DOCSLIB.ORG

2:00-4:00 Pm Session 1A: Theandrites: Byzantine Philosophy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2:00-4:00 Pm Session 1A: Theandrites: Byzantine Philosophy Thursday, June 10, 2021 (All times are in the time zone of Athens.) 2:00-4:00 p.m. Session 1a: Theandrites: Byzantine Philosophy and Christian Platonism Frederick Laurtizen <[email protected]> and Sarah Klitenic Wear <[email protected]> Panagiotis Pavlos <[email protected]>, University of Oslo, Platonism and Christian Thought: A System in Phase Transition; An Approach to the Contributions of Vassilios Tatakis and fr. John Romanides” Fernandez Marco Alviz <[email protected]>, National University of Distance Learning, UNED, Madrid, “Χάρισμα and παιδεία in Late Antiquity: From Neoplatonic circles to Christian thought in the 3rd and 4th centuries” Chris Chris Barnard <[email protected]>, Newman University, “The Good and Evil λόγοι Dialectic in Saint Maximus the Confessor” Evi Zacharia <[email protected]>, Radboud University Nijmegen, “Commentary on Alcibiades I: towards an explanation of human perfection through love” Session 1b: Plotinus and Proclus Marcin Podbielski <[email protected]> Paolo Di Leo <[email protected]>, Singapore University of Technology and Design, “Plotinus and Heidegger: A Dialogue Through Parmenides’ R. B3” Marcin Podbielski <[email protected]>, Jesuit University Ignatianum, “Revisiting the Text, Grammar, and Translations of Plotinus’s On Contemplation” Martin Lee Mueller <[email protected]>, University of Oslo, “Deep Ecology and Telling About Nature” Zdenek Lenner, <[email protected]>, École Pratique des Hautes Études (EPHE Paris) & École Normale Supérieure de Lyon (ENS Lyon), "Providential Eros and reversive Eros in Proclus: to what extent are the means of ascent gifts which descend?" Session 1c: The Plato-Homer Question in Antiquity: Philosophers and Scholars Christina-Panagiota Manolea <[email protected]> and François Renaud <[email protected]> Francesca Pentassuglio <[email protected]>, Sapienza University of Rome and Universität zu Köln, “Homer in the Symposiaka: Xenophon and Plutarch compared” Michele Corradi <[email protected]>, Université d’Aix-Marseille/Università di Pisa, Ὅσιον προτιμᾶν τὴν ἀλήθειαν. Aristotele e la critica di Platone ad Omero Marco Donato <[email protected]>, Université d’Aix-Marseille, “Homer in the Platonic Dubia and Spuria” Carlotta Capuccino <[email protected]>, Università di Bologna, “Poetic Enthusiasm: The (Mis)Fortune of a Platonic Image” Session 1d: Soul, Intellect, and Afterlife John F. Finamore <[email protected]> and Ilaria Ramelli <[email protected]> Cristian Furness <[email protected]>, University of Tasmania, “Allegorising the Soul's Journey: Porphyry's Vita Plotini and De Antro Nympharum” Dirk Baltzly <[email protected]>, University of Tasmania, “Unity and plurality in the human soul: the case of the Republic’s civic virtues” Lech Trzcionkowski <[email protected]>, Jagiellonian University, “Embodied Soul and Philosophical Practice in “Parallel” Lives of Plotinus and Proclus” Camille Guigon <[email protected]>, University Lyon 3 -Jean Moulin, “The dual role of the logos in the necessity of the soul’ incorporation in Plotinus’ treatises” 4:00-4:30 p.m. Break 4:30-6:00 p.m. Session 2a: Theandrites: Byzantine Philosophy and Christian Platonism Frederick Lauritzen <[email protected]> and Sarah Klitenic Wear <[email protected]> Nikos Charalabopoulos <[email protected]>, University of Patras, “The Gay Corcyrean (Aen. Gaz. Thphr. 18.14-22 Colonna) Or how both to refute metempsychosis and be faithful to Plato too” Maria Chriti (Μαρία Χρίτη) < [email protected]>, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, “John Philoponus on the Protoplast soul” Session 2b: Platonism and Christian Thought in Late Antiquity and Byzantium: Rivals, alliances, or merely a continuum? Vladimir Cvetkovic <[email protected]> and Panagiotis G. Pavlos <[email protected]> Richard Swinburne, <[email protected]>, Oxford University, “Plato's soul and modern neuroscience” George Pavlos <[email protected]>, Democritus University of Thrace, “Methodology, Continuity and Deadlocks in Greek philosophical thinking and tradition” Session 2c: Nature and Soul in the Greek Neoplatonic Tradition Melina G. Mouzala <[email protected]> and Elias Tempelis <[email protected]> Giouli Korobili <[email protected]>, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and Berlin- Brandenburgischen Akademie der Wissenschaften and Constantinos Stefou <[email protected]>, Ionian University of Corfu and Democritus University of Thrace, “Nature, Soul and Individuality in Porphyry’s Embryology” Melina G. Mouzala <[email protected]>, University of Patras, “Nature and Soul as principles of motion and change: Simplicius and Philoponus on Aristotle’s Physics II. 1-3” Session 2d: Neo-Platonic and Gnostic exegeses of late-antique divine revelations: Corpus Hermeticum, Chaldean Oracles, Gnostic revealed texts George-Florin Calian <[email protected]> and Nicola Spanu <[email protected]> Ida Soldini, <[email protected]>, Scuola dottorale in Scienze Religiose, Lugano, Svizzera, “Platone fu prima autore comico e poi filosofo?” Mikhail Vedeshkin <[email protected]>, Institute of World History of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the Institute for Social Sciences of RANEPA, “The Problem of Mystical Practices in Neoplatonic School of Pergamon” Łukasz Piątak <[email protected]>, Adam Mickiewicz University, "Hurakhsh vs. Helios: The image of sun as compared between the prayers of Al-Suhrawardi and the Proclus' Hymns" 6:00-6:30 p.m. Break 6:30-8:00 p.m. Session 3a: Neo-Platonic and Gnostic exegeses of late-antique divine revelations: Corpus Hermeticum, Chaldean Oracles, Gnostic revealed texts George-Florin Calian <[email protected]> and Nicola Spanu <[email protected]> Nicola Spanu <[email protected]>, Independent Researcher, “The divine Father of the Chaldean Oracles in light of Proclus’ and Damascius’ oracular exegesis” Robert Heller <[email protected]>, King's College London, “Hekate in Proclus and the Chaldean Oracles” Florin George Calian <[email protected]>, Lucian Blaga University, “Divine Revelation and Neoplatonism” Session 3b: Platonism and Christian Thought in Late Antiquity and Byzantium: Rivals, alliances, or merely a continuum? Vladimir Cvetkovic <[email protected]> and Panagiotis G. Pavlos <[email protected]> István Perczel <[email protected]>, CEU, “The Letters of Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite and the Hypotheses of Pato's Parmenides: Ronald Hathaway's Hypothesis Revisited” Bogna Kosmulska <[email protected]>, University of Warsaw, “The Category of καινότης in (Neo)Platonic and Christian Discussion – A Lesson from Pseudo-Dionysian Letter IV and Its Reception in Maximus the Confessor” Dionysios Skliris <[email protected]>, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, “The notion of the ‘parhypostasis’: A comparison between Proclus (412-485) and Saint Maximus the Confessor (c. 580-662)” Session 3c: Nature and Soul in the Greek Neoplatonic Tradition Melina G. Mouzala <[email protected]> and Elias Tempelis <[email protected]> Celina Bebenek <[email protected]>, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, “The Apparent Contradiction in Plato’s Descent of the Soul: Discussion and Resolution in Plotinus’ Ennead IV” Ricardo Salles <[email protected]>, Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, “The Stoic cosmic soul and the theory of seminal principles in late Platonist sources” Session 3d: Delphic Philosophy: Goddesses of Prophecy, Providence, and Foreknowledge Dylan Burns <[email protected]>, Michael Griffin <[email protected]>, and Danielle Layne <[email protected]> Andreea-Maria Lemnaru-Carrez <[email protected]>, “Into the cloven meads of Aphrodite. Empedocles' reception of φιλία as the cosmic force of unification in Iamblichus' De Mysteriis.” Dylan Burns <[email protected]>, Universiteit van Amsterdam, “Origen of Alexandria on the Oracle to Laius” Elsa Simonetti <[email protected]>, KU Leuven, "Delphi and the Pythia in Origen’s Contra Celsum” 8:00-8:30 p.m. Break 8:30-10:00 p.m. Session 4a: Plato, Aristotle, and Origen Aron Reppmann <[email protected]> Joseph Forte <[email protected]>, Rivier University, “The Phaedo’s Hopes in Relation to a Figurative Reading of the ‘True Earth’ Myth” Guy Schuh <[email protected]>, Boston College, “Virtue and Rewards in the Nicomachean Ethics” Aron Reppmann <[email protected]>, Trinity Christian College, “‘The true account:’ Origen’s retrieval of the Seventh Letter in Against Celsus” Session 4b: Theandrites: Byzantine Philosophy and Christian Platonism Frederick Lauritzen <[email protected]> and Sarah Klitenic Wear <[email protected]> Donna Altimari Adler <[email protected]>, Independent Scholar, “Divine Names, Divine Images, Apophatic Theology and the Neoplatonic Tradition in the thought of John of Damascus” Elena Draghici-Vasilescu <[email protected]>, Wolfson College, Oxford, “Pseudo- Dionysius, a Statue, and Byzantium” David Jenkins <[email protected]>, Princeton University, “Lines that do lie anywhere: Italikos- Psellos-Xiphilinos” Session 4c: Platonism and Christian Thought in Late Antiquity and Byzantium: Rivals, alliances, or merely a continuum? Vladimir Cvetkovic <[email protected]>
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Aquinas on Attributes
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by MedievaleCommons@Cornell Philosophy and Theology 11 (2003), 1–41. Printed in the United States of America. Copyright C 2004 Cambridge University Press 1057-0608 DOI: 10.1017/S105706080300001X Aquinas on Attributes BRIAN LEFTOW Oriel College, Oxford Aquinas’ theory of attributes is one of the most obscure, controversial parts of his thought. There is no agreement even on so basic a matter as where he falls in the standard scheme of classifying such theories: to Copleston, he is a resemblance-nominalist1; to Armstrong, a “concept nominalist”2; to Edwards and Spade, “almost as strong a realist as Duns Scotus”3; to Gracia, Pannier, and Sullivan, neither realist nor nominalist4; to Hamlyn, the Middle Ages’ “prime exponent of realism,” although his theory adds elements of nominalism and “conceptualism”5; to Wolterstorff, just inconsistent.6 I now set out Aquinas’ view and try to answer the vexed question of how to classify it. Part of the confusion here is terminological. As emerges below, Thomas believed in “tropes” of “lowest” (infima) species of accidents and (I argue) substances.7 Many now class trope theories as a form of nominalism,8 while 1. F. C. Copleston, Aquinas (Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books, 1955), P. 94. 2. D. M. Armstrong, Nominalism and Realism (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1978), pp. 25, 83, 87. Armstrong is tentative about this. 3. Sandra Edwards, “The Realism of Aquinas,” The New Scholasticism 59 (1985): 79; Paul Vincent Spade, “Degrees of Being, Degrees of Goodness,” in Aquinas’ Moral Theory, ed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Univocity of Substance and the Formal Distinction of Attributes: the Role of Duns Scotus in Deleuze's Reading of Spinoza Nathan Widder
    parrhesia 33 · 2020 · 150-176 the univocity of substance and the formal distinction of attributes: the role of duns scotus in deleuze's reading of spinoza nathan widder This paper examines the role played by medieval theologian John Duns Scotus in Gilles Deleuze’s reading of Spinoza’s philosophy of expressive substance; more generally, it elaborates a crucial moment in the development of Deleuze’s philosophy of sense and difference. Deleuze contends that Spinoza adapts and extends Duns Scotus’s two most influential theses, the univocity of being and formal distinction, despite neither appearing explicitly in Spinoza’s writings. “It takes nothing away from Spinoza’s originality,” Deleuze declares, “to place him in a perspective that may already be found in Duns Scotus” (Deleuze, 1992, 49).1 Nevertheless, the historiographic evidence is clearly lacking, leaving Deleuze to admit that “it is hardly likely that” Spinoza had even read Duns Scotus (359n28). Indeed, the only support he musters for his speculation is Spinoza’s obvious in- terests in scholastic metaphysical and logical treatises, the “probable influence” of the Scotist-informed Franciscan priest Juan de Prado on his thought, and the fact that the problems Duns Scotus addresses need not be confined to Christian thought (359–360n28). The paucity of evidence supporting this “use and abuse” of history, however, does not necessarily defeat the thesis. Like other lineages Deleuze proposes, the one he traces from Duns Scotus to Spinoza, and subsequently to Nietzsche, turns not on establishing intentional references by one thinker to his predecessor, but instead on showing how the borrowings and adaptations asserted to create the connec- tion make sense of the way the second philosopher surmounts blockages he faces while responding to issues left unaddressed by the first.
    [Show full text]
  • Neoplatonism: the Last Ten Years
    The International Journal The International Journal of the of the Platonic Tradition 9 (2015) 205-220 Platonic Tradition brill.com/jpt Critical Notice ∵ Neoplatonism: The Last Ten Years The past decade or so has been an exciting time for scholarship on Neo­ platonism. I ought to know, because during my stint as the author of the “Book Notes” on Neoplatonism for the journal Phronesis, I read most of what was published in the field during this time. Having just handed the Book Notes over to George Boys­Stones, I thought it might be worthwhile to set down my overall impressions of the state of research into Neoplatonism. I cannot claim to have read all the books published on this topic in the last ten years, and I am here going to talk about certain themes and developments in the field rather than trying to list everything that has appeared. So if you are an admirer, or indeed author, of a book that goes unmentioned, please do not be affronted by this silence—it does not necessarily imply a negative judgment on my part. I hope that the survey will nonetheless be wide­ranging and comprehensive enough to be useful. I’ll start with an observation made by Richard Goulet,1 which I have been repeating to students ever since I read it. Goulet conducted a statistical analy­ sis of the philosophical literature preserved in the original Greek, and discov­ ered that almost three­quarters of it (71%) was written by Neoplatonists and commentators on Aristotle. In a sense this should come as no surprise.
    [Show full text]
  • B Philosophy (General) B
    B PHILOSOPHY (GENERAL) B Philosophy (General) For general philosophical treatises and introductions to philosophy see BD10+ Periodicals. Serials 1.A1-.A3 Polyglot 1.A4-Z English and American 2 French and Belgian 3 German 4 Italian 5 Spanish and Portuguese 6 Russian and other Slavic 8.A-Z Other. By language, A-Z Societies 11 English and American 12 French and Belgian 13 German 14 Italian 15 Spanish and Portuguese 18.A-Z Other. By language, A-Z 20 Congresses Collected works (nonserial) 20.6 Several languages 20.8 Latin 21 English and American 22 French and Belgian 23 German 24 Italian 25 Spanish and Portuguese 26 Russian and other Slavic 28.A-Z Other. By language, A-Z 29 Addresses, essays, lectures Class here works by several authors or individual authors (31) Yearbooks see B1+ 35 Directories Dictionaries 40 International (Polyglot) 41 English and American 42 French and Belgian 43 German 44 Italian 45 Spanish and Portuguese 48.A-Z Other. By language, A-Z Terminology. Nomenclature 49 General works 50 Special topics, A-Z 51 Encyclopedias 1 B PHILOSOPHY (GENERAL) B Historiography 51.4 General works Biography of historians 51.6.A2 Collective 51.6.A3-Z Individual, A-Z 51.8 Pictorial works Study and teaching. Research Cf. BF77+ Psychology Cf. BJ66+ Ethics Cf. BJ66 Ethics 52 General works 52.3.A-Z By region or country, A-Z 52.5 Problems, exercises, examinations 52.65.A-Z By school, A-Z Communication of information 52.66 General works 52.67 Information services 52.68 Computer network resources Including the Internet 52.7 Authorship Philosophy.
    [Show full text]
  • John Duns Scotus's Metaphysics of Goodness
    University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 11-16-2015 John Duns Scotus’s Metaphysics of Goodness: Adventures in 13th-Century Metaethics Jeffrey W. Steele University of South Florida, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd Part of the Medieval History Commons, Philosophy Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Scholar Commons Citation Steele, Jeffrey W., "John Duns Scotus’s Metaphysics of Goodness: Adventures in 13th-Century Metaethics" (2015). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/6029 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. John Duns Scotus’s Metaphysics of Goodness: Adventures in 13 th -Century Metaethics by Jeffrey Steele A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Philosophy College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Major Professor: Thomas Williams, Ph.D. Roger Ariew, Ph.D. Colin Heydt, Ph.D. Joanne Waugh, Ph.D Date of Approval: November 12, 2015 Keywords: Medieval Philosophy, Transcendentals, Being, Aquinas Copyright © 2015, Jeffrey Steele DEDICATION To the wife of my youth, who with patience and long-suffering endured much so that I might gain a little knowledge. And to God, fons de bonitatis . She encouraged me; he sustained me. Both have blessed me. “O taste and see that the LORD is good; How blessed is the man who takes refuge in Him!!” --Psalm 34:8 “You are the boundless good, communicating your rays of goodness so generously, and as the most lovable being of all, every single being in its own way returns to you as its ultimate end.” –John Duns Scotus, De Primo Principio Soli Deo Gloria .
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 2.1 Augustine: Commentary
    CHAPTER 2.1 Augustine: Commentary Augustine Aurelius Augustinus Hipponensis (henceforth Augustine) was born in 354 A.D. in the municipium of Thagaste (modern day Souk Ahras, Algeria, close to the border with Tunisia). He died in 430, as the Arian1 Vandals besieged the city of Hippo where he was bishop, marking another stage in the demise of the Roman Empire. Rome had already been sacked in 410 by Alaric the Visigoth, but the slow decline of Roman grandeur took place over a period of about 320 years which culminated in 476 when Romulus Augustus, the last Emperor of the Western Roman Empire, was deposed by Odoacer, a Germanic chieftain. Augustine thus lived at a time which heralded the death knell of the ancient world and the beginnings of mediaeval western European Christendom.2 Augustine‘s great legacy to western civilization is that intellectually he united both worlds in drawing from the ancient thought of Greece and Rome and providing a Christian understanding of the intellectual achievements of the ancients. His new synthesis is a remarkable achievement even today and for those of us, who remain Christians in the West, our debates, agreements and disagreements are still pursued in Augustine‘s shadow.3 1 Arianism was a schismatic sect of Christianity that held the view that the Second Person of the Trinity, Christ, is created and thus does not exist eternally with the Father. 2 See J. M. Rist‘s magnificent Augustine: Ancient Thought Baptized, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2003. Rist notes that, ‗Despite his lack of resources he managed to sit in judgment on ancient philosophy and ancient culture.‘ p.
    [Show full text]
  • Overturning the Paradigm of Identity with Gilles Deleuze's Differential
    A Thesis entitled Difference Over Identity: Overturning the Paradigm of Identity With Gilles Deleuze’s Differential Ontology by Matthew G. Eckel Submitted to the Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts Degree in Philosophy Dr. Ammon Allred, Committee Chair Dr. Benjamin Grazzini, Committee Member Dr. Benjamin Pryor, Committee Member Dr. Patricia R. Komuniecki, Dean College of Graduate Studies The University of Toledo May 2014 An Abstract of Difference Over Identity: Overturning the Paradigm of Identity With Gilles Deleuze’s Differential Ontology by Matthew G. Eckel Submitted to the Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts Degree in Philosophy The University of Toledo May 2014 Taking Gilles Deleuze to be a philosopher who is most concerned with articulating a ‘philosophy of difference’, Deleuze’s thought represents a fundamental shift in the history of philosophy, a shift which asserts ontological difference as independent of any prior ontological identity, even going as far as suggesting that identity is only possible when grounded by difference. Deleuze reconstructs a ‘minor’ history of philosophy, mobilizing thinkers from Spinoza and Nietzsche to Duns Scotus and Bergson, in his attempt to assert that philosophy has always been, underneath its canonical manifestations, a project concerned with ontology, and that ontological difference deserves the kind of philosophical attention, and privilege, which ontological identity has been given since Aristotle.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    The Libraries of the Neoplatonists edited by Cristina D’Ancona Philosophia Antiqua 107. Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2007. Pp. xxxvi + 531. ISBN 978--90--04--15641--8.Cloth ¤ 149.00, $221.00 Reviewed by Peter Adamson? King’s College London [email protected] Here’s a statistic for you: of the nearly 11 million words of extant Greek philosophical texts now available in the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae, about 58% were written by Neoplatonists and another 13% were written by Alexander and Themistius. This means that much more than half of the directly extant Greek philosophical tradition consists in original works of Neoplatonists, Neoplatonist commen- taries on Plato and Aristotle, and other late ancient commentaries on Aristotle. The Neoplatonists and commentators are mostly what remains to us of what one might call the Greek ‘philosophical library’. I take this information from a delightful article by R. Goulet in the volume under review. His statistical analysis is open to various caveats. It only counts Greek and so leaves out such authors as Lucretius and Cicero. And it does not count all Greeks: the volumi- nously extant Galen does not figure in the tally, even though some of Galen’s works should be considered philosophical. Still, Goulet’s point is a telling one. Plato and Aristotle, with their relatively ex- tensive and inexhaustibly fascinating writings—they make up respec- tively 6% and 9% of the total extant Greek—will always attract the most attention from readers of ancient philosophy. But there is a vast corpus of late antique philosophical literature which has only begun to be explored seriously in the past few decades.
    [Show full text]
  • BIBLIOGRAPHY for a New Edition of ARISTOTLE's PROTREPTICUS
    1 PROVISIONAL BIBLIOGRAPHY for a new edition of ARISTOTLE'S PROTREPTICUS compiled by D. S. Hutchinson and Monte Ransome Johnson version of 2013 February 25 A. Primary Sources 1. Aristotle a. Collections of fragments of Aristotle's lost works, including his Protrepticus b. Editions and translations of fragments of Aristotle’s Protrepticus c. Editions and translations of papyri attributable to Aristotle's Protrepticus d. Editions and translations of the Aristotle Corpus e. Editions and translations of other lost works of Aristotle 2. Isocrates 3. Plato 4. Archytas of Tarentum 5. Heraclides of Pontus 6. Anonymous Iamblichi 7. Cicero 8. Clement of Alexandria (AD II-III) 9. Lactantius (AD III-IV) 10. Iamblichus of Chalcis (AD III-IV) a. Manuscripts of the Protrepticus b. Printed editions and translations of the Protrepticus c. Editions and translations of other works of Iamblichus 11. Ancient Commentators a. Aristocles of Messene (AD I) b. Alexander of Aphrodisias (AD II) c. Ammonius (AD V) d. Proclus (AD V) e. Olympiodorus the younger (AD V-VI) f. Philoponus (AD VI) g. Asclepius of Tralles (AD VI) h. Elias (AD VI-VII) i. David the Invincible Philosopher (AD VI-VII) j. Anonymous Scholion on Cod.Par.Gr.2064 12. Boethius (AD V-VI) 13. Stobaeus (AD VI) B. Secondary Sources (arranged alphabetically) 2 A. Primary Sources 1. Aristotle a. Collections of fragments of Aristotle's lost works, including his Protrepticus Flashar, H. Aristoteles: Fragmente zu Philosophie, Rhetorik, Poetik, Dictung. Darmstadt, 2006. Gigon, O. Librorum deperditorum fragmenta = vol. iii of Aristoteles Opera. Berlin, 1987. Gohlke, P. Aristoteles Fragmente. Paderborn, 1959.
    [Show full text]
  • Hegel on the Conceivability of Self-Determination
    The Concept as Self-Determination: Hegel on the Conceivability of Self- Determination Herein I investigate how four dogmas underpinning the traditional concepts of universality, the genus, class, and abstract universal, generate four paradoxes of self- reference. The four dogmas are the following: (1) that contradiction entails the total absence of determinacy, (2) the necessary finitude of the concept, (3) the separation of principles of universality and particularity, and (4) the necessity of appealing to foundations. In section III I show how these dogmas underpin the paradoxes of self-reference, and how one cannot make progress on these paradoxes as long as these four dogmas are in place. Corresponding to the abovementioned dogmas are the four paradoxes of self-reference: (1a) the problem of the differentia, (1b) the problem of psychologism, (3c) the problem of participation, and (4d) the problem of onto-theology. Section I enumerates the three traditional concepts of the concept and some of the basic limitations to which they are subject. Section II elucidates the four dogmas shared by these concepts. Finally, Section III shows how four paradoxes of self-reference follow from the dogmas elucidated in Section II. Though philosophers have been struggling with these problems for centuries, philosophers have never systematically connected each of these problems nor have philosophers derived them all from a single principle. It is my contention that the four paradoxes of self-reference are systematically connected insofar as they all follow from a single principle.1 This principle is formal universality. Though I do not provide a solution to these paradoxes, in Section III I suggest that the history of Western philosophy has already provided us with the only two viable ways to eschew these paradoxes.
    [Show full text]
  • Proof for the Existence of God Developed by Saint Augustine
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Master's Theses Theses and Dissertations 1948 The "Psychological" Proof For the Existence of God Developed By Saint Augustine Patrick J. Kremer Loyola University Chicago Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses Part of the Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Kremer, Patrick J., "The "Psychological" Proof For the Existence of God Developed By Saint Augustine" (1948). Master's Theses. 250. https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses/250 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 1948 Patrick J. Kremer THE 11 PSYCHOLOGI CAL" PROOF FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD DEVELOPED BY SAINT AUGUSTINE BY PATRICK J. KREMER, S.J. • A THESIS SUmiTTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQ.UIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE 01<' MASTER OF ARTS IN LOYOLA UNIVERSITY DEC:D.1BER 1948 VITA AUCTORIS Patrick J. Kremer, S.J., was born in Detroit, Michigan, June 25, 1919. He attended Visitation Grammar School, and in June, 1935, was graduated from Visitation High School, Detroit, Michigan. In September, 1935, he entered the University of Detroit, from which he received the degree of Bachelor of Arts in June, 1939. He entered the Milford Novitiate of the Society of Jesus in September, 1939, and spent three years there. He studied at West Baden College Branch of Loyola University from 1942 to 1944, and has been enrolled in the Loyola University Graduate School since September, 1942.
    [Show full text]
  • Mind, Body, Motion, Matter Eighteenth-Century British and French Literary Perspectives Edited by Mary Helen Mcmurran and Alison Conway MIND, BODY, MOTION, MATTER
    Mind, Body, Motion, Matter Eighteenth-Century British and French Literary Perspectives edited by Mary Helen McMurran and Alison Conway MIND, BODY, MOTION, MATTER Eighteenth-Century British and French Literary Perspectives Mind, Body, Motion, Matter Eighteenth-Century British and French Literary Perspectives EDITED BY MARY HELEN MCMURRAN AND ALISON CONWAY UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO PRESS Toronto Buffalo London © University of Toronto Press 2016 Toronto Buffalo London www.utppublishing.com Printed in the U.S.A. ISBN 978-1-4426-5011-4 (cloth) Printed on acid-free, 100% post-consumer recycled paper with vegetable-based inks. ___________________________________________________________________ Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Mind, body, motion, matter : eighteenth-century British and French literary perspectives / edited by Mary Helen McMurran and Alison Conway. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-4426-5011-4 (cloth) 1. English literature – 18th century – History and criticism. 2. French literature – 18th century – History and criticism. 3. Philosophy in literature. 4. Materialism in literature. 5. Vitalism in literature. 6. Aesthetics in literature. I. Conway, Alison Margaret, editor II. McMurran, Mary Helen, 1962–, author, editor PR448.P5M55 2016 820.9'384 C2015-908168-8 ___________________________________________________________________ CC-BY-NC-ND This work is published subject to a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivative License. For permission to publish commercial versions please
    [Show full text]