Three points serve as the backbone of Engberg-Pedersen’s interpretation of the social kind of oikeiōsis in Stoicism: (1) rejection of the role of the cosmic nature as a normative premise in oikeiōsis; (2) exclusive stress on the self-reflexive dimension in oikeiōsis; (3) taking the change in one’s view of oneself and other people to be the heart of oikeiōsis. However, none of these is convincing when examined closely. We have also seen that Engberg-Pedersen’s treatment of Paul is insufficient both in its methodological refinement and in exegesis. Engberg-Pedersen’s comparison is dyadic and imbalanced. Moreover, it fails to grasp the complexities and intricacies of Paul’s view of the Jewish customs, the Law, scriptural traditions, and other culturally conditioned social norms.
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
-
2
Troels Engberg-Pedersen, Paul and the Stoics (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 2000).
-
5
Troels Engberg-Pedersen, The Stoic Theory of Oikeiosis: Moral Development and Social Interaction in Early Stoic Philosophy (Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University, 1990).
-
7
Ibid., 35.
-
9
Ibid., 34.
-
23
Ibid., 244, n.8.
-
24
Ibid., 70. Italics his.
-
25
Julia Annas, The Morality of Happiness (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993).
-
30
Ibid., 46.
-
37
So Brad Inwood, “Stoic Ethics,” in The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (ed. K. Algra et al.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 676: “Both human and cosmic nature serve as the foundations and first principles of Stoics ethics. . . . [H]uman and cosmic nature are related as part to whole.”
-
40
Translation by Raphael Woolf, On Moral Ends (ed. Julia Annas and trans. R. Woolf; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), with slight change and Latin added.
-
50
Ibid., 148. His emphasis.
-
51
J.Z. Smith, Drudgery Divine: On the Comparison of Early Christianities and the Religions of Late Antiquity (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990) 108.
-
53
Alan Segal, Paul the Convert: The Apostolate and Apostasy of Saul the Pharisee (New Heaven and London: Yale University Press, 1990) 75.
-
58
Ibid., 51.
-
62
Raymond F. Collins, First Corinthians (Sacra Pagina; Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1999) 407.
-
63
Cf. Dale B. Martin, The Corinthian Body (New Haven: Yale, 1995) 199: “[Paul’s] writings confirms the Greco-Roman gender hierarchy . . . [T]the physiology of gender dominant in Greco-Roman society . . . is taken over by Paul as an unquestionable given.”
-
65
Ibid., 172. My emphasis.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 319 | 73 | 5 |
| Full Text Views | 267 | 11 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 68 | 23 | 3 |
Three points serve as the backbone of Engberg-Pedersen’s interpretation of the social kind of oikeiōsis in Stoicism: (1) rejection of the role of the cosmic nature as a normative premise in oikeiōsis; (2) exclusive stress on the self-reflexive dimension in oikeiōsis; (3) taking the change in one’s view of oneself and other people to be the heart of oikeiōsis. However, none of these is convincing when examined closely. We have also seen that Engberg-Pedersen’s treatment of Paul is insufficient both in its methodological refinement and in exegesis. Engberg-Pedersen’s comparison is dyadic and imbalanced. Moreover, it fails to grasp the complexities and intricacies of Paul’s view of the Jewish customs, the Law, scriptural traditions, and other culturally conditioned social norms.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 319 | 73 | 5 |
| Full Text Views | 267 | 11 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 68 | 23 | 3 |