DOCSLIB.ORG

The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Ethics Edited by Christopher Bobonich Index More Information

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Ethics Edited by Christopher Bobonich Index More Information Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-05391-5 — The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Ethics Edited by Christopher Bobonich Index More Information Index Academic skeptics, 214, 219, 220–22, Antiochus of Ascalon, 219 225–28, 233 Antiphon, 28n action Antisthenes, 39, 41 eudaimonism and action guidance, 277–79 Apelles, Pyrrhonist parable of, 234–35, 236 and knowledge (Plotinus), 250–53 Apology (Plato), 12–13, 53, 84, 289–90 possibility of in skepticism (agency), aporia, 219, 234, 236 225–26, 235–36 appearances Stoic account of, 204–5 imaginative (phantasiai), 127, 130 and emotion, 209 perceptual (phainomena), 74, 225, 230–31 selection, 205–6 see also perception active principle (Stoic physics), 189, 201 appetites activity, in Aristotelian function argument, in Aristotle, 125, 127 107–8 in Plato, 74, 78, 82–83, 84, 320 Aenesidemus, 219, 222, 224, 230, 234 and physiology, 81–82 Aeschines, 40–41, 43 see also desire Against Colotes (Plutarch), 225–26 appropriation (oikeiôsis) Against the Ethicists (Sextus Empiricus), 222 Plotinus, 248–49 agency, in skepticism, 225–28, 230–31, 235–36 Stoics, 189–90 akratic actions, 72–73 apraxia charge, 225–26 see also unwilling actions Academic responses, 225–28 Alcibiades (Aeschines), 40–41, 87 Pyrrhonist responses, 230–31, 232–33 Alcibiades (Plato), 256 Aquinas, Thomas, 141, 270 Alexander of Aphrodisias, 192 Arcesilaus, 219, 220–21, 233 alienation, 354, 355 answer to apraxia charge, 225–27 anatomy, human see physiology Aristippus, 40, 350–51 Anaxagoras, 19, 20 Aristo, 185, 191 Anaximander, 22–23 Aristophanes anger, 82–83, 84, 207 as character in Symposium, 291–92 see also emotions Clouds, 20, 30, 38 animals Aristotle, 105–23 arguments from natural instincts, 166, biographical information, 31, 323–24 284, 332 on contemplative vs. political life, 322–24, capacity for happiness, 241 335–36 divided soul, 107–8, 127–28, 129, 130 and immortality, 324 immortal component, 325, 333 and moral activity, 326 goals of, 110, 113–14, 141n elitism see elitism: Aristotle natural virtue, 134 and “ethics” as field, 35 reincarnation (Plato), 84–85 eudaimonism, 267, 268 sacrifice and consumption of, 24–25, 261n egoism objection, 274–75 Stoic account of, 189, 201–3 evidence for Pre-Socratic thought in, 11, 16 Annas, Julia, 156, 296, 296n on friendship (philia), 143–58 Anscombe, Elizabeth (G. E. M.), 1, 273 commonplace beliefs, 146–48, 150, Antigonus of Carystus, 229 156–57 381 © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-05391-5 — The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Ethics Edited by Christopher Bobonich Index More Information 382 index Aristotle (cont.) assimilation to god, 7 dissolution of, 154–55 attainable similarities, 320 genuine and apparent goods, 149, 153 contemplative vs. political life, 323–28, limits on, 157–58 329–31, 335–36 possibility of disinterested well- as goal of eros,90 wishing, 146–48, 149–53, 156 immortality, 331–34 self-extension interpretations, through contemplation, 324–26, 155–56, 157 331–32 survey of responses to self-interest moral goodness, 245, 320–21, 327–28, charge, 144–46 334–35 taxonomy, 143–44, 159n justice, 328–31, 335 unequal, 160n “political” and “higher” virtues, 245, of vicious agents, 153, 160n 246–47 virtue of friend as object of well- truth and falsehood, 321–22 wishing, 148–49 non-reciprocal likeness, 246 of virtuous agents, 146, 149–50, physical nature, 319–20, 321, 324, 326–27 153–54, 156–57 astronomy, study of, 324, 326 on gods and moral virtue, 328 Athens, 33 on happiness, 242 Aristotle in, 323 on the human good, 105–6, 120 Laws personified (Crito), 290–91 and fineness, 118–20 Socrates in, 44, 289 see also function argument: Aristotle attractive vs. imperative concepts, 271 impartiality, 294–96 autonomy (Plotinus), 253 knowledge, taxonomy of, 251 in later Platonist curriculum, 256 beauty (to kalon) on reproduction as immortality, 332 approach to the form, 291 on the soul, 124–26 as cause of goodness of life, 67 deliberative part, 132–35 and eros,87–89, 91–93 passionate part, 128–31 see also fineness, the fine rationality and immortality, 325–26 belief (or opinion) (doxa) rationality and virtue, 132, 134–35, conflicts of, 79–80 138–40 contrasted with knowledge, 187, 190–91 schemes of division, 124–25, 126–28 harmful, 167, 169–70 theoretical rational part, 135–37 target of Epicurean therapy, 169 as testimony for Socrates’ thought, 31, 32 skeptical rejection of, 226–27, 233–35 disregard of natural philosophy, 32–33 in Stoic psychology, 202, 203–4 methodology, 34, 42–43 and variable character traits, 213 skepticism, 40 Bene, L., 260n on virtue, 105, 109, 138 Betegh, G., 15 popular view, 344 biographies, as Platonist exemplars, 254–55, as selfhood or essence, 148–49 256–57 theoretical and practical wisdom, 252 breath (pneuma) (Stoics), 201–2 see also function argument: Aristotle Arius Didymus, 11 Callipho, 238n art (technê) see craft knowledge Carneades, 219, 221 Aspasia (Aeschines), 43 on the pithanon, 227–28 Aspasius, 129, 316n causes assent (sugkatathesis), 202–4 in Aristotle, 136–37, 138 and emotion, 208–9 in Stoic physics, 189 skeptical rejection of, 226 see also One (or Good), the see also impulse Cave allegory, 60, 299, 322, 331 © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-05391-5 — The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Ethics Edited by Christopher Bobonich Index More Information index 383 character, 35 and human physiology, 81–82, 319–20 in Aristotle in Plato’s developing thought, 57 bad character of majority, 309 Cooper, John, 144 natural and habituated characteristics, cosmology 306–8, 310 Anaximander, 22–23 reformation, 308–9, 310 Empedocles, 24, 25 Epicurus on friendship and, 182n Plato, 292, 319 Stoics on, 211–14 in non-philosophers’ education, 302–3 character friendship see virtuous agent and Stoics, 201, 283, 285–86 philia cosmopolitanism character-virtue, 125, 128–29, 141n of Socrates, 289–90 children of Stoics, 189–90 instincts of, 166, 189–90, 206–7 courage see also parenthood and the fine, 116–17, 119, 121 The Choice of Heracles (Prodicus), 37 as knowledge (Stoics), 190 Chrysippus, 183, 201 knowledge involved in, 54, 83 on agency, 203, 205 “art of measurement”, 54, 55 on courage, 190 “natural” vs. strict, 134 on emotion, 209 and non-philosophers, 58 on happiness, 194 relation to other virtues, 69 on moral responsibility for “sickness”, 214 as sub-field of wisdom (Zeno), 191 rationalism, 214 cradle argument, 166 on virtue, 198n craft knowledge (expertise) (technê), 40, 53, 54, Cicero 74–75 on Carneades, 221, 238n analogy to virtue, 43, 54–55 cradle argument for Epicurean creativity, eros and, 91, 92 hedonism, 166 Crisp, R., 123n on equality of error (Stoics), 347, 348 criterion on friendship (Epicurean), 180, 293 of action (skeptical) Lucullus as skeptical diaphônia, 221 appearances, 230–31 on over-rationality (Stoics), 214 the persuasive, 227–28 on partiality and impartiality the reasonable, 226–27 Epicureanism, 293 of value (Epicurean), 166, 172 Stoics, 281–82, 284 Crito (Plato), 290–91 on persuasive impressions (Stoics), 227 Cynics, 350–51 on political life, 295 Cyrenaics, 265, 268, 280n Cleanthes, 183, 191, 201, 283 vs. Cynics, 350–51 Clouds (Aristophanes), 20, 30, 38 vs. Epicureans, 351–53 community on wealth, 344–45 common good in the Nicomachean Ethics, 294–95 daimones,33 in the Republic, 287–89 Empedocles’ demonic story, 24–25 and Epicurean virtue, 177, 178 eros as daimôn,93 and natural partiality (Stoics), 284 and eudaimonia, 37, 194 philia between citizens (Plato), 98–100 human intellect as daimôn, 325, 326 Socrates in Athens, 289–91 Socrates and the divine, 33–34, 37 conflicts of interest, 152–53 Damascius, 256, 257 see also self-sacrifice De Anima (Aristotle), 113–14, 126–27, 136, contemplation (theôria), 136, 138 325, 332 contemplative vs. political life, 322–24 De Finibus (On Ends) (Cicero) and godlikeness, 319, 320, 324–28 on Carneades, 221 © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-05391-5 — The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Ethics Edited by Christopher Bobonich Index More Information 384 index De Finibus (On Ends) (Cicero) (cont.) eclecticism, 340 on Epicureanism, 166, 180, 293 education on Stoics, 214, 284, 348 of Aristotle’s practically wise (phronimoi), De Officiis (Cicero), 281–82 310–12, 313 De Rerum Natura (Lucretius), 174 in the Laws,71n, 302–4 death, 57, 58–59 and philia within the community, 99 Epicureanism, 173–75, 181 and pederasty, 87 fear of, 170–71 in the Republic, 59, 61–62, 63, 85n justice rewarded (Plato), 328–29 and the spirited part of the soul, 83 see also immortality; reincarnation use of myths, 321 definition, 41–42 egoism, 271 deliberation, 130, 132–33, 304 and eros,95 and action, 134–35 as objection to eudaimonism, 273–77 goal-directed, 139 and philia,98 from impartial perspective, 290–91 and utilitarianism, 287 role of normative principles, 311–12 see also other-regarding concern as Stoic good, 193, 196 elenchus,41–42 see also practical wisdom elitism, 7, 298–99 Democritus, 21–22, 233, 265 Aristotle, 7, 304–15 dependency thesis, 154 attainability of ethical virtue, 306–10 desire attainability of practical wisdom, in Aristotelian psychology, 127–28 310–14 Epicurean categorization, 168–69 ethical vs. philosophical success, Plato on conflicts of, 78–79, 82–84 304–6, 314–15 in Plotinus, 248 possibility thesis, 306, 310 effect on the soul, 249–50 Plato, 7, 299–304, 314–15 in Stoic thought emotions emotional taxonomy, 208 as barrier to impartiality, 291–92 object
Load more

Recommended publications
  • On the Date of the Trial of Anaxagoras
    The Classical Quarterly http://journals.cambridge.org/CAQ Additional services for The Classical Quarterly: Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here On the Date of the Trial of Anaxagoras A. E. Taylor The Classical Quarterly / Volume 11 / Issue 02 / April 1917, pp 81 - 87 DOI: 10.1017/S0009838800013094, Published online: 11 February 2009 Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009838800013094 How to cite this article: A. E. Taylor (1917). On the Date of the Trial of Anaxagoras. The Classical Quarterly, 11, pp 81-87 doi:10.1017/S0009838800013094 Request Permissions : Click here Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAQ, IP address: 128.122.253.212 on 28 Apr 2015 ON THE DATE OF THE TRIAL OF ANAXAGORAS. IT is a point of some interest to the historian of the social and intellectual development of Athens to determine, if possible, the exact dates between which the philosopher Anaxagoras made that city his home. As everyone knows, the tradition of the third and later centuries was not uniform. The dates from which the Alexandrian chronologists had to arrive at their results may be conveniently summed up under three headings, (a) date of Anaxagoras' arrival at Athens, (6) date of his prosecution and escape to Lampsacus, (c) length of his residence at Athens, (a) The received account (Diogenes Laertius ii. 7),1 was that Anaxagoras was twenty years old at the date of the invasion of Xerxes and lived to be seventy-two. This was apparently why Apollodorus (ib.) placed his birth in Olympiad 70 and his death in Ol.
    [Show full text]
  • Proquest Dissertations
    Justice ou amitie ? Les fondements aristoteliciens et epicuriens de la communaute Jean-Philippe Ranger These soumise a la Faculte des etudes superieures et postdoctorales de I'Universite d'Ottawa et a l'£cole Doctorale 5 : Concepts et langages de I'Universite Paris IV (Sorbonne) dans le cadre des exigences du programme de doctorat en cotutelle de these Sous la codirection de Catherine Collobert (Ottawa) et Jonathan Barnes (Paris IV) Departement de Philosophie Faculte des arts Universite d'Ottawa UFR Philosophie Universite Paris IV © Jean-Philippe Ranger, Ottawa, Canada, 2007 Library and Bibliotheque et 1*1 Archives Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-49393-9 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-49393-9 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives and Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par Plntemet, prefer, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans loan, distribute and sell theses le monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, worldwide, for commercial or non­ sur support microforme, papier, electronique commercial purposes, in microform, et/ou autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in et des droits moraux qui protege cette these.
    [Show full text]
  • The Polemical Practice in Ancient Epicureanism* M
    UDK 101.1;141.5 Вестник СПбГУ. Философия и конфликтология. 2019. Т. 35. Вып. 3 The polemical practice in ancient Epicureanism* M. M. Shakhnovich St. Petersburg State University, 7–9, Universitetskaya nab., St. Petersburg, 199034, Russian Federation For citation: Shakhnovich M. M. The polemical practice in ancient Epicureanism. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies, 2019, vol. 35, issue 3, pp. 461–471. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2019.306 The article explores the presentation methods of a philosophical doctrine in Greek and Ro- man Epicureanism; it is shown that for the ancient, middle, and Roman Epicureans a con- troversy with representatives of other philosophical schools was a typical way of present- ing their own views. The polemical practice, in which the basic principles of Epicureanism were expounded through the criticism of other philosophical systems, first of all, Academics and Stoics, was considered not only as the preferred way of presenting the own doctrine, but also as the most convenient rhetorical device, which had, among other things, didac- tic significance. The founder of the school, Epicurus, often included in his texts the terms used in other philosophical schools, giving them a different, often opposite, content. While presenting his teaching in the treatise “On Nature” or in letters to his followers, Epicurus pushed off the opinions of Democritus, Plato, and the Stoics, but resorted mainly to implicit criticism of his opponents, often without naming them by name. His closest students and later followers — Metrodorus, Hermarchus, Colotes, Philodemus, Lucretius, Diogenes of Oenoanda — continuing the controversy with the Academics and the Stoics, more frank- ly expressed their indignation about the “falsely understood Epicureanism” or erroneous opinions.
    [Show full text]
  • University of London Thesis
    REFERENCE ONLY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON THESIS Degree pWo Year 'Loo'S' j Name of Author F COPYRIGHT This is a thesis accepted for a Higher Degree of the University of London. It is an unpublished typescript and the copyright is held by the author. All persons consulting the thesis must read and abide by the Copyright Declaration below. COPYRIGHT DECLARATION I recognise that the copyright of the above-described thesis rests with the author and that no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without the prior written consent of the author. LOANS Theses may not be lent to individuals, but the Senate House Library may lend a copy to approved libraries within the United Kingdom, for consultation solely on the premises of those libraries. Application should be made to: Inter-Library Loans, Senate House Library, Senate House, Malet Street, London WC1E 7HU. REPRODUCTION University of London theses may not be reproduced without explicit written permission from the Senate House Library. Enquiries should be addressed to the Theses Section of the Library. Regulations concerning reproduction vary according to the date of acceptance of the thesis and are listed below as guidelines. A. Before 1962. Permission granted only upon the prior written consent of the author. (The Senate House Library will provide addresses where possible). B. 1962 - 1974. In many cases the author has agreed to permit copying upon completion of a Copyright Declaration. C. 1975 - 1988. Most theses may be copied upon completion of a Copyright Declaration. D. 1989 onwards. Most theses may be copied. This thesis comes within category D.
    [Show full text]
  • Epicureanism by Tim O'keefe Berkeley/Los Angeles
    Epicureanism by Tim O’Keefe Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2010. Pp. xvii+ 206. ISBN 978–0–520–26471–7. Paper $24.95 Reviewed by Monte Ransome Johnson University of California, San Diego [email protected] I have been looking for a short introduction to Epicureanism to recom- mend to students in my upper-division Hellenistic Philosophy course at UC San Diego. The students are required to read, in addition to my own translation (with D. S. Hutchinson) of Epicurus’ Letter to Menoeceus, the entirety of Cicero’s On Moral Ends and several dia- logues and essays of Seneca. But Cicero and Seneca are both hostile sources of information about Epicureanism; and the Letter to Menoe- ceus, though a brilliantly concise summary, is an extremely brief and compact introduction to Epicureanism, which, of course, contains no indication of the subsequent importance of Epicureanism on the his- tory of philosophy and science. And so one looks for a serviceable starting point for further consideration of the Epicurean position and, hopefully, deeper research into the arguments. In the case of Stoicism, I have found a book in the same series (Ancient Philosophies) to be very useful for these purposes: John Sellars’ Stoicism [2006]. Sellars’ book is cheap, in print, and con- tains all of the following very useful tools: a list of abbreviations; a chronology; short accounts of all the leading Stoic figures (Zeno through Hierocles) and of the most important sources for reconstruct- ing their philosophy (Cicero through Simplicius); an overview of the ‘decline and loss of texts’; and chapters on the Stoic system, logic, physics, ethics, and also on the Stoic legacy (covering late antiquity through Deleuze, including many important points of detail in the early modern period).
    [Show full text]
  • Squaring the Epicurean Circle: Friendship and Happiness in the Garden
    Ancient Philosophy 37 (2017) ©Mathesis Publications 1 Squaring the Epicurean Circle: Friendship and Happiness in the Garden Benjamin Rossi Epicurean ethics has been subject to withering ancient and contemporary criti- cism for the supposed irreconcilability of Epicurus’s endorsement of friendship and his ethical egoism. On the one hand, Epicurus claims that friendship is an immortal good (VS 78), that it ‘dances round the world the world announcing to us all that we should wake up and felicitate one another’ (VS 52), and he even claims that every friendship is worth choosing for its own sake (VS 23).1 Clearly, for Epicurus, friendship is a central pillar of the good life. On the other hand, Epicurus is clear that the sole rational norms for evaluating actions and desires are one’s own pleasure and pain. For example, he writes that ‘[i]f you do not on every occasion refer each of your actions to the natural goal but turn prematurely to something else in avoiding or pursuing things, your actions will not accord with your reasoning’ (KD 25). The natural goal is aponia and ataraxia, the absence of physical and mental pain. Epicurus’s egoism seems to permit only a level of commitment to friendship commensurate with its hedo- nic value, and it definitely rules out endowing friendship with intrinsic value. This tension has been ably articulated by contemporary philosophers, most notably Mitsis 1988, ch. 3 and Annas 1993, ch. 11. More recently, Evans 2004 has suggested that a plausible Epicurean response begins by explaining why friendship is valuable for Epicurus.
    [Show full text]
  • ©2014 Sergio Yona
    ©2014 Sergio Yona THE PSYCHOLOGY OF SATIRE: EPICUREAN ETHICS IN HORACE’S SERMONES BY SERGIO YONA DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Classical Philology in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2014 Urbana, Illinois Doctoral Committee: Professor Ariana Traill, Chair Professor Antony Augoustakis, Director of Research Professor Kirk Sanders Professor Kirk Freudenburg, Yale University ABSTRACT This study examines the role of Greek philosophy, specifically the ethical doctrines of the Epicurean sect, in Horace’s satiric poetry. It endeavors to highlight the important influence of one of Horace’s contemporaries and neighbor in Italy, the Epicurean philosopher and poet Philodemus of Gadara. This is done through considerations of Horace’s self-portrayal as a qualified moralist who meets Epicurean standards and employs their tools of investigation and correction. A large portion of the study is dedicated to the manner in which he incorporates Epicurean economic and social teachings as communicated and preserved by Philodemus, and to explaining the significance of this for his literary persona in the Sermones. ii For Angela, sine qua non iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to acknowledge in a special way the support and advice offered to me by my adviser, Antony Augoustakis, who read numerous revisions of this paper and provided important guidance throughout. Many thanks also to the members of my committee, Ariana Traill, Kirk Sanders and Kirk Freudenburg, whose insights and suggestions at the outset (as well as at the end) of this project were extremely helpful, and to David Armstrong, who kindly shared some of his forthcoming work on Horace with me.
    [Show full text]
  • Robert Zaborowski (University of Warmia & Mazury) EPICURUS
    ORGANON 48:2016 Robert Zaborowski (University of Warmia & Mazury) EPICURUS’ HEDONAI KATASTEMATIKAI AND KATA KINESIN VERSUS RIBOT’S STATIC AND DYNAMIC PASSIONS To commemorate Théodule Ribot (1839 – 1916) Abstract . There is a striking parallel between Epicurus’ di stin - ction of two types of pleasures (fr. 2 Usener = DL 10, 136, 10 – 12) and Ribot’s distinction of two types of passions ( Essai sur les passions , 1907). The paper focuses on possible similarities and dissimilarities of both approaches. Remarkably, Epicuru s’ hedone is just one category among pleasant feelings and Ribot’s passions are but one family of the whole class of affectivity. Epicurus’ and Ribot’s distinctions appear to be useful for advancing a theory of affectivity, particularly in integrating vari ous affective pheno - mena in one model in the form of a hierarchy and pointing to the principle the hierarchy is organized by. Keywords: Epicurus, Théodule Ribot, affectivity, hedonai kata - stematikai , hedonai kata kinesin , static passions, dynamic passio ns, taxonomy of affectivity, hierarchy of affectivity. 1. Foreword This is another piece of my ancient and modern dossier 1 . I again shall compare one ancient and one modern philosopher. Epicurus for obvious reasons never heard of Ribot and Ribot knew Ep icurus but didn’t draw on his distinction. Therefore it is more appropriate to speak about prefiguration or anticipation, if any similarity between their positions turns out to be found during the analysis below. As I understand it, the purpose of such an approach is not only a historical but also a philosophical one. The latter may be even Address for correspondence: IF UWM, Obitza 1, 10725 Olsztyn, Poland.
    [Show full text]
  • An Athenian Commentary on Plato's Republic: Poetry, Science and Textual Engagement in Proclus' in Rem
    An Athenian Commentary on Plato's Republic: Poetry, science and textual engagement in Proclus' In Rem. by David Blair Pass A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Classics in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in Charge: Professor Anthony Long, Chair Professor G.R.F. Ferrari, Chair Professor Leslie Kurke Professor Kinch Hoekstra Spring 2013 Abstract An Athenian Commentary on Plato's Republic: Poetry, science and textual engagement in Proclus' In Rem. by David Blair Pass Doctor of Philosophy in Classics University of California, Berkeley Professor Anthony Long, Chair Professor G.R.F. Ferrari, Chair Proclus’ Commentary on Plato’s Republic is the only extant ancient Greek commentary on Plato’s Republic. Despite the fact that it includes discussions of most of the major parts of the book, it has received very little scholarly attention. This dissertation introduces the work in its entirety and tries to identify some of the most important contributions it can make to philosophical and philological scholarship on the Republic. I am particularly attentive to ways in which Proclus’ concerns—such as responding to Epicurean critiques of Platonic myth or defending Homer—may help us see Plato’s work in its cultural context. The first chapter focuses on introducing the work and answering basic questions about the place of the Republic in late antique Platonism, the extent of Proclus’ sources and what portions of the Republic Proclus discusses. I consider the form of the commentary, arranged as various essays, in comparison with Proclus’ other commentaries which proceed in a line by line manner.
    [Show full text]
  • TAKAKJY-DISSERTATION-2018.Pdf (1.052Mb)
    Copyright by Laura Chason Takakjy 2018 The Dissertation Committee for Laura Chason Takakjy Certifies that this is the approved version of the following Dissertation: POETIC GENETICS: FAMILY, SEXUAL REPRODUCTION, AND COMMUNITY IN LUCRETIUS’ DE RERUM NATURA Committee: Lesley A. Dean-Jones, Supervisor Pamela Gordon G. Karl Galinsky Ayelet H. Lushkov Stephen A. White Robert J. Hankinson POETIC GENETICS: FAMILY, SEXUAL REPRODUCTION, AND COMMUNITY IN LUCRETIUS’ DE RERUM NATURA by Laura Chason Takakjy Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin The University of Texas at Austin August 2018 Dedication To my mother, Carol Randolph Chason Acknowledgements Thank you to all the faculty in the Classics Department at The University of Texas at Austin for the instruction, mentorship, and opportunities I received over the years. For their support and guidance over the duration of this project, I offer gratitude to the members of my dissertation committee: Lesley Dean-Jones, Pamela Gordon, Karl Galinsky, Jim Hankinson, Ayelet Haimson Lushkov, and Steve White. I extend special thanks to Lesley Dean-Jones for her unwavering belief in me as a scholar and in my project. She has been an encouraging presence in my education from the first day of graduate school. I also am so grateful to Pam Gordon for her mentorship and for becoming an important part of my education these last two years. I also want to thank Jim Hankinson for his encouragement and support over the years.
    [Show full text]
  • Toward a New Reading of Cicero's De Finibus Kelsey Ward
    Duquesne University Duquesne Scholarship Collection Electronic Theses and Dissertations Spring 5-11-2018 Toward a New Reading of Cicero's De Finibus Kelsey Ward Follow this and additional works at: https://dsc.duq.edu/etd Part of the Ethics and Political Philosophy Commons, and the History of Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Ward, K. (2018). Toward a New Reading of Cicero's De Finibus (Doctoral dissertation, Duquesne University). Retrieved from https://dsc.duq.edu/etd/1457 This One-year Embargo is brought to you for free and open access by Duquesne Scholarship Collection. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Duquesne Scholarship Collection. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TOWARD A NEW READING OF CICERO’S DE FINIBUS A Dissertation Submitted to the McAnulty College and Graduate School of Liberal Arts Duquesne University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Kelsey Ward May 2018 Copyright by Kelsey Ward 2018 TOWARD A NEW READING OF CICERO’S DE FINIBUS By Kelsey Ward Approved April 6, 2018 ________________________________ ________________________________ Dr. Ronald M. Polansky Dr. Michael Harrington Professor of Philosophy Associate Professor of Philosophy (Committee Chair) (Committee Member) ________________________________ Dr. Thérèse Bonin Associate Professor of Philosophy (Committee Member) ________________________________ ________________________________ Dr. James Swindal Dr. Ronald M. Polansky Dean of McAnulty College Chair, Department of Philosophy Professor of Philosophy Professor of Philosophy iii ABSTRACT TOWARD A NEW READING OF CICERO’S DE FINIBUS By Kelsey Ward May 2018 Dissertation supervised by Professor Ronald Polansky In this dissertation, I argue that Cicero has two primary, interdependent aims in De finibus: the critical assessment of the dominant ethical positions, and the education of his readers.
    [Show full text]
  • Handout #11: Epicurean Ethics: Hedonism, Death, and Justice
    Draft of 10-29-15 PHIL 161; Fall 2015 David O. Brink Greek Ethics Handout #11: Epicurean Ethics: Hedonism, Death, and Justice Epicurean and Stoic ethical theories are part of more comprehensive philosophical systems that began life as the Hellenistic philosophical schools. The Hellenistic age is a period of Greek intellectual and social history usually dated from the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BCE (Aristotle died in 322) to Octavian's defeat of Anthony and Cleopatra at Actium in 31 BCE. This period roughly begins with Macedonian rule and ends with the more or less complete incorporation of Greece into the Roman Empire. Philosophy during this period involves three main schools of thought: Epicureanism, Stoicism, and Skepticism. Much of the philosophical work done in this period is within one of these three schools. The founders of these schools literally established schools -- educational institutions -- that survived for many years and that perpetuated the doctrines of the school. These schools constructed systematic treatments of logic (e.g. semantics and epistemology), physics (e.g. natural philosophy and metaphysics), and ethics (including politics). These systematic theories were articulated against the background of earlier Greek philosophy -- the Pre-Socratics, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle -- and of the other schools, sometimes borrowing from, sometimes criticizing, this background. Subsequent thinkers in each school developed their views both against this background and against that of the founders of the school. All three schools, but especially Stoicism and Skepticism, outlived the Hellenistic age and received important articulation by Roman intellectuals. It may help to fix the major figures in each Greco-Roman tradition.
    [Show full text]