Eraclito allievo di Pirrone: per una revisione di Philop. In Cat. 2,7–24

in Méthexis
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

In this article I try to solve an hermeneutical problem concerning some lines (2,7–24) of the Commentary to the Categories of John Philoponus. There, the commentator would seem committing an error, stating that Heraclitus was a disciple of Pyrrho by the expression «ὁ δὲ μαθητὴς αὐτοῦ Ἡράκλειτος (2,15)». I will present the edition of the text made by Busse with its translation and exegesis and, then, I will compare the passage in Philoponus with similar ones in other Neoplatonic commentators to the Categories. Hence, I will show how the speech of Philoponus is, contrary to what was previously thought, complete and efficient and I will try to propose possible solutions for the text.

Eraclito allievo di Pirrone: per una revisione di Philop. In Cat. 2,7–24

in Méthexis

Sections

References

Adoménas M. (2002). ‘The Fluctuating Fortunes of Heraclitus in Plato’. In Laks A. ; Louguet C. Qu’est-ce que la philosophie présocratique? What is the Presocratic philosophy?. pu du SeptentrionVilleneuve d’Ascq: pp. 419447.

Castagnoli L. (2007). ‘«Everything is True», «Everything is False»: Self-Refutation Arguments from Democritus to Augustine’. Antiquorum philosophia1: 1174.

Erginel M.M. (2009). ‘Relativism and Self-Refutation in the Theaetetus. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy37: 145.

Flückiger H. (2005). ‘The EΦEKTIKOI in the Commentators’. In Brancacci A. Philosophy and Doxography in the Imperial Age. Leo S. Olschki EditoreFirenze: 113129.

Irwin T. (1977). ‘Plato’s Heracleiteanism’. Philosophical Quarterly27: 113.

Kahn C.H. (1977). ‘Plato and Heraclitus’. Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy1: 241258.

Mansfeld J. (1994). Prolegomena: Questions to Be Settled Before the Study of an Author or a text. Brill, Leiden/New York 1994.

McCabe M.M. (2000). Plato and His Predecessors: The Dramatisation of Reason. Cambridge University PressCambridge: 97104.

Moyal G.J.D. (1988). ‘Did Plato Misunderstand Heraclitus?’. Revue des études anciennes90: 8998.

Notomi N. (2013). ‘A Protagonist of the Sophistic Movement? Protagoras in Historiography’. In van Ophuijsen J.M. ; van Raalte M. ; Stork P . Protagoras of Abdera: The Man His Measure. Brill Leiden: 1136.

Philoponus. On Aristotle Categories15. Transl. by Sirkel R. Tweedale M. & Harris J. with Philoponus. A Treatise Concerning the Whole and the Parts. Transl. by King D. . Bloomsbury Academic. London2014.

Pirrone. Testimonianze. A cura di Fernanda Decleva Caizzi. Bibliopolis. Napoli 1981.

Polito R. (2004). The Sceptical Road: Aenesidemus’ Appropriation of Heraclitus. BrillLeiden.

Polito R. (2014). Aenesidemus of Cnossus: Testimonia. Cambridge University PressCambridge.

Rist J.M. (1970). ‘The Heracliteanism of Aenesidemus’. Phoenix24/4: 309319.

Schofield M. (2007). ‘Aenesidemus: Pyrrhonist and Heraclitean’. In Ioppolo A.M. ; Sedley D.N. Pyrrhonists, Patricians and Platonizers: Hellenistic Philosophy in the Period 155–86 b.c . Bibliopolis Naples: 269338.

Simplicius. Commentaire sur lesCatégories. Fasc. 1: introduction première partie (pp. 1–93 Kalbfleisch) trad. de Ph. Hoffmann (avec la collaboration de I. et P. Hadot); commentaire et notes par I. Hadot. Brill. Leiden1990.

Tarán L. (1999). ‘Heraclitus: the River-fragments and their Implications’. Elenchos20/1: 952.

Tarrant H. (1998). ‘Introduction’. In Olympiodorus. Commentary on Plato’s Gorgias. Transl. with full notes by Jackson R. Lycos K. Tarrant H. . Brill. Leiden.

van Eck J. (2009). ‘Moving like a Stream: Protagoras’ Heracliteanism in Plato’s Theaetetus’ . Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy36: 199248.

Wedin M. (2004). ‘On the Use and Abuse of Non-contradicton. Aristotle’s Critique of Protagoras and Heraclitus in Metaphysics Gamma 5’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy26: 213239.

Westerink L.G. (1990). ‘The Alexandrian commentators and the Introductions to their Commentaries’. In Sorabji R. Aristotle Transformed. The Ancient commentators and their Influence. Duckworth London/Ithaca ny: 325348.

Wiśniewski B. (1953). ‘Protagoras et Héraclite’. Revue belge de philologie et d’histoire31/2–3: 490499.

Index Card

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 9 9 3
Full Text Views 4 4 4
PDF Downloads 2 2 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0