For Oriental Philosophy, See 183; for Medieval and Modern Philosophy, See 184 180 Philosophy: General and History

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

For Oriental Philosophy, See 183; for Medieval and Modern Philosophy, See 184 180 Philosophy: General and History

PHILOSOPHY PHILOSOPHY PHILOSOPHY For ancient philosophy, see 182; for Oriental philosophy, see 183; for Medieval and modern philosophy, see 184 180 Philosophy: general and history. Modern texts. Metaphysics [Superseded by decimalised classes, Jan. 2000] 180.01 Series 180.1 Philosophy, general and Western: theory, history 180.2 Individual philosophers: texts 180.3 Special topics (e.g. metaphysics, epistemology, ontology) ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY [For index of ancient philosophers and schools, see next page] 182.01 Series 182.1 General and history. Special subjects and aspects 182.2 Pre-Socratics. Sophists and their schools down to ca. 300 B.C. 182.4 Socrates and the Minor Socratics. Plato and Platonism. The `Old Academy' 182.6 Aristotle and the Peripatetics 182.8 Post-Aristotelians ORIENTAL PHILOSOPHY See also Religion, classes 2-14. For Series, see 180.01 183.1 General oriental and Far Eastern philosophy: China, Korea, Japan, etc. 183.2 Indic philosophy 183.3 Near Eastern philosophy: Arabic, Islamic, Jewish, etc. MEDIEVAL AND MODERN PHILOSOPHY Individual philosophers and philosophical schools: biography and criticism. For Texts, see 180.2; for Series, see 180.01 184 [Superseded by decimalised classes, Jan. 2000] 184.1 Medieval and Renaissance philosophy, to. ca. 1600 184.2 Philosophy, Modern, ca. 1600- ---------------- 192 Logic (incl. symbolic and algebraic logic) 192.01 Series 194 Ethics. For Christian ethics, see 53.1 or 53.2 194.01 Series PHILOSOPHY PHILOSOPHY INDEX OF ANCIENT PHILOSOPHERS AND SCHOOLS (182) Academy, Old .4 Plato .4 Academy, Middle .8 Plotinus .8 Academy, New .8 Pluralists .2 Aenesidemus .8 Polemo .4 Aeschines, Socraticus, Porphyry .8 of Sphettus .4 Poseidonius .8 Anaxagoras .2 Proclus .8 Anaximander .2 Protagoras .2 Anaximenes .2 Pyrrho .8 Antiochus .8 Pythagoras and Pythagoreans.2 Antisthenes .4 Sceptics .8 Antoninus (M. Aurelius) .8 Seneca .8 Arcesilas .8 Socrates .4 Aristippus (fl. c. 400 B.C.) .4 Sophists .2 Aristotle .6 Speusippus .4 Aristoxenus .6 Stoics .8 Atomists .2 Strato .6 Boethius .8 Thales .2 Carneades .8 Theophrastus .6 Chrysippus .8 Timon, of Phlius .8 Cicero .8 Xenocrates .4 Cleanthes .8 Xenophanes .2 Cynics (except Antisthenes) .8 Xenophon .4 Cyrenaics (except Aristippus).8 Zeno, of Elea .2 Democritus .2 Zeno, the Stoic .8 Diogenes, Cynicus .8 Eclectics .8 Elean-Eretrians .4 Eleatics .2 Empedocles .2 Epictetus .8 Epicurus and Epicureans .8 Eucleides .4 Eudemus .6 Gorgias .2 Henists .2 Heracleitus .2 Hippias .2 Iamblichus .8 Ionian school .2 Julian .8 Leucippus .2 Luctius .8 Megarians .4 Melissus .2 Milesians .2 Monists .2 Musonius Rufus .8 Neo-Platonists .8 Neo-Pythagoreans .8 Panaetius .8 Parmenides .2 Panaetius .8 Parmenides .2 Peripatetics .6 Philo, Judaeus .8 Philo, Larissacus .8.

Copy Link

Recommended publications

Humor As Philosophical Subversion, Especially in the Skeptics
Humor as Philosophical Subversion, Especially in the Skeptics Richard Bett 1. Introduction Aristotle is not exactly a comedian. He wrote about comedy in the lost second book of the Poetics, and, as discussed in another paper in this volume, he wrote about wittiness (εὐτραπελία) in his ethical works. But he does not exhibit much of either. What humor there is in Aristotle seems to fall into two main varieties. First, there is word-play that engages the reader’s attention, which can perhaps be seen as an instance of a technique he describes in Rhetoric 3.10, that of saying “smart things and things that create a good impression” (τὰ ἀστεῖα καὶ τὰ εὐδοκιµοῦντα, 1410b6).1 Early in the Nicomachean Ethics, he says that in endeavoring to determine the principles (ἀρχαί) of ethics, we should begin (ἀρκτέον) with things known to us (1095b2-4). A little later, introducing the idea of the function (ἔργον) of a human being, he asks whether we can seriously consider that a human being as such (as opposed to people in various occupations) is ἀργόν (1097b28- 30) – which is intentionally ambiguous between “without function” and “lazy.” In De Caelo, introducing the topic of minimal magnitudes, he says that positing such a minimal magnitude (τοὐλάχιστον) will make the biggest difference (τὰ µέγιστα) in mathematics (271b10-11). And in De Interpretatione, discussing names, he says that “non-human 1 Unless otherwise noted, translations are my own. In the case of Timon, I sometimes draw on translations in Bett 2000 and Bett 2015. In the case of Sextus I generally draw on Bett 1997, Bett 2005, and Bett 2012.
[Show full text]
View / Download
ELECTRYONE ΗΛΕΚΤΡΥΩΝΗ Xenophanes of Colophon and the Problem of Distinguishing Between Skepticism and Negative Dogmatism Dariusz Kubok University of Silesia in Katowice [email protected] ABSTRACT: Sextus Empiricus in Pyr. (I, 224, cf Diog. IX, 18) describes Xenophanes of Colophon as hupatuphos, which is to mean that he was a skeptic who did not entirely free himself of dogmatic assertions. In this paper I will try to demonstrate an alternative way of understanding hupatuphos in relation to Xenophanes. In my opinion, the interpretation according to which passages can be found in Xenophanes' writings expressing both a skeptical and negative dogmatic position is possible. Thus, this thinker may be described with the adjective hupatuphos not because he did not manage to free himself of positive dogmatism, but rather because he did not free himself of negative dogmatism. KEY-WORDS: skepticism, dogmatism, knowledge, truth, opinion, Xenophanes of Colophon In his Outlines of Pyrrhonism (PH I, 224, cf Diog. IX, 18), Sextus Empiricus invokes the opinion of Timon of Phlius describing Xenophanes of Colophon as hupatuphos ("not entirely free of tuphos,"1 "partly free of conceit,"2 "semi-free of 1 Lesher (1992) 215, n. 53. 2 Lesher (1992) 215. Xenophanes of Colophon and the Problem of Distinguishing Between Skepticism and Negative Dogmatism vanity"3), referring to the fact that both dogmatic and skeptical elements can be found in his views. Among the dogmatic elements are the belief that everything is one and the passages implying the existence of a positive (constructive) theology. Based on Sextus’ opinion some scholars see conflict in Xenophanes’ philosophy between positive dogmatic theology and skepticism.4 In this article, I will try to show that it is possible to seriously weaken this conflict, if not to do away with it entirely, and that an epistemological reading of Xenophanes may lead to more fruitful conclusions.
[Show full text]
Early Pyrrhonism As a Sect of Buddhism? a Case Study in the Methodology of Comparative Philosophy
Comparative Philosophy Volume 9, No. 2 (2018): 1-40 Open Access / ISSN 2151-6014 / www.comparativephilosophy.org https://doi.org/10.31979/2151-6014(2018).090204 EARLY PYRRHONISM AS A SECT OF BUDDHISM? A CASE STUDY IN THE METHODOLOGY OF COMPARATIVE PHILOSOPHY MONTE RANSOME JOHNSON & BRETT SHULTS ABSTRACT: We offer a sceptical examination of a thesis recently advanced in a monograph published by Princeton University Press entitled Greek Buddha: Pyrrho’s Encounter with Early Buddhism in Central Asia. In this dense and probing work, Christopher I. Beckwith, a professor of Central Eurasian studies at Indiana University, Bloomington, argues that Pyrrho of Elis adopted a form of early Buddhism during his years in Bactria and Gandhāra, and that early Pyrrhonism must be understood as a sect of early Buddhism. In making his case Beckwith claims that virtually all scholars of Greek, Indian, and Chinese philosophy have been operating under flawed assumptions and with flawed methodologies, and so have failed to notice obvious and undeniable correspondences between the philosophical views of the Buddha and of Pyrrho. In this study we take Beckwith’s proposal and challenge seriously, and we examine his textual basis and techniques of translation, his methods of examining passages, his construal of problems and his reconstruction of arguments. We find that his presuppositions are contentious and doubtful, his own methods are extremely flawed, and that he draws unreasonable conclusions. Although the result of our study is almost entirely negative, we think it illustrates some important general points about the methodology of comparative philosophy. Keywords: adiaphora, anātman, anattā, ataraxia, Buddha, Buddhism, Democritus, Pāli, Pyrrho, Pyrrhonism, Scepticism, trilakṣaṇa 1.
[Show full text]
Analytic Continuation of Ζ(S) Violates the Law of Non-Contradiction (LNC)
Analytic Continuation of ζ(s) Violates the Law of Non-Contradiction (LNC) Ayal Sharon ∗y July 30, 2019 Abstract The Dirichlet series of ζ(s) was long ago proven to be divergent throughout half-plane Re(s) ≤ 1. If also Riemann’s proposition is true, that there exists an "expression" of ζ(s) that is convergent at all s (except at s = 1), then ζ(s) is both divergent and convergent throughout half-plane Re(s) ≤ 1 (except at s = 1). This result violates all three of Aristotle’s "Laws of Thought": the Law of Identity (LOI), the Law of the Excluded Middle (LEM), and the Law of Non- Contradition (LNC). In classical and intuitionistic logics, the violation of LNC also triggers the "Principle of Explosion" / Ex Contradictione Quodlibet (ECQ). In addition, the Hankel contour used in Riemann’s analytic continuation of ζ(s) violates Cauchy’s integral theorem, providing another proof of the invalidity of Riemann’s ζ(s). Riemann’s ζ(s) is one of the L-functions, which are all in- valid due to analytic continuation. This result renders unsound all theorems (e.g. Modularity, Fermat’s last) and conjectures (e.g. BSD, Tate, Hodge, Yang-Mills) that assume that an L-function (e.g. Riemann’s ζ(s)) is valid. We also show that the Riemann Hypothesis (RH) is not "non-trivially true" in classical logic, intuitionistic logic, or three-valued logics (3VLs) that assign a third truth-value to paradoxes (Bochvar’s 3VL, Priest’s LP ). ∗Patent Examiner, U.S. Patent and Trademark Oﬃce (USPTO).
[Show full text]
CURRICULUM VITAE RICHARD BETT Department of Philosophy
CURRICULUM VITAE RICHARD BETT Department of Philosophy The Johns Hopkins University Citizen of U.K. Baltimore, MD 21218-2686 Permanent Resident of U.S. Phone: (410) 516-6863 Fax: (410) 516-6848 e-mail: <[email protected]> EDUCATION B.A. Oxford University, 1980, Literae Humaniores (Classics and Philosophy). First Class Honours, Final Examinations, 1980; First Class Honours, Honour Moderations in Greek & Latin Literature, 1978 Ph.D. University of California, Berkeley, 1986, Philosophy. Dissertation Title: “Moral Scepticism: Why Ask ‘Why Should I be Moral?’” CURRENT POSITION Professor of Philosophy, The Johns Hopkins University; secondary appointment in Classics PREVIOUS POSITIONS Assistant Professor of Philosophy, University of Texas at Arlington, 1986-1991 Visiting Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Johns Hopkins, Jan.-June 1991 Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Johns Hopkins, 1991-1994 Associate Professor of Philosophy, Johns Hopkins, 1994-2000; secondary appointment in Classics, 1996-2000 Acting Executive Director, The American Philosophical Association, Jan. 2000-June 2001 PUBLICATIONS a) Books Sextus Empiricus, Against the Ethicists (Adversus Mathematicos XI): Introduction, Translation and Commentary (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997, paperback 2000). Pp. xxxiv + 302 Pyrrho, his Antecedents and his Legacy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2000, paperback 2003). Pp. xi + 264 Sextus Empiricus, Against the Logicians (Adversus Mathematicos VII-VIII): Introduction, Translation and Notes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005 – hardback & paperback
[Show full text]
Diogenes Laërtius: a Moderate Skeptic in the History of Philosophy (Book IX)∗
Philosophy Study, April 2021, Vol. 11, No. 4, 293-302 doi: 10.17265/2159-5313/2021.04.005 D D AV I D PUBLISHING Diogenes Laërtius: A Moderate Skeptic in the History of Philosophy (Book IX)∗ Ramón Román-Alcalá University of Córdoba, Córdoba, Spain This paper presents the keys and reasons for Diogenes Laërtius’ alleged scepticism, based on an analysis of the general design of his work The Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers. I believe that it would be manifestly erroneous to seek confirmation of this scepticism solely in Book IX without taking into account the overall structure of the work. A convincing explanation is also provided of one of the most enigmatic and most studied phrases in this work. What did Diogenes mean when he said that Apollonides of Nicaea was ὁ παρ’ ἡμῶν (“one of us”)? Keywords: scepticism, Diogenes Laërtius, sextus, Pyrrho, The Lives of Philosophers The Singular Book IX of “The Lives” Diogenes Laërtius’ work Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers was already relatively well-known in antiquity, due not only to the author’s popularity but also to the singularity of the work, in which he had succeeded in faithfully characterising much of ancient historiography. Moreover, and this is important to highlight in our introduction, taking into account the structure of many of the books and sources mentioned by Diogenes, this work began a new and highly original historiographic genre, which could be called “successions”. Diogenes’ Lives of Philosophers is a singular work. It starts with an introduction focusing on the origins of philosophy (which were undoubtedly Greek), the different classifications of philosophy and philosophers.
[Show full text]
The Demise of Plato's Academy341
141 SKÉPSIS, ANO VII, Nº 10, 2014. MURDER OR NATURAL CAUSES? THE DEMISE OF PLATO'S ACADEMY341 RAMÓN ROMÁN-ALCALÁ (Universidad de Córdoba). E-mail: [email protected] Introduction. History, operating imperceptibly, tends to provide us with an overview of the rise and fall of philosophical movements, an overarching perspective to which we are blinded when studying the key figures within the limits of their time and space. It is fascinating to observe how philosophical doctrines mutate or change course over time, for reasons whose significance for the evolution of the system as a whole become apparent only when that evolution has ended, but which go unnoticed in the heat and clamour of the dialectical battles that shaped it. The moderate scepticism propounded by Arcesilaus342 and Carneades marked the heyday of the Academy; under their followers, the philosophical stance of the Academy shifted towards a striking dogmatism which eventually prompted its downfall. Little by little, scepticism began to fade, giving way first to a semi-dogmatic outlook and later to the most unyielding dogmatism. This shift in position was the reason for the demise, first of Academic scepticism – which was later to be restored with certain 341T his paper forms part of the Research Project I + D + I FFI2012-32989 on skepticism, funded by the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness. 342 Arcesilaus is the key figure in the academic skepticism, made an innovative reading of Plato's dialogues, and where others saw a positive and systematic doctrine, the dialectical method looked a skeptical argument (to the impossibilities of clear definitions of concepts), cf.
[Show full text]
Pyrrhonian Skepticism in Diogenes Laertius
SAPERE Scripta Antiquitatis Posterioris ad Ethicam REligionemque pertinentia Schriften der späteren Antike zu ethischen und religiösen Fragen Herausgegeben von Rainer Hirsch-Luipold, Reinhard Feldmeier und Heinz-Günther Nesselrath unter der Mitarbeit von Natalia Pedrique und Andrea Villani Band XXV Pyrrhonian Skepticism in Diogenes Laertius Introduction, Text, Translation, Commentary and Interpretative Essays by Katja Maria Vogt, Richard Bett, Lorenzo Corti, Tiziano Dorandi, Christiana M. M. Olfert, Elisabeth Scharffenberger, David Sedley, and James Warren edited by Katja Maria Vogt Mohr Siebeck SAPERE is a Project of the Göttingen Academy of Sciences and Humanities within the programme of the Union of the German Academies funded by the Federal Republic of Germany and the State of Lower Saxony. e-ISBN PDF 978-3-16-156430-7 ISBN 978-3-16-153336-5 The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Natio nal- bibliographie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http:// dnb.dnb.de. © 2015 by Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, Germany. www.mohr.de This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher’s written permission. This ap- plies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and pro- cessing in electronic systems. This book was supervised by Heinz-Günther Nesselrath (representing the SAPERE Editors) and typeset by Magdalena Albrecht, Janjenka Szillat and Andrea Villani at the SAPERE Research Institute, Göttingen. Printed by Gulde Druck in Tübin- gen on non-aging paper and bound by Buchbinderei Spinner in Ottersweier. Printed in Germany. SAPERE Greek and Latin texts of Later Antiquity (1st–4th centuries AD) have for a long time been overshadowed by those dating back to so-called ‘classi- cal’ times.
[Show full text]
The Twentieth Century Has Been So Begrudging to Timon of Phlius That He Could Be Forgiven for Identifying Himself with His Misanthropic Namesake
68 TIMON OF PHLIUS: PYRRHONIST AND SATIRIST The twentieth century has been so begrudging to Timon of Phlius that he could be forgiven for identifying himself with his misanthropic namesake. About a hundred and fifty of his 'glanzenden Sillen' (the phrase is Wilamowitz's) survive, but in Albin Lesky's Geschichte der griechischen Literatur Timon gets only a third of the space devoted to Anaximander from whom we possess one possible sentence.' Serious work on Timon largely came to a stop with Hermann Diels who edited the fragments and testimonia in Poetarum philosophorum fragmenta (Berlin, 1901), a book which is as difficult to come by as the older and much fuller study of Timon by C. Wachsmuth in Sillographorum Graecorum reliquiae (Leipzig, 1885).2 In spite of his skilful parody of Homer and his Aristophanic versatility in language (some sixty neologisms, many of them comic formations, occur in the fragments),3 Timon has been ignored by those who give such generous attention to Hellenistic poetry. Many fragments raise at least one major textual difficulty. A new edition and literary study of the material is badly needed.4 This neglect of Timon is all the more surprising since his subject matter, the philosophy of Pyrrho, continues to attract considerable interest.5 Pyrrho wrote nothing, and no-one who studies Pyrrho can avoid Timon, whose summary of Pyrrho's views, as reported by Aristocles in Eusebius, is often taken as the starting point for discussion of early scepticism.6 The authors of two recent books on Greek scepticism, Charlotte Stough and Mario Dal Pra, have properly appreciated the unique importance of Timon's evidence for understanding Pyrrho;7 and Dal Pra follows his chapter on Pyrrho with a useful survey of Timon.
[Show full text]
Date and Life
XENOPHANES Xenophanes' main claim to fame is as a pre-Socratic philosopher who inveighed against the Homeric and Hesiodic portrayal of the gods, argued for a single, non-anthropomorphic deity, and offered "rational" explanations of various physical phenomena (wind, rain, celestial bodies etc.). For the most part these topics were dealt with in hexameters and will consequently receive little attention in what follows. I Date and Life In fr. 8 Xenophanes tells us that he spent 67 years wandering about Greece and that 25 years had elapsed prior to this, and in fr. 22 he introduces an interlocutor who asks, "How old were you when the Mede came?" It is generally assumed that the Mede is Harpagus who subjugated Xenophanes' native city Colophon in the late 540s and that this was the date at which the poet began his 67 years of wandering. Diogenes Laertius (9.20) gives the 60th Olympiad (540- 37) as Xenophanes' floruit and he or his source may have used the arrival of Harpagus in Colophon as the evidence for his dating. It seems therefore that Xenophanes was born c. 565 and died c. 470. He clearly lived for at least 92 years (or 91 by inclusive reckoning) and Censorinus (15.3) states that he lived to be over 100. The poet's death c. 470 would be consistent with the testimony of Timaeus (21 A 8 D-K) that Xenophanes lived in the time of Hieron, tyrant of Sy racuse from 478 to 467. A divergent chronology, proposed by Apol lodorus, assigns Xenophanes' birth to the 40th Olympiad (620-17) and represents him as living "until the times of Darius and Cyrus" (Darius ascended the throne in 522 and Cyrus died in 529).
[Show full text]
Book Reviews
International Journal for the Study of Skepticism 1 (2011) 151–157 brill.nl/skep Book Reviews Timon of Phlius: Pyrrhonism into Poetry . By Dee L. Clayman. Untersuchungen zur antiken Literatur und Geschichte (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2009). Th e book under review is of interest to students of ancient philosophy not least for treat- ing Timon of Phlius, the most important source for the philosophy of the obscure Pyrrho of Elis, primarily as part of the history of ancient poetry. For historians of philosophy Timon’s primary importance lies in his exposition of Pyrrho’s views, to which he may indeed have added his own thoughts. Th ese views became the background to Aenesidemus’s introduction of Pyrrhonism as radical skepticism in the fi rst century B.C. Clayman argues that Timon is important in another way, namely as establishing a skeptical aesthetics that, along with Pyrrho’s skepticism, profoundly and directly infl uenced “… some of the great Hellenistic poets like Callimachus, Th eocritus and Apollonius of Rhodes who integrated elements of Timon’s poetry into their own as well as his skeptical world view” (2). Indeed, the author views Apollonius’s Argonautica as a “Skeptic epic” (187). Th e book is divided into six chapters. Th e fi rst discusses the lives of Pyrrho and Timon, for which our primary source is Diogenes Laertius. Th e author readily acknowledges that little can be asserted with confi dence concerning these lives but off ers an interpretation of the testimonies. Reasonably, she views Timon as an itinerant poet imbued with the philoso- phy of his teacher.
[Show full text]
Ancient Skepticism: Pyrrhonism Diego E
Philosophy Compass 6/4 (2011): 246–258, 10.1111/j.1747-9991.2011.00391.x Ancient Skepticism: Pyrrhonism Diego E. Machuca* Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientı´ficas y Tećnicas Abstract Pyrrhonism was one of the two main ancient skeptical traditions. In this second paper of the three-part series devoted to ancient skepticism, I present and discuss some of the issues on Pyrrho- nian skepticism which have been the focus of much attention in the recent literature. The topics to be addressed concern the outlooks of Pyrrho, Aenesidemus, and Sextus Empiricus. In the first paper of this three-part series on ancient skepticism, I offered a general pre- sentation of the ancient skeptical traditions as well as an overview of recent translations and general studies. With this framework in place, the present paper deals with some vexed questions concerning the stances of Pyrrho, Aenesidemus, and Sextus Empiricus. For reasons of space, the discussion will be selective and it will not always be possible to go into detail about the issues tackled. 1. Pyrrho Most recent scholarship on Pyrrho of Elis (360–270 BC) continues to divide between two main interpretations of his outlook, which may be called ‘practical’ and ‘theoretical’. The first interpretation affirms that Pyrrho’s motivation was exclusively or mainly ethi- cal.1 This view finds support in some passages in Diogenes Laertius and particularly in Cicero, who does not refer to Pyrrho as a skeptic, but invariably portrays him as a moral- ist – as someone who considered virtue as the only good and who was admired for his lifestyle (Academica II 130; On Moral Ends III 11–2, IV 43, 49, 60; On Duties I 6).
[Show full text]