This paper aims to show that the Middle Platonists’ appeal to the Timaeus was grounded in a complex and effective philosophical reasoning: the Middle Platonists conceived of Plato’s text as a web of passages which Plato himself had carefully established. Only a few of them were granted a qualified priority, namely, those offering a complete and comprehensive philosophical account of the key elements which the Platonists regarded as fundamental. This will allow us to show that the Middle Platonists’ preference for the Timaeus does not depend on the fact that it is systematic. Rather it is systematic insofar as it proves capable of giving context to passages from other dialogues and provides them with an account that is philosophically sound.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
Baltes, M. (1976). Die Weltentstehung des platonischen Timaios nach den antiken Interpreten I, Leiden.
Baltes, M. (1983). Zur Philosophie des Platonikers Attikos, in H.-D. Blume, F. Mann (eds.), Platonismus und Christentum. Festschrift für Heinrich Dörrie, Münster, 38–57.
Boys-Stones, G. (2001). Post-Hellenistic Philosophy, Oxford.
Boys-Stones, G. (2018). Platonist philosophy 80 bc to ad 250: an introduction and collection of sources in translation, Cambridge-New York.
Donini, P. (1994). Testi e commenti, manuali e insegnamento: la forma sistematica e i metodi della filosofia in età postellenistica, in H. Temporini, W. Haase (Hrsg.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt ii 36, 7, Berlin-New York, pp. 5027–5100.
Donini, P. (2000). Il trattato filosofico in Plutarco, in I. Gallo, C. Moreschini (eds), I generi letterari in Plutarco, Napoli, pp. 133–45.
Dörrie, H. and M. Baltes (eds.) (1998). Der Platonismus in der Antike, Band V. Die philosophische Lehre des Platonismus. Platonische Physik (im antiken Verständnis) ii, Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt.
Erler, M. (1996). Philologia medicans. La lettura delle opere di Epicuro nella sua scuola, in Gabriele Giannantoni, Marcello Gigante (eds.), Epicureismo greco e romano, Napoli, II, pp. 513–526.
Ferrari, F. (1995). Dio, idee e materia: la struttura del cosmo in Plutarco di Cheronea, Napoli.
Ferrari, F. (2000). La letteratura filosofica di carattere esegetico in Plutarco, in I. Gallo, C. Moreschini (eds.), I generi letterari in Plutarco, Napoli, pp. 147–175.
Ferrari, F. (2001). La funzione dell’esegesi testuale nel medioplatonismo: il caso del Timeo, Athenaeum 89, 525–574.
Ferrari, F. (2010). Esegesi, commento e sistema nel medioplatonismo, in A. Neschke et al. (Hrsg.), Argumenta in dialogos Platonis, Teil 1: Platoninterpretation und ihre Hermeneutik von der Antike bis zum Beginn des 19. Jahrhunderts, Schwabe, pp. 51–76.
Ferrari, F. (2012). L’esegesi medioplatonica del Timeo: metodi, finaltà, risultati, in F. Celia and A. Ulacco (eds.), Il Timeo. Esegi greche, arabe, latine, Pisa, pp. 81–131.
Gioè, A. (ed.) (2002). Filosofi medioplatonici del secondo secolo d.C., Napoli.
Mansfeld, J. (1994). Prolegomena. Questions to Be Settled Before the Study of an Author, or a Text, Leiden-New York-Köln.
Opsomer, J. (1996). ζητήματα. Structure et argumentation dans les Quaestiones Platonicae, in J.A. Fernandez Delgado, F. Pordomingo Pardo (eds.), Estudios sobre Plutarco. Aspectos Formales, Salamanca-Madrid, pp. 71–83.
Opsomer, J. (2004). Plutarch’s De animae Procreatione in Timaeo. Manipulation or search for consistency?, in P. Adamson, H. Baltussen, M.W.F. Stone (eds.), Philosophy, Science and Exegesis in Greek, Latin and Arabic Commentaries, London, pp. 137–162.
Opsomer, J. (2007). Plutarch on the One and the Dyad, in R. Sorabji and R.W. Sharples (eds.), Greek and Roman Philosophy: 100 bc – 200 ad, London, pp. 379–395.
Opsomer, J. (2011). Arguments non lineaires et pensée en cercle. Forme et argumentation dans les Questions Platoniciennes de Plutarque, in X. Brouillette, A. Giavatto (éds.), Les Dialogues Platoniciens chez Plutarque. Stratégies et Méthodes Exégétiques, Leuven, pp. 93–116.
Petrucci, F.M. (2016a). Argumentative Strategies for Interpreting Plato’s Cosmogony: Taurus and the Issue of Literalism in Antiquity, Phronesis 61, 43–59.
Petrucci, F.M. (2016b). ἀντέχεσθαι τῶν ῥημάτων: the Neoplatonic Criticism of Atticus’ Exegesis of Plato’s Cosmogony, in T. Dangel, J. Halfwassen, C.S. O’Brien (eds), Seele und Materie im Neuplatonismus, Heidelberg, pp. 97–125.
Petrucci, F.M. (2018). Taurus of Beirut. The Other Side of Middle Platonism, London-New York.
Sedley, D. (2013). Cicero and the Timaeus, in M. Schofield (ed.), Aristotle, Plato and the Pythagoreanism in the First Century bc, Cambridge, pp. 188–213.
Tarrant, H. (2000). Plato’s First Interpreters, London.
Trabattoni, F. (1987). Il frammento 4 di Attico, Rivista di storia della filosofia 3, 421–438.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 325 | 212 | 35 |
Full Text Views | 77 | 14 | 1 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 204 | 42 | 3 |
This paper aims to show that the Middle Platonists’ appeal to the Timaeus was grounded in a complex and effective philosophical reasoning: the Middle Platonists conceived of Plato’s text as a web of passages which Plato himself had carefully established. Only a few of them were granted a qualified priority, namely, those offering a complete and comprehensive philosophical account of the key elements which the Platonists regarded as fundamental. This will allow us to show that the Middle Platonists’ preference for the Timaeus does not depend on the fact that it is systematic. Rather it is systematic insofar as it proves capable of giving context to passages from other dialogues and provides them with an account that is philosophically sound.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 325 | 212 | 35 |
Full Text Views | 77 | 14 | 1 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 204 | 42 | 3 |