Cet article examine les opinions des néoplatoniciens tardifs sur le phénomène social de la philotimia (« amours des honneurs » ; « ambition »). Sur la base du Commentaire de l’Alcibiade de Proclus, on montre que la philotimia est une émotion qui résulte d’une compréhension imparfaite de la vraie nature de l’honneur et du pouvoir. La mauvaise philotimia pousse les ambitieux à poursuivre une carrière politique en quête de pouvoir mondain et de prestige au prix de l’étude de la philosophie. (...) La bonne philotimia, au contraire, peut les pousser à rechercher ce qui est véritablement bien et donc les mettre sur la voie de la philosophie. L’histoire fournit maints exemples de bonne et de mauvaise philotimia. Damascius, dans sa Vie d’Isidore, mobilise des théories de la bonne et de la mauvaise philotimia pour éloigner ses lecteurs de l’arène politique et les conduire vers la poursuite de la philosophie. (shrink)

The aim of this paper, which is devoted to the Proclean Commentary on the Alcibiades I, is to explain not only why this dialogue is so popular in Neoplatonism, i.e. why it is considered the foundation of Plato’s teaching, but also its methodological importance for reading the proems of the dialogues. For, in my opinion, it has not yet been properly investigated whether and why the two issues, i.e. the introductory importance and the importance for grasping the relevance of the (...) proems, are closely linked. I will therefore first try to show how the isagogical questions are perfectly embedded in a philosophical system that has redefined the very criteria of textual analysis around the idea that each dialogue is a literary microcosm analogous to the macrocosmic universe. I will then show how the exegetical methods proposed by Proclus in his Commentary on the Alcibiades are influenced by certain theoretical assumptions that are useful for reading the dialogues in general, and finally I will demonstrate how the proem of the Alcibiades allows us to re-evaluate the importance of the proems that Plato appended to his writings. (shrink)

I argue that in his commentary on Epictetus’ Encheiridion, Simplicius derives a method by which his students can enter into the process of self-constitution, which is only achieved through completion of the study of Plato’s dialogues. The result of following the method is the attainment of a perspective consonant with the level of political virtue, which I call ‘political subjectivity’. This is a speculative interpretation of the effect the student would. experience in following the method, accomplished through analyses of Simplicius’ (...) interpretation of Epictetus’ concept of to eph’ hēmīn and the related prohairesis. I complement this with an analysis of the metaphysical foundation Simplicius gives the method in light of Charles Taylor’s notion of ‘strong evaluation’. In this way, I show how Simplicius adapts these concepts to his Neoplatonic psychology and virtue theory to make the method serve as preparation for the development of virtue prior to study of Plato. (shrink)