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

Learn More →

Anonymus Iamblichi and Nomos: Beyond the Sophistic Discourse

Anonymus Iamblichi and Nomos: Beyond the Sophistic Discourse AbstractThe paper challenges the traditional assumption that the fragments of ‘Anonymus Iamblichi’ (Diels-Kranz 89) are best understood and interpreted against the intellectual and cultural background of the so-called ‘sophistic movement’. I begin by suggesting that we can distinguish, in the fragments, between two separate ‘discourses’ concerning nomos (‘law’) and its role in human life: an abstract ‘sophistic’ discourse, centered around the defense of nomos against the antinomian champions of natural pleonexia, and another, less abstract and more polemical discourse on nomos, which is aimed at the author’s contemporary Athens. I argue that the author’s engagement with well-known sophistic ideas is best understood as instrumental to his polemical agenda: it provides him with a powerful intellectual framework in which to articulate his criticism of democratic society, especially with regard to traditional notions of social ‘benefaction’ and the relation between rich and poor. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Polis: The Journal for Ancient Greek Political Thought Brill

Anonymus Iamblichi and Nomos: Beyond the Sophistic Discourse

Download PDF
16 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/anonymus-iamblichi-and-nomos-beyond-the-sophistic-discourse-OS7wd0fAB8

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
Copyright © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0142-257x
eISSN
2051-2996
DOI
10.1163/20512996-12340341
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

AbstractThe paper challenges the traditional assumption that the fragments of ‘Anonymus Iamblichi’ (Diels-Kranz 89) are best understood and interpreted against the intellectual and cultural background of the so-called ‘sophistic movement’. I begin by suggesting that we can distinguish, in the fragments, between two separate ‘discourses’ concerning nomos (‘law’) and its role in human life: an abstract ‘sophistic’ discourse, centered around the defense of nomos against the antinomian champions of natural pleonexia, and another, less abstract and more polemical discourse on nomos, which is aimed at the author’s contemporary Athens. I argue that the author’s engagement with well-known sophistic ideas is best understood as instrumental to his polemical agenda: it provides him with a powerful intellectual framework in which to articulate his criticism of democratic society, especially with regard to traditional notions of social ‘benefaction’ and the relation between rich and poor.

Journal

Polis: The Journal for Ancient Greek Political Thought – Brill

Published: Sep 9, 2021

There are no references for this article.