WE must first state the subject of our inquiry and the faculty to which it belongs: its subject is demonstration and the faculty that carries it out demonstrative science.

ABSTRACT: English translation of the 2nd/3rd century Peripatetic Philosopher's Alexander of Aphrodisias commentary on Aristotle's non-modal syllogistic, i.e. on one of the most influential logical texts of all times. -/- Volume includes introduction on Alexander of Aphrodisias and the early commentators, translation with notes and comments, appendices with a new translation of Aristotle's text, a summary of Aristotle's non-modal syllogistic and textual notes.

This book explores the various views on language and its relation to philosophy in the Platonic tradition by examening the reception of Plato’s Cratylus in antiquity in general, and the commentary of the Neoplatonist Proclus in particular.

The last phase of Greek philosophy has until recently been less intelligently studied than any other, and in our understanding of its development there are still lamentable lacunae. Three errors in particular have in the past prevented a proper appreciation of Plotinus' place in the history of philosophy. The first was the failure to distinguish Neoplatonism from Platonism: this vitiates the work of many early exponents from Ficinus down to Kirchner. The second was the belief that the Neoplatonists, being ‘mystics,’ (...) were necessarily incomprehensible to the plain man or even to the plain philosopher. To have encouraged the persistence of this superstition in the nineteenth century is the least pardonable of Creuzer's many sins. The third was the chronological confusion involved in the ascription to Saint Paul's contemporary of the works of the pretended Dionysius Areopagita, which contain a fully-developed Neoplatonic theology. Though the fraud had been exposed by Scaliger, these writings continued down to the beginning of the nineteenth century to be used as evidence that the ‘Nsoplatonic trinity’ was an inferior imitation of the Christian one. When this false trail was at length abandoned the fashion for orientalizing explanations persisted in another guise: to the earliest historians of Neoplatonism, Simon and Vacherot, the school of Plotinus was ‘the school of Alexandria,’ and its inspiration was mainly Egyptian. Vacherot says of Neoplatonism that it is ‘essentially and radically oriental, having nothing of Greek thought but its language and procedure.’ Few would be found to-day to subscribe to so sweeping a pronouncement; but the existence of an important oriental element in Plotinus' thought is still affirmed by many French and German writers. (shrink)

Syrianus, originally from Alexandria, moved to Athens and became the head of the Academy there after the death of Plutarch of Athens. Syrianus attacked Aristotle in his commentary on Books 13 and 14 of the "Metaphysics", just as his pupil Proclus was to do later in his commentaries on Plato. This is because in "Metaphysics 13-14", Aristotle himself was being thoroughly polemical towards Platonism, in particular against the Academic doctrine of Form-numbers and the whole concept of separable number. In reply, (...) Syrianus gives an account of mathematical number and of geometrical entities, and of how all of these are processed in the mind, which was to influence Proclus and all subsequent Neoplatonists. (shrink)

This study of the practices and principles of a wide range of ancient scholars dealing with philosophical, scientific, biblical and other authors is an ...

The first full-scale commentary on the Cratylus, one of Plato's most difficult and intriguing dialogues.

Thrasyllus, best known as the Roman emperor Tiberius' astrologist, figured prominently in the development of ancient Platonism. How prominently and to what effect are questions that have puzzled philosophers down to our day; Harold Tarrant's important new book attempts to answer them.

Les preuves de l’immortalité de l’âme, qui sont un des thèmes cen­traux de l’enseignement de Platon, ont fait l’objet d’une réflexion d’ordre logique et formel sur la manière dont elles sont (ou devraient être) exprimées. En particulier l’argument en faveur de l’immortalité de l’âme contenu dans le Phèdre (245c5-246a2), fondé sur la notion d’âme automotrice et principe de mouve­ment, a été assidûment analysé, pour ce qui est de sa formulation, par plusieurs représentants de la tradition platonicienne (Alcinoos, Hermias d’Alexandrie), ainsi (...) qu’à l’intérieur de la tradition péripatéticienne (Alexandre d’Aphrodise). Par conséquent, il représente, à l’avis de l’auteur, un point privilégié d’observation de la façon dont les platoniciens s’approprient la logique aristotélicienne et récri­vent, à partir de l’époque impériale, certains arguments platoniciens. En outre, il apparaît qu’Alexandre d’Aphrodise, bien qu’étant de tradition péripatéticienne, a grandement contribué à la reformulation des arguments de Platon selon les canons de la logique aristotélicienne par les platoniciens contemporains et posté­rieurs. Il semble aussi qu’Hermias, dans ses scholies sur le Phèdre, réagit juste­ment à certaines affirmations d’Alexandre. Dans cet article, on montre quels sont les points de contact ainsi que les différences dans la réécriture analytico-syllogistique de l’argument du Phèdre en faveur de l’immortalité de l’âme par Alcinoos et Hermias, sans négliger l’apport d’Alexandre. (shrink)