois lignes principales : la tradition peripateticienne, qui, d'Aristote a son commentateur Alexandre d'Aphrodise, elabore un modele de melange par mediation ou les ingredients de depart s'assimilent reciproquement pour s'unifier en un compose qualitativement intermediaire ; la doctrine stoicienne de la mixtion de part en part , ou les ingredients se compenetrent jusqu'a devenir parfaitement coextensifs ; le neoplatonisme et les transpositions qu'il opere a partir des modeles physiques precedents pour penser non seulement des relations entre corps mais aussi celle entre l'ame et le corps ou bien entre les realites incorporelles ou immaterielles de l'arriere-monde suprasensible. Fondee sur un vaste corpus de textes couvrant pres d'un millenaire d'histoire de la philosophie grecque, cette etude se veut aussi une proposition de methode : donner a lire les textes eux-memes et rester au plus pres de l'analyse des sources pour suivre parmi l'etonnant foisonnement des doctrines les developpements aussi divers qu'inattendus que la raison humaine, dans sa luxuriante imagination theorique, sait donner a la meme idee, fut-elle aussi courante et intuitive que celle de melange. |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/4vYe8e193vKJ529 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1415","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1415,"authors_free":[{"id":2216,"entry_id":1415,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":394,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Groisard, Jocelyn","free_first_name":"Jocelyn","free_last_name":"Groisard","norm_person":{"id":394,"first_name":"Jocelyn","last_name":"Groisard","full_name":"Groisard, Jocelyn","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1105076865","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Mixis: le probl\u00e8me du m\u00e9lange dans la philosophie grecque d'Aristote \u00e0 Simplicius","main_title":{"title":"Mixis: le probl\u00e8me du m\u00e9lange dans la philosophie grecque d'Aristote \u00e0 Simplicius"},"abstract":"Que se passe-t-il quand de l'eau et du vin se melangent ? Comment les quatre elements simples du monde physique se melent-ils les uns aux autres pour former les choses qui nous entourent ? La multitude des couleurs vient-elle aussi d'un melange de couleurs simples ? Deux corps melanges sont-ils simplement juxtaposes a une echelle microscopique ou bien peuvent-ils se compenetrer de sorte qu'il y aurait deux corps dans le meme lieu ? L'union de l'ame et du corps est-elle un melange ? Telles sont quelques-unes des questions etonnamment diverses que croise cette histoire du probleme du melange dans la philosophie grecque. Le recit propose ici suit trois lignes principales : la tradition peripateticienne, qui, d'Aristote a son commentateur Alexandre d'Aphrodise, elabore un modele de melange par mediation ou les ingredients de depart s'assimilent reciproquement pour s'unifier en un compose qualitativement intermediaire ; la doctrine stoicienne de la mixtion de part en part , ou les ingredients se compenetrent jusqu'a devenir parfaitement coextensifs ; le neoplatonisme et les transpositions qu'il opere a partir des modeles physiques precedents pour penser non seulement des relations entre corps mais aussi celle entre l'ame et le corps ou bien entre les realites incorporelles ou immaterielles de l'arriere-monde suprasensible. Fondee sur un vaste corpus de textes couvrant pres d'un millenaire d'histoire de la philosophie grecque, cette etude se veut aussi une proposition de methode : donner a lire les textes eux-memes et rester au plus pres de l'analyse des sources pour suivre parmi l'etonnant foisonnement des doctrines les developpements aussi divers qu'inattendus que la raison humaine, dans sa luxuriante imagination theorique, sait donner a la meme idee, fut-elle aussi courante et intuitive que celle de melange.","btype":1,"date":"2016","language":"French","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/4vYe8e193vKJ529","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":394,"full_name":"Groisard, Jocelyn","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":1415,"pubplace":"Paris ","publisher":"Belles lettres","series":"Anag\u00f4g\u00ea","volume":"9","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2016]}
| Title | Simplicius and Philoponus on the Authority of Aristotle |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2016 |
| Published in | Brill’ Companion to the Reception of Aristotle in Antiquity |
| Pages | 419-438 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Golitsis, Pantelis |
| Editor(s) | Falcon, Andrea |
| Translator(s) |
| Simplicius endeavoured to establish Aristotle not only as an unshakable authority in philosophy of language and natural philosophy but also as a philosopher who fully shared with Plato knowledge of the divine truth (i.e. the truth about the first realities of cosmos: the Soul, the Intelligence, and the One). Philoponus, on the other hand, rejected Aristotle as an authority, countered many of his arguments in his Aristotelian commentaries, and openly opposed Aristotle in his treatise On the Eternity of the World against Aristotle. One should abstain, however, from thinking in a simplistic man- ner of Simplicius as the “traditionalist” and of Philoponus as the “modernist.” Philoponus seems to have fully accepted the authority of Moses while commenting on the Genesis, and the fully equal rank that Simplicius granted to Aristotle and Plato was a novelty within the Neoplatonic tradition. Both philosophers, we might say, served a religious purpose by using a philosophical method; they both had recourse to philosophical exegesis, the former in order to demolish Hellenic authorities and establish the truth of Christianity, mainly its doctrine of creationism, the latter in order to defend Hellenism as a unitary and perennial system of thought. [introduction, p. 419-420] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/jYm8rtR0v0S9ee1 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1323","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1323,"authors_free":[{"id":1957,"entry_id":1323,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":129,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Golitsis, Pantelis","free_first_name":"Pantelis","free_last_name":"Golitsis","norm_person":{"id":129,"first_name":"Pantelis","last_name":"Golitsis","full_name":"Golitsis, Pantelis","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2222,"entry_id":1323,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":95,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Falcon, Andrea","free_first_name":"Andrea","free_last_name":"Falcon","norm_person":{"id":95,"first_name":"Andrea","last_name":"Falcon","full_name":"Falcon, Andrea","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1138844241","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius and Philoponus on the Authority of Aristotle","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius and Philoponus on the Authority of Aristotle"},"abstract":"Simplicius endeavoured to establish Aristotle not only as an unshakable authority in philosophy of language and natural philosophy but also \r\nas a philosopher who fully shared with Plato knowledge of the divine truth (i.e. the truth about the first realities of cosmos: the Soul, the Intelligence, and the One). Philoponus, on the other hand, rejected Aristotle as an authority, countered many of his arguments in his Aristotelian commentaries, and openly opposed Aristotle in his treatise On the Eternity of the World against Aristotle. One should abstain, however, from thinking in a simplistic man-\r\nner of Simplicius as the \u201ctraditionalist\u201d and of Philoponus as the \u201cmodernist.\u201d Philoponus seems to have fully accepted the authority of Moses while commenting on the Genesis, and the fully equal rank that Simplicius granted to Aristotle and Plato was a novelty within the Neoplatonic tradition. Both philosophers, we might say, served a religious purpose by using a philosophical method; they both had recourse to philosophical exegesis, the former in order \r\nto demolish Hellenic authorities and establish the truth of Christianity, mainly its doctrine of creationism, the latter in order to defend Hellenism as a unitary and perennial system of thought. [introduction, p. 419-420]","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/jYm8rtR0v0S9ee1","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":129,"full_name":"Golitsis, Pantelis","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":95,"full_name":"Falcon, Andrea","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1323,"section_of":304,"pages":"419-438","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":304,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Brill\u2019 Companion to the Reception of Aristotle in Antiquity","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Falcon2016","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2016","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2016","abstract":"Brill\u2019s Companion to the Reception of Aristotle provides a systematic yet accessible account of the reception of Aristotle\u2019s philosophy in Antiquity. To date, there has been no comprehensive attempt to explain this complex phenomenon. This volume fills this lacuna by offering broad coverage of the subject from Hellenistic times to the sixth century AD. It is laid out chronologically and the 23 articles are divided into three sections: I. The Hellenistic Reception of Aristotle; II. The Post-Hellenistic Engagement with Aristotle; III. Aristotle in Late Antiquity. Topics include Aristotle and the Stoa, Andronicus of Rhodes and the construction of the Aristotelian corpus, the return to Aristotle in the first century BC, and the role of Alexander of Aphrodisias and Porphyry in the transmission of Aristotle's philosophy to Late Antiquity. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/RHiGvAiG1uBRmx5","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":304,"pubplace":"Leiden \u2013 Boston","publisher":"Brill","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2016]}
| Title | Brill’ Companion to the Reception of Aristotle in Antiquity |
| Type | Edited Book |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2016 |
| Publication Place | Leiden – Boston |
| Publisher | Brill |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | |
| Editor(s) | Falcon, Andrea |
| Translator(s) |
| Brill’s Companion to the Reception of Aristotle provides a systematic yet accessible account of the reception of Aristotle’s philosophy in Antiquity. To date, there has been no comprehensive attempt to explain this complex phenomenon. This volume fills this lacuna by offering broad coverage of the subject from Hellenistic times to the sixth century AD. It is laid out chronologically and the 23 articles are divided into three sections: I. The Hellenistic Reception of Aristotle; II. The Post-Hellenistic Engagement with Aristotle; III. Aristotle in Late Antiquity. Topics include Aristotle and the Stoa, Andronicus of Rhodes and the construction of the Aristotelian corpus, the return to Aristotle in the first century BC, and the role of Alexander of Aphrodisias and Porphyry in the transmission of Aristotle's philosophy to Late Antiquity. [author's abstract] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/RHiGvAiG1uBRmx5 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"304","_score":null,"_source":{"id":304,"authors_free":[{"id":379,"entry_id":304,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":95,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Falcon, Andrea","free_first_name":"Andrea","free_last_name":"Falcon","norm_person":{"id":95,"first_name":"Andrea","last_name":"Falcon","full_name":"Falcon, Andrea","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1138844241","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Brill\u2019 Companion to the Reception of Aristotle in Antiquity","main_title":{"title":"Brill\u2019 Companion to the Reception of Aristotle in Antiquity"},"abstract":"Brill\u2019s Companion to the Reception of Aristotle provides a systematic yet accessible account of the reception of Aristotle\u2019s philosophy in Antiquity. To date, there has been no comprehensive attempt to explain this complex phenomenon. This volume fills this lacuna by offering broad coverage of the subject from Hellenistic times to the sixth century AD. It is laid out chronologically and the 23 articles are divided into three sections: I. The Hellenistic Reception of Aristotle; II. The Post-Hellenistic Engagement with Aristotle; III. Aristotle in Late Antiquity. Topics include Aristotle and the Stoa, Andronicus of Rhodes and the construction of the Aristotelian corpus, the return to Aristotle in the first century BC, and the role of Alexander of Aphrodisias and Porphyry in the transmission of Aristotle's philosophy to Late Antiquity. [author's abstract]","btype":4,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/RHiGvAiG1uBRmx5","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":95,"full_name":"Falcon, Andrea","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":304,"pubplace":"Leiden \u2013 Boston","publisher":"Brill","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2016]}
| Title | The notion of ἐπιτηδειότης in Simplicius' discussion of quality |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2016 |
| Journal | Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale |
| Volume | 27 |
| Pages | 65-83 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Hauer, Mareike |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| In this paper, I will focus on the meaning and function of epitêdeiotês in Simplicius and I will argue, based on an analysis of different passages of chapter 8 of Simplicius' Commentary on Aristotle’s Categories, that epitêdeiotês is not a mere substitute for the Aristotelian notion of dynamis, in Simplicius either. However, it will become apparent that Simplicius does not make any effort to clearly distinguish epitêdeiotês from dynamis, an aspect that might have led Todd to assume that epitêdeiotês is a mere substitute for the Aristotelian notion of dynamis. The fact that Simplicius does not explicitly distinguish epitêdeiotês from dynamis does, however, not necessarily imply that he does not make anydistinctions between the two notions. [Introduction, p. 67] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/iAt7auDa0df2ob0 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1150","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1150,"authors_free":[{"id":1725,"entry_id":1150,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":174,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hauer, Mareike","free_first_name":"Mareike","free_last_name":"Hauer","norm_person":{"id":174,"first_name":"Mareike","last_name":"Hauer","full_name":"Hauer, Mareike","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"The notion of \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03b7\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 in Simplicius' discussion of quality","main_title":{"title":"The notion of \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03b7\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 in Simplicius' discussion of quality"},"abstract":"In this paper, I will focus on the meaning and function of epit\u00eadeiot\u00eas in Simplicius and I will argue, based on an analysis of different passages of chapter 8 of Simplicius' Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Categories, that epit\u00eadeiot\u00eas is not a mere substitute for the Aristotelian notion of dynamis, in Simplicius either. \r\nHowever, it will become apparent that Simplicius does not make any effort to clearly distinguish epit\u00eadeiot\u00eas from dynamis, an aspect that might have led Todd to assume that epit\u00eadeiot\u00eas is a mere substitute for the Aristotelian notion of dynamis. The fact that Simplicius does not explicitly distinguish epit\u00eadeiot\u00eas from dynamis does, however, not necessarily imply that he does not make anydistinctions between the two notions. [Introduction, p. 67]","btype":3,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/iAt7auDa0df2ob0","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":174,"full_name":"Hauer, Mareike","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1150,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale","volume":"27","issue":"","pages":"65-83"}},"sort":[2016]}
| Title | Simplicius on the Relation between Quality and Qualified |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2016 |
| Journal | Méthexis |
| Volume | 28 |
| Pages | 111-140 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Hauer, Mareike |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Simplicius claims in his Commentary on Aristotle’s Categoriesthat quality is prior to the qualified according to nature. However, in an interesting passage in the same commentary, Simplicius describes the relation between quality and qualified in such a way that it strongly suggests an ontological simultaneity. The aim of this paper is to clarify Simplicius' notion of natural priority and to investigate the extent to which the assumption of a natural priority of the quality over the qualified is compatible with the assumption of a co-existence of quality and qualified. [Author's abstract] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/MaVlDWOYkfo0ZCx |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"387","_score":null,"_source":{"id":387,"authors_free":[{"id":506,"entry_id":387,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":174,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hauer, Mareike","free_first_name":"Mareike","free_last_name":"Hauer","norm_person":{"id":174,"first_name":"Mareike","last_name":"Hauer","full_name":"Hauer, Mareike","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Simplicius on the Relation between Quality and Qualified","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius on the Relation between Quality and Qualified"},"abstract":"Simplicius claims in his Commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Categoriesthat quality is prior to the qualified according to nature. However, in an interesting passage in the same com\u00admentary, Simplicius describes the relation between quality and qualified in such a way that it strongly suggests an ontological simultaneity. The aim of this paper is to clarify Simplicius' notion of natural priority and to investigate the extent to which the as\u00adsumption of a natural priority of the quality over the qualified is compatible with the assumption of a co-existence of quality and qualified. [Author's abstract]","btype":3,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/MaVlDWOYkfo0ZCx","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":174,"full_name":"Hauer, Mareike","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":387,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"M\u00e9thexis","volume":"28","issue":"","pages":"111-140"}},"sort":[2016]}
| Title | Simplicius’ Corollary on Place: Method of Philosophising and Doctrines |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2016 |
| Published in | Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators |
| Pages | 531–540 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Hoffmann, Philippe , Golitsis, Pantelis |
| Editor(s) | Sorabji, Richard |
| Translator(s) |
| Simplicius’ Corollary on Place (Corollarium de loco) is not a doxographic text but a strictly Neoplatonic philosophical work, with its own philosophical method. It takes the form of a digression interrupting the continuity of Simplicius’ commentary on Aristotle’s Physics (itself a written work intended for readers, hoi entugkhanontes, hoi enteuxomenoi), and its literary genre is that of a monograph treatise using dialectic and exegesis as its principal methods. The dialectical method consists in discussing the opinions of Simplicius’ predecessors, ancient and modern, mainly Aristotle and Proclus, to pave the way for the exposition of the truth, following the method inaugurated by Aristotle in the Topics and still very much alive. It also proceeds by puzzles and solutions (aporiai kai luseis). Th e exegetic method reappears even within a digression which breaks with the continuous commentary and Simplicius devotes sometimes long passages to quoting and commenting on texts from Aristotle, Theophrastus, Proclus, and Damascius, but also from the Chaldaean Oracles, Iamblichus, or Syrianus. Throughout this piece Simplicius maintains complete control over his material which includes the art of rhetoric, dialectical technique, and his philosophic intention. In it, he replaces the Aristotelian defi nition of place (‘the first unmoved boundary of the surrounding body’ (to tou periekhontos peras akinêton prôton), Phys . 4.4, 212a20–1) with a new defi nition taken from his master Damascius (place is the measure of the intrinsic positioning (metron tês theseôs) of the parts of a body, and of its right position in a greater surrounding whole), and he departs from Aristotle’s thought with a radical innovation which progressively works its way in. [introduction] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/bi4wQSMQigT8oIm |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1508","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":1508,"authors_free":[{"id":2619,"entry_id":1508,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"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":2620,"entry_id":1508,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":129,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Golitsis, Pantelis","free_first_name":"Pantelis","free_last_name":"Golitsis","norm_person":{"id":129,"first_name":"Pantelis","last_name":"Golitsis","full_name":"Golitsis, Pantelis","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2621,"entry_id":1508,"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\u2019 Corollary on Place: Method of Philosophising and Doctrines","main_title":{"title":"Simplicius\u2019 Corollary on Place: Method of Philosophising and Doctrines"},"abstract":"Simplicius\u2019 Corollary on Place (Corollarium de loco) is not a doxographic text but a strictly Neoplatonic philosophical work, with its own philosophical method. It takes the form of a digression interrupting the continuity of Simplicius\u2019 commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics (itself a written work intended for readers, hoi entugkhanontes, hoi enteuxomenoi), and its literary genre is that of a monograph treatise using dialectic and exegesis as its principal methods. The dialectical method consists in discussing the opinions of Simplicius\u2019 predecessors, ancient and modern, mainly Aristotle and Proclus, to pave the way for the exposition of the truth, following the method inaugurated by Aristotle in the Topics and still very much alive. It also proceeds by puzzles and solutions (aporiai kai luseis). Th e exegetic method reappears even within a digression which breaks with the continuous commentary and Simplicius devotes sometimes long passages to quoting and commenting on texts from Aristotle, Theophrastus, Proclus, and Damascius, but also from the Chaldaean Oracles, Iamblichus, or Syrianus. Throughout this piece Simplicius maintains complete control over his material which includes the art of rhetoric, dialectical technique, and his philosophic intention. In it, he replaces the Aristotelian defi nition of place (\u2018the first unmoved boundary of the surrounding body\u2019 (to tou periekhontos peras akin\u00eaton pr\u00f4ton), Phys . 4.4, 212a20\u20131) with a new defi nition taken from his master Damascius (place is the measure of the intrinsic positioning (metron t\u00eas these\u00f4s) of the parts of a body, and of its right position in a greater surrounding whole), and he departs from Aristotle\u2019s thought with a radical innovation which progressively works its way in. [introduction]","btype":2,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/bi4wQSMQigT8oIm","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":138,"full_name":"Hoffmann, Philippe ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":129,"full_name":"Golitsis, Pantelis","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":133,"full_name":"Sorabji, Richard","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1508,"section_of":1419,"pages":"531\u2013540","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":1419,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":"reference","type":4,"language":"en","title":"Aristotle Re-Interpreted. New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2016","edition_no":null,"free_date":null,"abstract":"This volume presents collected essays \u2013 some brand new, some republished, and others newly translated \u2013 on the ancient commentators on Aristotle and showcases the leading research of the last three decades. Through the work and scholarship inspired by Richard Sorabji in his series of translations of the commentators started in the 1980s, these ancient texts have become a key field within ancient philosophy. Building on the strength of the series, which has been hailed as \u2018a scholarly marvel\u2019, \u2018a truly breath-taking achievement\u2019 and \u2018one of the great scholarly achievements of our time\u2019 and on the widely praised edited volume brought out in 1990 (Aristotle Transformed) this new book brings together critical new scholarship that is a must-read for any scholar in the field.\r\n\r\nWith a wide range of contributors from across the globe, the articles look at the commentators themselves, discussing problems of analysis and interpretation that have arisen through close study of the texts. Richard Sorabji introduces the volume and himself contributes two new papers. A key recent area of research has been into the Arabic, Latin and Hebrew versions of texts, and several important essays look in depth at these. With all text translated and transliterated, the volume is accessible to readers without specialist knowledge of Greek or other languages, and should reach a wide audience across the disciplines of Philosophy, Classics and the study of ancient texts. [author's abstract]","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/thdAvlIvWl4EdKB","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":1419,"pubplace":"New York","publisher":"Bloomsbury Academic","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":[2016]}
| Title | Parmenide tràdito, Parmenide tradìto nel Commentario di Simplicio alla Fisica di Aristotele. Saggio introduttivo, raccolta dei testi in greco, traduzione e commentario |
| Type | Monograph |
| Language | Italian |
| Date | 2016 |
| Publication Place | Sankt Augustin |
| Publisher | Academia Verlag |
| Series | Symbolon |
| Volume | 42 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Licciardi, Ivan Adriano |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Questo libro di Ivan Adriano Licciardi su Parmenide nel Commento alla Fisica di Simplicio colma una vistosa e per certi aspetti paradossale lacuna negli studi sul Neoplatonismo: sebbene Simplicio (VI sec. d.C.) rappresenti una delle fonti più importanti per la ricostruzione del poema di Parmenide (costituisce l'unico testimone dei celebri frr. 6 e 8), manca a tutt'oggi uno studio approfondito dedicato alla sua interpretazione della figura di Parmenide e in generale della filosofia eleatica. Il lavoro di Licciardi, accurato dal punto di vista filologico, ben documentato sotto l'aspetto storiografico e dotato di acume filosofico, costituisce dunque un contributo prezioso, e per più di un aspetto seminale, su un nodo strategico della trasmissione e della ricezione del pensiero di Parmenide. L'ipotesi interpretativa che regge l'impianto storiografico di questo studio è che il Parmenide tràdito di Simplicio sia contemporaneamente un Parmenide tradìto. In effetti, Simplicio si impegna a promuovere un'immagine di Parmenide che risulti omogenea alla strategia concordista che attraversa una larga parte del tardo neoplatoni-smo pagano. La sostanziale convergenza tra Platone e Aristotele viene estesa da Simplicio anche a Parmenide, al quale egli attribuisce un'attitudine filosofica che anticipa il bi-mondismo formu-lato da Platone. Come già prima di lui aveva fatto Plutarco di Cheronea, anche Simplicio attri-buisce a Parmenide la formulazione dell'opposizione 'platonica' tra intelligibile e sensibile; sul-le orme di Plotino Simplicio interpreta il monismo ontologico di Parmenide, ossia la concezione dell'essere-uno, come una prefigurazione della seconda 'ipotesi' dell'esercizio del Parmenide platonico, dove vengono esaminate le conseguenze a partire dall'uno che è. Del resto la stessa critica che Aristotele muove a Parmenide e all'Eleatismo viene fortemente indebolita da Simplicio, che la piega alle esigenze della sua attitudine concordista. Il risultato di una simile operazione è, come spiega bene Licciardi, che il Parmenide di Simplicio non è né quello storico, né quello 'platonico', ossia quello messo in scena nel Parmenide, e neppure quello 'aristotelico', cioè quello contenuto nel I libro della Fisica. [Franco Ferrari] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/li7EZjYNGMIhBjJ |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1402","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1402,"authors_free":[{"id":2298,"entry_id":1402,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":246,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Licciardi, Ivan Adriano","free_first_name":"Ivan Adriano","free_last_name":"Licciardi","norm_person":{"id":246,"first_name":"Ivan Adriano","last_name":"Licciardi","full_name":"Licciardi, Ivan Adriano","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Parmenide tr\u00e0dito, Parmenide trad\u00ecto nel Commentario di Simplicio alla Fisica di Aristotele. Saggio introduttivo, raccolta dei testi in greco, traduzione e commentario","main_title":{"title":"Parmenide tr\u00e0dito, Parmenide trad\u00ecto nel Commentario di Simplicio alla Fisica di Aristotele. Saggio introduttivo, raccolta dei testi in greco, traduzione e commentario"},"abstract":"Questo libro di Ivan Adriano Licciardi su Parmenide nel Commento alla Fisica di Simplicio colma una vistosa e per certi aspetti paradossale lacuna negli studi sul Neoplatonismo: sebbene Simplicio (VI sec. d.C.) rappresenti una delle fonti pi\u00f9 importanti per la ricostruzione del poema di Parmenide (costituisce l'unico testimone dei celebri frr. 6 e 8), manca a tutt'oggi uno studio approfondito dedicato alla sua interpretazione della figura di Parmenide e in generale della filosofia eleatica.\r\nIl lavoro di Licciardi, accurato dal punto di vista filologico, ben documentato sotto l'aspetto storiografico e dotato di acume filosofico, costituisce dunque un contributo prezioso, e per pi\u00f9 di un aspetto seminale, su un nodo strategico della trasmissione e della ricezione del pensiero di Parmenide. L'ipotesi interpretativa che regge l'impianto storiografico di questo studio \u00e8 che il Parmenide tr\u00e0dito di Simplicio sia contemporaneamente un Parmenide trad\u00ecto. In effetti, Simplicio si impegna a promuovere un'immagine di Parmenide che risulti omogenea alla strategia concordista che attraversa una larga parte del tardo neoplatoni-smo pagano. La sostanziale convergenza tra Platone e Aristotele viene estesa da Simplicio anche a Parmenide, al quale egli attribuisce un'attitudine filosofica che anticipa il bi-mondismo formu-lato da Platone. Come gi\u00e0 prima di lui aveva fatto Plutarco di Cheronea, anche Simplicio attri-buisce a Parmenide la formulazione dell'opposizione 'platonica' tra intelligibile e sensibile; sul-le orme di Plotino Simplicio interpreta il monismo ontologico di Parmenide, ossia la concezione dell'essere-uno, come una prefigurazione della seconda 'ipotesi' dell'esercizio del Parmenide platonico, dove vengono esaminate le conseguenze a partire dall'uno che \u00e8. Del resto la stessa critica che Aristotele muove a Parmenide e all'Eleatismo viene fortemente indebolita da Simplicio, che la piega alle esigenze della sua attitudine concordista. Il risultato di una simile operazione \u00e8, come spiega bene Licciardi, che il Parmenide di Simplicio non \u00e8 n\u00e9 quello storico, n\u00e9 quello 'platonico', ossia quello messo in scena nel Parmenide, e neppure quello 'aristotelico', cio\u00e8 quello contenuto nel I libro della Fisica. [Franco Ferrari]","btype":1,"date":"2016","language":"Italian","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/li7EZjYNGMIhBjJ","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":246,"full_name":"Licciardi, Ivan Adriano","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":1402,"pubplace":"Sankt Augustin","publisher":"Academia Verlag","series":"Symbolon","volume":"42","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2016]}
| Title | Rational Assent and Self-Reversion: A Neoplatonist Response to the Stoics |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2016 |
| Journal | Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy |
| Volume | 50 |
| Pages | 237-288 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Coope, Ursula |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Humans are accountable for what they do and believe in a way that other animals are not. T h e Stoics held that this is because humans are rational, and in particular because they have the capacity for rational assent. But how exactly does the capacity for rational assent explain accountability? O ur Stoic sources do not explicitly answer this question, but I argue that they suggest the following view. Humans are responsible for assenting (and withholding as sent) just because o f the way in which the capacity for assent is reason-responsive: you can assent (or withhold assent) for reasons, and if you know whether or not you should be assenting, you can be guided by this knowledge in either assenting or withholding assent.This view, however, raises certain further questions. What is it about the nature o f our capacity for assent that enables it to be reason-responsive in a way that other psychic capacities are not? Why can one assent for a reason, but not have at* impression of something's being the case for a reason? I argue that a basis for answering these questions can be found in a perhaps surprising source: ps.-Simplicius' sixth-century commentary on Aristotle's De anima. Ps.-Simplicius draws on the Neoplatonist notion of self-reversion to explain what is distinctive about the rational capacity for assent. His account, I claim, provides a basis for explaining the distinctively reason-responsive nature of our capacity for assent. [Introduction, p. 287] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/dvgVyUDHfWVEDyD |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1276","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1276,"authors_free":[{"id":1865,"entry_id":1276,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":53,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Coope, Ursula","free_first_name":"Ursula","free_last_name":"Coope","norm_person":{"id":53,"first_name":"Ursula","last_name":"Coope","full_name":"Coope, Ursula","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1078072639","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Rational Assent and Self-Reversion: A Neoplatonist Response to the Stoics","main_title":{"title":"Rational Assent and Self-Reversion: A Neoplatonist Response to the Stoics"},"abstract":"Humans are accountable for what they do and believe in a way that other animals are not. T h e Stoics held that this is because hu\u00admans are rational, and in particular because they have the capacity for rational assent. But how exactly does the capacity for rational assent explain accountability? O ur Stoic sources do not explicitly answer this question, but I argue that they suggest the following view. Humans are responsible for assenting (and withholding as\u00ad\r\nsent) just because o f the way in which the capacity for assent is \r\nreason-responsive: you can assent (or withhold assent) for reasons, \r\nand if you know whether or not you should be assenting, you can be guided by this knowledge in either assenting or withholding assent.This view, however, raises certain further questions. What is it about the nature o f our capacity for assent that enables it to be reason-responsive in a way that other psychic capacities are not? Why can one assent for a reason, but not have at* impression of something's being the case for a reason? I argue that a basis for answering these questions can be found in a perhaps surprising source: ps.-Simplicius' sixth-century commentary on Aristotle's De anima. Ps.-Simplicius draws on the Neoplatonist notion of self-reversion to explain what is distinctive about the rational \r\ncapacity for assent. His account, I claim, provides a basis for explaining the distinctively reason-responsive nature of our capacity for assent. [Introduction, p. 287]","btype":3,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/dvgVyUDHfWVEDyD","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":53,"full_name":"Coope, Ursula","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1276,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy ","volume":"50","issue":"","pages":"237-288"}},"sort":[2016]}
| Title | The Peripatetics: Aristotle’s Heirs 322 BCE - 200 CE |
| Type | Monograph |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2016 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Baltussen, Han |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| The Peripatetics explores the development of Peripatetic thought from Theophrastus and Strato to the work of the commentator Alexander of Aphrodisias. The book examines whether the internal dynamics of this philosophical school allowed for a unity of Peripatetic thought, or whether there was a fundamental tension between philosophical creativity and the notions of core teachings and canonisation. The book discusses the major philosophical preoccupations of the Peripatetics, interactions with Hellenistic schools of thought, and the shift in focus among Greek philosophers in a changing political landscape. It is the first book of its kind to provide a survey of this important philosophical tradition. [author's abstract] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/V65LMjETUYeWctJ |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1553","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1553,"authors_free":[{"id":2716,"entry_id":1553,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Baltussen, Han","free_first_name":"Han","free_last_name":"Baltussen","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"The Peripatetics: Aristotle\u2019s Heirs 322 BCE - 200 CE","main_title":{"title":"The Peripatetics: Aristotle\u2019s Heirs 322 BCE - 200 CE"},"abstract":" The Peripatetics explores the development of Peripatetic thought from Theophrastus and Strato to the work of the commentator Alexander of Aphrodisias. The book examines whether the internal dynamics of this philosophical school allowed for a unity of Peripatetic thought, or whether there was a fundamental tension between philosophical creativity and the notions of core teachings and canonisation. The book discusses the major philosophical preoccupations of the Peripatetics, interactions with Hellenistic schools of thought, and the shift in focus among Greek philosophers in a changing political landscape. It is the first book of its kind to provide a survey of this important philosophical tradition. [author's abstract]","btype":1,"date":"2016","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/V65LMjETUYeWctJ","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":[2016]}
| Title | Doppelte Entelecheia: Das Menschenbild in “Simplikios”’ Kommentar zu Aristoteles’ De anima |
| Type | Article |
| Language | German |
| Date | 2003 |
| Journal | Elenchos |
| Volume | 24 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 57-91 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Perkams, Matthias |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
Einen Versuch zur systematischen Fruchtbarmachung des aristotelischen Konzeptes der entelecheia in einer neuplatomschen Seelenlehre liefert der Kommentar zu De anima, der uns unter dem Namen des Simplikios überliefert ist. Ich möchte im Folgenden zeigen, dass der Kommentator bemüht ist, den entelecheia- Begriff in seiner systematischen Tragweite aufzunehmen und ihn auf eine Weise fruchtbar zu machen, die über eine einfache Zurückweisung des Konzeptes von Alexander von Aphrodisias, wie man sie beim zweifelsohne echten Simplikios findet, hinaus geht. [Introduction, p. 61] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/umN6jre03GJLtAJ |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1087","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1087,"authors_free":[{"id":1643,"entry_id":1087,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":283,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Perkams, Matthias","free_first_name":"Matthias","free_last_name":"Perkams","norm_person":{"id":283,"first_name":"Matthias","last_name":"Perkams","full_name":"Perkams, Matthias","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/123439760","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Doppelte Entelecheia: Das Menschen\u00adbild in \u201cSimplikios\u201d\u2019 Kommentar zu Aristoteles\u2019 De anima","main_title":{"title":"Doppelte Entelecheia: Das Menschen\u00adbild in \u201cSimplikios\u201d\u2019 Kommentar zu Aristoteles\u2019 De anima"},"abstract":"Einen Versuch zur systematischen Fruchtbarmachung des aristotelischen Konzeptes der entelecheia in einer neuplatomschen Seelenlehre liefert der Kommentar zu De anima, der uns unter dem Namen des Simplikios \u00fcberliefert ist. Ich m\u00f6chte im Fol\u00adgenden zeigen, dass der Kommentator bem\u00fcht ist, den entelecheia- \r\nBegriff in seiner systematischen Tragweite aufzunehmen und ihn auf eine Weise fruchtbar zu machen, die \u00fcber eine einfache Zur\u00fcckwei\u00adsung des Konzeptes von Alexander von Aphrodisias, wie man sie beim zweifelsohne echten Simplikios findet, hinaus geht. [Introduction, p. 61]","btype":3,"date":"2003","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/umN6jre03GJLtAJ","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":283,"full_name":"Perkams, Matthias","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1087,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Elenchos","volume":"24","issue":"1","pages":"57-91"}},"sort":["Doppelte Entelecheia: Das Menschen\u00adbild in \u201cSimplikios\u201d\u2019 Kommentar zu Aristoteles\u2019 De anima"]}
| Title | Early Reactions to Plato’s Timaeus: polemic and exegesis in Theophrastus and Epicurus |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2003 |
| Published in | Ancient Approaches to Plato's Timaeus |
| Pages | 49-71 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Baltussen, Han |
| Editor(s) | Sharples, Robert W. , Sheppard, Anne D. |
| Translator(s) |
We are reasonably well informed about what might justly be thought of as the commentary tradition of the late Hellenistic and late antique period. In this series of papers on the theme ‘Plato’s Timaeus and the Commentary Tradition’ an obvious choice of topic has been to discuss the works of authors who explicitly declare to be commenting upon or clarifying the text o f an author. Most papers in this volume have therefore justly seen it as their task to clarify the interaction between one commentator and the Timaeus. My perspective is slightly different. Commentary as we usually see it must have had its precursors in some form or other. As it happens, we have some evidence related to the Timaeus which makes this a reasonable assumption. I therefore want to look at two thinkers whose interpretative efforts occur at the beginnings of the ‘commentary tradition’ . Here things are less clear and well-defined in that at this end o f the scale we are dealing with the emergence o f exegesis. This means that certain fundamental assumptions - eg. what a commentary or a commentator is - would no longer have an obvious value as starting points and that important questions about the interaction between authors and texts (such as ‘what is a commentary?’, ‘what form did the interpretation of texts take?’ or ‘when do commentaries emerge?’) require a fresh look. [p. 49] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/MH2yCoPHJ3hq5XF |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"971","_score":null,"_ignored":["booksection.book.abstract.keyword"],"_source":{"id":971,"authors_free":[{"id":1462,"entry_id":971,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":39,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Baltussen, Han","free_first_name":"Han","free_last_name":"Baltussen","norm_person":{"id":39,"first_name":"Han","last_name":"Baltussen","full_name":"Baltussen, Han","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/136236456","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2351,"entry_id":971,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":42,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"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":2352,"entry_id":971,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":43,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Sheppard, Anne D.","free_first_name":"Anne D.","free_last_name":"Sheppard","norm_person":{"id":43,"first_name":"Anne D.","last_name":"Sheppard","full_name":"Sheppard, Anne D.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1158024592","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Early Reactions to Plato\u2019s Timaeus: polemic and exegesis in Theophrastus and Epicurus","main_title":{"title":"Early Reactions to Plato\u2019s Timaeus: polemic and exegesis in Theophrastus and Epicurus"},"abstract":"We are reasonably well informed about what might justly be thought of as the commentary \r\ntradition of the late Hellenistic and late antique period. In this series of papers on the theme \r\n\u2018Plato\u2019s Timaeus and the Commentary Tradition\u2019 an obvious choice of topic has been to \r\ndiscuss the works of authors who explicitly declare to be commenting upon or clarifying the \r\ntext o f an author. Most papers in this volume have therefore justly seen it as their task to \r\nclarify the interaction between one commentator and the Timaeus.\r\nMy perspective is slightly different. Commentary as we usually see it must have had its \r\nprecursors in some form or other. As it happens, we have some evidence related to the \r\nTimaeus which makes this a reasonable assumption. I therefore want to look at two thinkers \r\nwhose interpretative efforts occur at the beginnings of the \u2018commentary tradition\u2019 . Here \r\nthings are less clear and well-defined in that at this end o f the scale we are dealing with the \r\nemergence o f exegesis. This means that certain fundamental assumptions - eg. what a \r\ncommentary or a commentator is - would no longer have an obvious value as starting points \r\nand that important questions about the interaction between authors and texts (such as \u2018what \r\nis a commentary?\u2019, \u2018what form did the interpretation of texts take?\u2019 or \u2018when do \r\ncommentaries emerge?\u2019) require a fresh look. [p. 49]","btype":2,"date":"2003","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/MH2yCoPHJ3hq5XF","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":39,"full_name":"Baltussen, Han","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":42,"full_name":"Sharples, Robert W.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":43,"full_name":"Sheppard, Anne D.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":971,"section_of":157,"pages":"49-71","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":157,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"Ancient Approaches to Plato's Timaeus","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Sharples\/Sheppard2003","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2003","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2003","abstract":"Twelve academic essays, given during the Institute of Classical Studies research seminar in 2000 and 2001, examine Plato's vision of the `real world' as he presented it in Timaeus while considering the text's influence on classical philosophers and scientists. Specific subjects include astronomy, the reactions of Aristotle and others to Timaeus , Hellenistic musicology, Proclus' Commentary , comparisons with Aristotle's Physics , mythology.","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/2ocEqA4hdMXnPzv","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":157,"pubplace":"University of London","publisher":"Institute of Classical Studies","series":"Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies","volume":"46, Supplement 78","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Early Reactions to Plato\u2019s Timaeus: polemic and exegesis in Theophrastus and Epicurus"]}
| Title | Einige Corollarien des Simplicius in seinem Commentar zu Aristoteles’ Physik (ed. Diels). I. p. 1129–1152 (contra Philoponum) |
| Type | Article |
| Language | German |
| Date | 2009 |
| Journal | Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie |
| Volume | 15 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 186–213 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Zahlfleisch, Johann |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
Der vorliegende Text behandelt einige Corollarien von Simplicius in seinem Kommentar zu Aristoteles' Physik, wobei er sich insbesondere mit Philoponus' Einwänden auseinandersetzt. Die Diskussion dreht sich um die Definition der Bewegung bei Aristoteles und die Frage nach ewigen und begrenzten Bewegungen. Philoponus hinterfragt, wie begrenzte Bewegung als Folge einer ewigen Bewegung angesehen werden kann, da die Potenz immer bestehe und eine Bedingung für die Bewegung sei. Simplicius argumentiert, dass die Potenz und Bewegung untrennbar verbunden sind und dass es keine ewige Bewegung geben könne. Er erläutert Aristoteles' Position und verteidigt sie gegen Philoponus' Einwände. Die Diskussion umfasst Themen wie die Rolle der Potenz in der Bewegung, die Anwendung der Begriffsdefinition auf verschiedene Sachverhalte und die Frage nach einem obersten Beweger. Am Ende wird betont, dass selbst bei einer Ablehnung des Aristotelischen Axioms von der Bewegung die Annahme eines ewigen obersten Bewegers bestehen bleibt. [introduction] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/pDLxkreRioxOsZ4 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1548","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1548,"authors_free":[{"id":2705,"entry_id":1548,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":null,"person_id":null,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Zahlfleisch, Johann","free_first_name":"Johann","free_last_name":"Zahlfleisch","norm_person":null}],"entry_title":"Einige Corollarien des Simplicius in seinem Commentar zu Aristoteles\u2019 Physik (ed. Diels). I. p. 1129\u20131152 (contra Philoponum)","main_title":{"title":"Einige Corollarien des Simplicius in seinem Commentar zu Aristoteles\u2019 Physik (ed. Diels). I. p. 1129\u20131152 (contra Philoponum)"},"abstract":"Der vorliegende Text behandelt einige Corollarien von Simplicius in seinem Kommentar zu Aristoteles' Physik, wobei er sich insbesondere mit Philoponus' Einw\u00e4nden auseinandersetzt. Die Diskussion dreht sich um die Definition der Bewegung bei Aristoteles und die Frage nach ewigen und begrenzten Bewegungen. Philoponus hinterfragt, wie begrenzte Bewegung als Folge einer ewigen Bewegung angesehen werden kann, da die Potenz immer bestehe und eine Bedingung f\u00fcr die Bewegung sei. Simplicius argumentiert, dass die Potenz und Bewegung untrennbar verbunden sind und dass es keine ewige Bewegung geben k\u00f6nne. Er erl\u00e4utert Aristoteles' Position und verteidigt sie gegen Philoponus' Einw\u00e4nde. Die Diskussion umfasst Themen wie die Rolle der Potenz in der Bewegung, die Anwendung der Begriffsdefinition auf verschiedene Sachverhalte und die Frage nach einem obersten Beweger. Am Ende wird betont, dass selbst bei einer Ablehnung des Aristotelischen Axioms von der Bewegung die Annahme eines ewigen obersten Bewegers bestehen bleibt. [introduction]","btype":3,"date":"2009","language":"German","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/pDLxkreRioxOsZ4","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1548,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Archiv f\u00fcr Geschichte der Philosophie","volume":"15","issue":"2","pages":"186\u2013213"}},"sort":["Einige Corollarien des Simplicius in seinem Commentar zu Aristoteles\u2019 Physik (ed. Diels). I. p. 1129\u20131152 (contra Philoponum)"]}
| Title | El testimonio de Aristóteles sobre Zenòn de Elea como un detractor de "lo uno" |
| Type | Article |
| Language | Spanish |
| Date | 2014 |
| Journal | Eidos: Revista de Filosofía de la Universidad del Norte |
| Volume | 23 |
| Pages | 157-181 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Gardella, Mariana |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
The aim of this paper is to discuss the traditional interpretation according to which the arguments of Zeno of Elea against multiplicity constitute a defense of monism. I will try to prove that Zeno’s objections on plurality suppose a previous critique to the existence of the one. Therefore Zeno is neither a monist nor a pluralist but a philosopher who criticizes metaphysical theories that consider being in numerical terms, i. e. as many or as one. I will focus on the analysis of the interpretation of Zeno’s philosophy developed by Aristotle. I will consider some passages from Physics, Sophistical Refutations and mainly Metaphysics Hi. 4. 1001b7-I3 (DK 29 A 21). I will also include some testimonies from Simplicius’ commentary on Aristotle’s Physics, where he discusses the interpretations of Eudemus of Rhodes and Alexander of Aphrodisias that support the Aristotelian point of view on Zeno’s philosophy (In Ph. 99.7-18, DK 29 A 21; 138. 3-6, DK 29 A 22). [Author's abstract] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/7Ft81rfWlW1HB3z |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"621","_score":null,"_source":{"id":621,"authors_free":[{"id":877,"entry_id":621,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":124,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Gardella, Mariana","free_first_name":"Mariana","free_last_name":"Gardella","norm_person":{"id":124,"first_name":"Mariana","last_name":"Gardella","full_name":"Gardella, Mariana","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"El testimonio de Arist\u00f3teles sobre Zen\u00f2n de Elea como un detractor de \"lo uno\"","main_title":{"title":"El testimonio de Arist\u00f3teles sobre Zen\u00f2n de Elea como un detractor de \"lo uno\""},"abstract":"The aim of this paper is to discuss the traditional interpretation according to which the arguments of Zeno of Elea against multiplicity constitute a defense of monism. I will try to prove that Zeno\u2019s objections on plurality suppose a previous critique to the existence of the one. Therefore Zeno is neither a monist nor a pluralist but a philosopher who criticizes metaphysical theories that consider being in numerical terms, i. e. as many or as one. I will focus on the analysis of the interpretation of Zeno\u2019s philosophy developed by Aristotle. I will consider some passages from Physics, Sophistical Re\u00adfutations and mainly Metaphysics Hi. 4. 1001b7-I3 (DK 29 A 21). I will also include some testimonies from Simplicius\u2019 commentary on Aristotle\u2019s Physics, where he discusses the interpretations of Eudemus of Rhodes and Alexander of Aphrodisias that support the Aristotelian point of view on Zeno\u2019s philosophy (In Ph. 99.7-18, DK 29 A 21; 138. 3-6, DK 29 A 22). [Author's abstract]","btype":3,"date":"2014","language":"Spanish","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/7Ft81rfWlW1HB3z","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":124,"full_name":"Gardella, Mariana","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":621,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Eidos: Revista de Filosof\u00eda de la Universidad del Norte","volume":"23","issue":"","pages":"157-181"}},"sort":["El testimonio de Arist\u00f3teles sobre Zen\u00f2n de Elea como un detractor de \"lo uno\""]}
| Title | Embryological Models in Ancient Philosophy |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2005 |
| Journal | Phronesis |
| Volume | 50 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 1-42 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Henry, Devin |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
Historically embryogenesis has been among the most philosophically intriguing phenomena. In this paper I focus on one aspect of biological development that was particularly perplexing to the ancients: self-organisation. For many ancients, the fact that an organism determines the important features of its own development required a special model for understanding how this was possible. This was especially true for Aristotle, Alexander, and Simplicius, who all looked to contemporary technology to supply that model. However, they did not all agree on what kind of device should be used. In this paper I explore the way these ancients made use of technology as a model for the developing embryo. I argue that their different choices of device reveal fundamental differences in the way each thinker understood the nature of biological development itself. In the final section of the paper I challenge the traditional view (dating back to Alexander’s interpretation of Aristotle) that the use of automata in GA can simply be read off from their use in the de motu. [Author's abstract] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/9xKw5hVszFw4oS0 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"512","_score":null,"_source":{"id":512,"authors_free":[{"id":711,"entry_id":512,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":1,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Henry, Devin","free_first_name":"Devin","free_last_name":"Henry","norm_person":{"id":1,"first_name":"Devin ","last_name":"Henry","full_name":"Henry, Devin ","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1071377922","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Embryological Models in Ancient Philosophy","main_title":{"title":"Embryological Models in Ancient Philosophy"},"abstract":"Historically embryogenesis has been among the most philosophically intriguing phenomena. In this paper I focus on one aspect of biological development that was particularly perplexing to the ancients: self-organisation. For many ancients, the fact that an organism determines the important features of its own develop\u00adment required a special model for understanding how this was possible. This was especially true for Aristotle, Alexander, and Simplicius, who all looked to con\u00adtemporary technology to supply that model. However, they did not all agree on what kind of device should be used. In this paper I explore the way these ancients made use of technology as a model for the developing embryo. I argue that their different choices of device reveal fundamental differences in the way each thinker understood the nature of biological development itself. In the final section of the paper I challenge the traditional view (dating back to Alexander\u2019s interpretation of Aristotle) that the use of automata in GA can simply be read off from their use in the de motu. [Author's abstract]","btype":3,"date":"2005","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/9xKw5hVszFw4oS0","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":1,"full_name":"Henry, Devin ","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":512,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Phronesis","volume":"50","issue":"1","pages":"1-42"}},"sort":["Embryological Models in Ancient Philosophy"]}
| Title | Empedocles' Life Cycles |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2005 |
| Published in | The Empedoclean Kosmos. Structure, Process and the Question of Cyclicity. Proceedings of the Symposium Philosophiae Antiquae Tertium Myconense July 6th-13th, 2003 |
| Pages | 331-371 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Sedley, David N. |
| Editor(s) | Pierrēs, Apostolos L. |
| Translator(s) |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/QxHvZNuQzf2nM8C |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"491","_score":null,"_source":{"id":491,"authors_free":[{"id":672,"entry_id":491,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":298,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Sedley, David N.","free_first_name":"David N.","free_last_name":"Sedley","norm_person":{"id":298,"first_name":"David N.","last_name":"Sedley","full_name":"Sedley, David N.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/12143141X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":673,"entry_id":491,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":204,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Pierr\u0113s, Apostolos L.","free_first_name":"Apostolos L.","free_last_name":"Pierr\u0113s","norm_person":{"id":204,"first_name":"Apostolos L.","last_name":"Pierr\u0113s","full_name":"Pierr\u0113s, Apostolos L.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1034968068","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Empedocles' Life Cycles","main_title":{"title":"Empedocles' Life Cycles"},"abstract":"","btype":2,"date":"2005","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/QxHvZNuQzf2nM8C","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":298,"full_name":"Sedley, David N.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":204,"full_name":"Pierr\u0113s, Apostolos L.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":491,"section_of":317,"pages":"331-371","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":317,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"The Empedoclean Kosmos. Structure, Process and the Question of Cyclicity. Proceedings of the Symposium Philosophiae Antiquae Tertium Myconense July 6th-13th, 2003","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Pierres2005","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2005","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2005","abstract":"","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/6BBfo4z277H4QNE","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":317,"pubplace":"Patras","publisher":"Institut for Philosophical Research","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Empedocles' Life Cycles"]}
| Title | Empedocles' Physica Book I: A New Reconstruction |
| Type | Book Section |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2005 |
| Published in | The Empedoclean Kosmos. Structure, Process and the Question of Cyclicity |
| Pages | 93-137 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Janko, Richard |
| Editor(s) | Pierrēs, Apostolos L. |
| Translator(s) |
The article discusses the significance of the discovery of papyrus fragments from Empedocles' Physics in Strasbourg, the first time a text from a known Presocratic philosopher has been found in a papyrus. Despite being a disappointment due to the overlapping content with the longest extant fragment of Physics Book I, the author offers a new solution to the puzzles presented by the papyrus. By reconstructing a passage from Empedocles' Physics 131 verses long, the author reveals a more coherent and less bizarre philosophical system and argues that Empedocles composed one poem instead of two. The English translation is written in verse to capture the poetic qualities of the original poem and reveals the extent of Lucretius' debt to Empedocles. The article offers a plausible and coherent account of the papyrus and has implications for different interpretations of Empedocles' system. [introduction/conclusion] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/GzaT1eGaIx8c0eP |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1358","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1358,"authors_free":[{"id":2034,"entry_id":1358,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":203,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Janko, Richard","free_first_name":"Richard","free_last_name":"Janko","norm_person":{"id":203,"first_name":"Richard","last_name":"Janko","full_name":"Janko, Richard","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1013357299","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":2391,"entry_id":1358,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":204,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Pierr\u0113s, Apostolos L.","free_first_name":"Apostolos L.","free_last_name":"Pierr\u0113s","norm_person":{"id":204,"first_name":"Apostolos L.","last_name":"Pierr\u0113s","full_name":"Pierr\u0113s, Apostolos L.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1034968068","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Empedocles' Physica Book I: A New Reconstruction","main_title":{"title":"Empedocles' Physica Book I: A New Reconstruction"},"abstract":"The article discusses the significance of the discovery of papyrus fragments from Empedocles' Physics in Strasbourg, the first time a text from a known Presocratic philosopher has been found in a papyrus. Despite being a disappointment due to the overlapping content with the longest extant fragment of Physics Book I, the author offers a new solution to the puzzles presented by the papyrus. By reconstructing a passage from Empedocles' Physics 131 verses long, the author reveals a more coherent and less bizarre philosophical system and argues that Empedocles composed one poem instead of two. The English translation is written in verse to capture the poetic qualities of the original poem and reveals the extent of Lucretius' debt to Empedocles. The article offers a plausible and coherent account of the papyrus and has implications for different interpretations of Empedocles' system. [introduction\/conclusion]","btype":2,"date":"2005","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/GzaT1eGaIx8c0eP","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":203,"full_name":"Janko, Richard","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":204,"full_name":"Pierr\u0113s, Apostolos L.","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":null,"booksection":{"id":1358,"section_of":317,"pages":"93-137","is_catalog":null,"book":{"id":317,"bilderberg_idno":null,"dare_idno":null,"catalog_idno":null,"entry_type":null,"type":4,"language":"en","title":"The Empedoclean Kosmos. Structure, Process and the Question of Cyclicity","title_transcript":"","title_translation":"","short_title":"Pierres2005","has_no_author":null,"volume":null,"date":"2005","edition_no":null,"free_date":"2005","abstract":"Pproceedings of the Symposium Philosophiae Antiquae Tertium Myconense, July 6th-July 13th, 2003.","republication_of":null,"online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/6BBfo4z277H4QNE","translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"is_catalog":0,"in_bibliography":0,"is_inactive":0,"notes":null,"doi_url":null,"book":{"id":317,"pubplace":"Patras","publisher":"Institut for Philosophical Research","series":"","volume":"","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null}}},"article":null},"sort":["Empedocles' Physica Book I: A New Reconstruction"]}
| Title | Empedokleův sfairos v pohledech antických interpretů |
| Type | Article |
| Language | Czech |
| Date | 2008 |
| Journal | Listy filologické / Folia philologica |
| Volume | 131 |
| Issue | 3/4 |
| Pages | 379-439 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Hladký, Vojtech |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/Caps1tYazG8VPNA |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"778","_score":null,"_source":{"id":778,"authors_free":[{"id":1142,"entry_id":778,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":180,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Hladk\u00fd, Vojtech ","free_first_name":"Vojtech","free_last_name":"Hladk\u00fd","norm_person":{"id":180,"first_name":"Vojt\u011bch","last_name":"Hladk\u00fd","full_name":"Hladk\u00fd, Vojt\u011bch","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Empedokle\u016fv sfairos v pohledech antick\u00fdch interpret\u016f","main_title":{"title":"Empedokle\u016fv sfairos v pohledech antick\u00fdch interpret\u016f"},"abstract":"","btype":3,"date":"2008","language":"Czech","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/Caps1tYazG8VPNA","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":180,"full_name":"Hladk\u00fd, Vojt\u011bch","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":778,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Listy filologick\u00e9 \/ Folia philologica","volume":"131","issue":"3\/4","pages":"379-439"}},"sort":["Empedokle\u016fv sfairos v pohledech antick\u00fdch interpret\u016f"]}
| Title | Epea and grammata : oral and written communication in ancient Greece |
| Type | Edited Book |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2002 |
| Publication Place | Leiden – Boston – Köln |
| Publisher | Brill |
| Series | Mnemosyne |
| Volume | Supplementum 230 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | |
| Editor(s) | Foley, John Miles , Worthington, Ian |
| Translator(s) |
This volume deals with aspects of orality and oral traditions in ancient Greece, specifically literature, rhetoric and society, and philosophy, and is a selection of refereed papers from the fourth biennial Orality and Literacy in Ancient Greece conference, held at the University of Missouri Columbia in 2000. |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/N7JuSfK6tmKQpol |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"293","_score":null,"_source":{"id":293,"authors_free":[{"id":1849,"entry_id":293,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":40,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Foley, John Miles","free_first_name":"John Miles","free_last_name":"Foley","norm_person":{"id":40,"first_name":"John Miles","last_name":"Foley","full_name":"Foley, John Miles","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/137343485","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1850,"entry_id":293,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":41,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"},"free_name":"Worthington, Ian","free_first_name":"Ian","free_last_name":"Worthington","norm_person":{"id":41,"first_name":"Ian","last_name":"Worthington","full_name":"Worthington, Ian","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/136869742","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Epea and grammata : oral and written communication in ancient Greece","main_title":{"title":"Epea and grammata : oral and written communication in ancient Greece"},"abstract":"This volume deals with aspects of orality and oral traditions in ancient Greece, specifically literature, rhetoric and society, and philosophy, and is a selection of refereed papers from the fourth biennial Orality and Literacy in Ancient Greece conference, held at the University of Missouri Columbia in 2000.","btype":4,"date":"2002","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/N7JuSfK6tmKQpol","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":40,"full_name":"Foley, John Miles","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}},{"id":41,"full_name":"Worthington, Ian","role":{"id":2,"role_name":"editor"}}],"book":{"id":293,"pubplace":"Leiden \u2013 Boston \u2013 K\u00f6ln","publisher":"Brill","series":"Mnemosyne","volume":"Supplementum 230","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Epea and grammata : oral and written communication in ancient Greece"]}
| Title | Essentialisme. Alexandre d'Aphrodise entre logique, physique et cosmologie |
| Type | Monograph |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2007 |
| Publication Place | Berlin – New York |
| Publisher | de Gruyter |
| Series | Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca et Byzantina |
| Volume | 2 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Rashed, Marwan |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
This book is the first study of the ontological system of Alexander of Aphrodisias (floruit c. 200 AD), famous for his commentaries on the works of Aristotle. By drawing not only on the entire known corpus of the commentator's works, but also on numerous new Greek and Arabic sources, Marwan Rashed aimsat defining Alexander’s place in the history of metaphysics. Alexander’s attempt to substantiate the objectivity of the Aristotelian form draws down the curtain on the phase of the Hellenistic peripatos, at the same time marking the beginning of medieval Aristotelianism. |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/47wiDCf94Sta9Mr |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"9","_score":null,"_source":{"id":9,"authors_free":[{"id":9,"entry_id":9,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":194,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Rashed, Marwan","free_first_name":"Marwan","free_last_name":"Rashed","norm_person":{"id":194,"first_name":"Marwan","last_name":"Rashed","full_name":"Rashed, Marwan","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/1054568634","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Essentialisme. Alexandre d'Aphrodise entre logique, physique et cosmologie","main_title":{"title":"Essentialisme. Alexandre d'Aphrodise entre logique, physique et cosmologie"},"abstract":"This book is the first study of the ontological system of Alexander of Aphrodisias (floruit c. 200 AD), famous for his commentaries on the works of Aristotle. By drawing not only on the entire known corpus of the commentator's works, but also on numerous new Greek and Arabic sources, Marwan Rashed aimsat defining Alexander\u2019s place in the history of metaphysics. Alexander\u2019s attempt to substantiate the objectivity of the Aristotelian form draws down the curtain on the phase of the Hellenistic peripatos, at the same time marking the beginning of medieval Aristotelianism.","btype":1,"date":"2007","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/47wiDCf94Sta9Mr","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":194,"full_name":"Rashed, Marwan","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":{"id":9,"pubplace":"Berlin \u2013 New \tYork","publisher":"de Gruyter","series":"Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca et Byzantina","volume":"2","edition_no":"","valid_from":null,"valid_until":null},"booksection":null,"article":null},"sort":["Essentialisme. Alexandre d'Aphrodise entre logique, physique et cosmologie"]}