Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Neoplatonism

Neoplatonism © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2010 DOI: 10.1163/156852810X523923 Phronesis 55 (2010) 357-375 brill.nl/phro Book Notes * Neoplatonism Peter Adamson Philosophy Department, King’s College London, Strand, London WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom peter.adamson@kcl.ac.uk Natural Philosophy It used to be a well-known fact that Neoplatonists were not much inter- ested in the natural world. But like other well-known facts – such as the Neoplatonists’ supposed lack of interest in practical ethics and political philosophy – this claim has slowly been acquiring the status of debunked stereotype. A new emphasis on Neoplatonic natural philosophy, already detectable in some recent publications, 1 reaches a climax with the appear- ance of a collection of articles edited by Riccardo Chiaradonna and Franco Trabattoni. 2 It also includes three excellent articles that deal with figures before Plotinus. Rashed questions the evidence of Simplicius which claims that there was a tradition of opposing Aristotle’s theory that the four elements have rectilinear motion. He shows that, instead, each of Ptolemy, Xenarchus and Plotinus had distinctive views; in fact Ptolemy’s was actually close to that of Aristotle. Chiaradonna provides a fundamen- tal study of the aims of Galen’s On Demonstration , which is preserved only in fragments and reports. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Phronesis Brill

Neoplatonism

Phronesis , Volume 55 (4): 357 – Jan 1, 2010

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/neoplatonism-I0O2nW0I4J

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2010 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0031-8868
eISSN
1568-5284
DOI
10.1163/156852810X523923
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2010 DOI: 10.1163/156852810X523923 Phronesis 55 (2010) 357-375 brill.nl/phro Book Notes * Neoplatonism Peter Adamson Philosophy Department, King’s College London, Strand, London WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom peter.adamson@kcl.ac.uk Natural Philosophy It used to be a well-known fact that Neoplatonists were not much inter- ested in the natural world. But like other well-known facts – such as the Neoplatonists’ supposed lack of interest in practical ethics and political philosophy – this claim has slowly been acquiring the status of debunked stereotype. A new emphasis on Neoplatonic natural philosophy, already detectable in some recent publications, 1 reaches a climax with the appear- ance of a collection of articles edited by Riccardo Chiaradonna and Franco Trabattoni. 2 It also includes three excellent articles that deal with figures before Plotinus. Rashed questions the evidence of Simplicius which claims that there was a tradition of opposing Aristotle’s theory that the four elements have rectilinear motion. He shows that, instead, each of Ptolemy, Xenarchus and Plotinus had distinctive views; in fact Ptolemy’s was actually close to that of Aristotle. Chiaradonna provides a fundamen- tal study of the aims of Galen’s On Demonstration , which is preserved only in fragments and reports.

Journal

PhronesisBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2010

There are no references for this article.