As was first pointed out by Gercke, there are close parallels, which clearly suggest a common source, between Apuleius,de Platone1.12, the treatiseOn Fatefalsely attributed to Plutarch, Calcidius'excursuson fate in his commentary on Plato'sTimaeus, and certain sections of the treatisede Natura hominisby Nemesius. Gercke traced the doctrines common to these works to the school of Gaius; recently however Dillon has pointed out that, while Albinus shares with these works the characteristic Middle-Platonic notion of fate as conditional or hypothetical – our actions (...) are free, but once we have acted the consequences of our actions are fated and inevitable – he doesnotshare certain other common features, such as the identification of fate as substance with the world-soul and the hierarchy of three providences. (shrink)

As was first pointed out by Gercke, there are close parallels, which clearly suggest a common source, between Apuleius, de Platone 1.12, the treatise On Fate falsely attributed to Plutarch, Calcidius' excursus on fate in his commentary on Plato's Timaeus, and certain sections of the treatise de Natura hominis by Nemesius. Gercke traced the doctrines common to these works to the school of Gaius; recently however Dillon has pointed out that, while Albinus shares with these works the characteristic Middle-Platonic notion (...) of fate as conditional or hypothetical – our actions are free, but once we have acted the consequences of our actions are fated and inevitable – he does not share certain other common features, such as the identification of fate as substance with the world-soul and the hierarchy of three providences. (shrink)

This paper sets out to analyze Proclus’ exegesis of Socrates’ suggestion in Parmenides 132d1-3 that Forms stand fixed as patterns, as it were, in the nature, with the other things being images and likenesses of them. Proclus’ analysis of the notion of being pattern reveals the impact of the Aristotelian conception of the form as paradigm on his views, as we can infer from Alexander of Aphrodisias’ and Simplicius’ explanation of the paradigmatic character of the Aristotelian form. Whereas Aristotle and (...) Alexander of Aphrodisias refute the efficient causality of the Platonic Forms and support that μέθεξις is just a metaphor, Syrianus, Proclus and Asclepius defend the Platonic theory, and specifically Proclus, who brings to the fore the multilateral role of the Forms as patterns with regard to the secondary things of this realm.[1] [1] An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Symposium Platonicum XII: Plato’s Parmenides, organized by the International Plato Society, Paris, 15-19 July 2019. (shrink)

The paper deals with the issue of some Aristotelian motives and categories in the Didaskalikos of Alcinous, one of the most important works of Middle Platonism. They are particularly evident in the chapters in which Alcinous discusses issues related to Platonic theology and theory of Ideas. A special place here is the motif of God as Intellect who thinks of Ideas (of absolute Forms, in the Platonic sense) and at the same time thinks of Himself (in the Aristotelian sense). In (...) connection with these Aristotelian motives, the question arises: do these motives have a substantive significance here, that is, do they really express Aristotle’s metaphysical views, or are they only a literary framework, in which the Platonic content is clothed? (shrink)

El objetivo de este artículo es reconstruir el contenido y los métodos de enseñanza del platonismo en el siglo II. Para tal propósito, el Didaskalikós de Alcínoo será el instrumento principal del que nos sirvamos para delimitar el origen, influencias y convergencias del platonismo medio, junto a otros textos paralelos en cronología y contenido. La supervivencia de esta obra completa nos ofrece una excelente oportunidad de reconstruir de manera precisa el carácter general del platonismo medio como una de las épocas (...) más cruciales – y a la vez más desconocidas- en el desarrollo y expansión del platonismo. Las obras de Apuleyo, Ario Didimo, Numenio de Apamea, el Comentario anónimo del Teeteto y Antíoco de Ascalón serán las fuentes que nos ayuden a completar el contenido del Didaskalikós como manual fundamental de enseñanza del platonismo en el siglo II. (shrink)

Soixante-dix ans environ séparent le Discours véritable contre les chrétiens du Contre l'écrit de Celse intitulé Discours véritable. Origène ne tient pas compte de cette distance historique: il discute au présent. Or, la situation de la culture païenne n'est plus exactement la même qu'au siècle précédent. La dynastie des Sévères s'effondre dans le désordre. La pensée s'appauvrit jusqu'à devenir «un Sahara littéraire» selon l'expression tranchante de Ferdinand Lot. De leur côté, les chrétiens ont gagné du terrain et leur recrutement s'est (...) modifié: désormais ils comptent dans leurs rangs des lettrés capables d'articuler la doctrine. Au siècle des apologètes succède celui des premiers théologiens. Cependant, bien que les interlocuteurs de Celse aient changé, païens et Chrétiens se situent dans la continuité de leur courant respectif. On pourrait résumer la situation en disant que le paganisme continue de s'effriter tandis que le christianisme se définit lentement. (shrink)