DOCSLIB.ORG

University of London Thesis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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 It is an unpublished typescript and the copyright is held by the author.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. □ This copy has been deposited in the Library of This copy has been deposited in the Senate House Library, Senate House, Malet Street, London WC1E 7HU. A study of Lucretius, De rerum natura 1 635-920: Lucretius and his sources Francesco Montarese University College London Ph.D. Classics UMI Number: U592815 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U592815 Published by ProQuest LLC 2013. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Abstract My thesis is a study of lines 635-920 o f DR N I , Lucretius’ refutation of the theories about the fundamental nature of matter elaborated by Heraclitus, Empedocles, Anaxagoras and other unnamed thinkers. My main concern is establishing what source Lucretius used in these lines and how he used it. In chapter 1 I give my reasons for believing that Lucretius, in DRN I 635-920, was following an Epicurean source, which in turn derived its information from Theophrastean doxography. In chapter 2 1 argue that books XIV and XV of the IIO were not Lucretius’ source-text for Lucretius’ refutation of earlier thinkers. In chapter 3 1 discuss how lines 635-920 fit in the structure of the first book of Lucretius’ poem, whether the critique was an addition from a later stage in composition, and whether the source is more likely to be Epicurus himself or a later Epicurean author. In chapter 4 1 focus on Lucretius’ own additions to the material he found in his source and his poetical and rhetorical contributions. Lucretius contributed extensively himself to this section as a finished poetic product. It will appear that even if the philosophy comes from the source, Lucretius shows understanding of the points in the way he adapts his poetical devices to the philosophical arguments. It will also appear that Lucretius foreshadows philosophical points in what have often been thought the ‘poetical sections’ or ‘purple passages’ of his poem (e.g. the invocation of Venus in the proem, and the description of Sicily and Aetna in DRN I 716-733), so that he could take them up later on in his narrative and provide an adequate explanation of reality. 2 Table of contents Introduction p. 8 Chapter 1. Lucretius drew the critique from an Epicurean polemical text 20 1.1 Lucretius’ information is ‘second-hand’ 32 1.2 Lucretius’ source was an Epicurean text 54 1.2.1 Lucretius’ use of homoeomeria 55 1.2 .2 The choice of Heraclitus as representative monist 62 1.2.2.1 The Stoics as fire monists? 66 1.2.2.2 The Stoic denial of void in the world? 68 1.2.3 Lucretius’ arguments against the limited pluralists 71 1.2.3.1 Lines 753-781 71 I.2.3.2. Lines 782-802 73 1.2.4 The Epicurean angle 77 1.3 Conclusion 85 Chapter 2. Books XIV and XV of Epicurus’ IIO 88 2.1 The content of books XIV and XV 89 2.1.1 Book XIV was not dedicated to polemic 90 3 2.1.11 Evidence from the format of PHerc. 1148 90 2.1.1.2 Columns I-XXII 92 2.1.1.3 Columns XXIII and XXTV 95 2.1.1.4 Evidence from the sezioni 101 2.1.2 Epicurus did not discuss Heraclitus’ theory IIO XTV 119 2.1.3 Epicurus did not confute Empedocles’ theory in IIO XIV 120 2.1.4. Book XV was not dedicated to criticism of Anaxagoras 128 2.1.4.1 Comice 2 130 2.1.4.2 Cornice 3 158 2.1.4.3 Comice 4 166 2.1.4.4 Cornice 5 174 2.1.4.5 Comici 6 and 7 183 2.1.4.6 Comice 8 187 2.2 Other considerations intrinsic to Epicurus’ work 192 2.3 Are IIO XTV and XV dependent on Theophrastus’ OA? 197 2.3.1 Was Plato the last of the limited pluralists in OA? 205 2.3.2 The detail of the arguments against Plato and air-monism 208 2.3 .3 The dating of IIO XIV and of Theophrastus’ OA 215 2.4 Conclusion 218 4 Chapter 3. Lucretius’ use of sources in DRN I 220 3.1 The source o fD R N l 156-598 and 951-1107 220 3.2 Did Lucretius change source after line 598 of DRN I? 228 3.3 The critique does not derive from the same source as 15 5 ff. 235 3.4 The connection between lines 634 and 635 239 3.5 Why did Lucretius have the critique at the centre of book I? 243 3.6 Was Epicurus the source of the critique? 250 3.7 Did Lucretius use a later Epicurean source? 255 3.7.1 The choice of Heraclitus 264 3.7.2 Lucretius’ use of homoeomeria 266 3.8 Conclusion 269 Chapter 4. Lucretius in the critique 270 4.1 Heraclitus as a general 270 4.2 Heraclitus’ army 274 4.2.1 Stolidi and inanes Graii 275 4.2.2 Sound and truth 282 4.2.3 Inversis sub verbis 295 4.3 The theme of the path, and the search for truth 308 4.3.1 Lines 657-659 309 4.3.2 Lines 690-700 311 4.4 Empedocles and Sicily 313 5 4.4.1 Empedoclean style and language 314 4.4.2 Lucretius’ praise 319 4.4.3 Aetna 329 4.4.4 Praise of Empedocles’ theories? 331 4.4.5 The four elements 337 4.5 Lucretius’ presentation of Anaxagoras’ theory 340 4.5.1 Lucretius’ transliteration homoeomeria 343 4.5.2 Parody of Anaxagoras 345 4.6 The mortality of Anaxagoras’ primordia 346 4.7 Lucretius’ strategy in 859-874 351 4.8 The analogy of letters and atoms 355 4.8.1 Lines 823-829 357 4.8.2 Intertextuality 361 4.8.3 Lines 906-914 364 4.9 Repetitions 367 4.10 The parallelism between lines 803-829 and 897-920 370 4.11 The critique as ‘dialogue’ 373 4.12 Conclusion 3 83 Appendix (a). Two stages of composition? 384 Appendix (b). The format of PHerc. 1148 and PHerc. 1151 392 6 Appendix (c). Do Epicurus’ AdHerodotum and AdPythoclem reflect continuous books of IK>? 405 Abbreviations 411 Bibliography 412 Plate 447 7 Introduction Lucretius’ criticism of the theories of matter of Heraclitus, Empedocles, Anaxagoras and other unnamed thinkers in lines 635-920 o f DRNI, which I shall henceforth refer to as the critique, is a unique piece of literature as it presents criticism of the views of earlier philosophers in poetry. Understanding how Lucretius used his sources is important forjudging his achievement. Although enquiries into the problem of how Latin authors used their Greek sources have now become somewhat unfashionable, studying Lucretius’ philosophical poem from this viewpoint still has much to teach us. As a Roman poet Lucretius would have considered it natural to reproduce Greek models, and would have been expected to do so. Livius Andronicus ‘translated’ the Odyssey into Satumian verses in the third century B.C. Ennius’ (239- 169 B.C.) introduction of the hexameter into Latin literature, with his 18 books of Armales , meant that the relationship between Latin texts and their Greek counterparts gained a further aspect. The style of the works of Roman literature could be directly compared to the Greek original they derived from.1 Indeed Ennius claimed that the spirit of Homer had been reincarnated in him. It may also be that, where the early books of the Annales are concerned, Ennius took over, not only the 1 Lucretius himself highlights the importance of Ennius’ import of the hexameter to Latin literature: detulit ex Helicone perermi fronde coronam (DRN 1 118).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Glossary Glossary
    Glossary Glossary Albedo A measure of an object’s reflectivity. A pure white reflecting surface has an albedo of 1.0 (100%). A pitch-black, nonreflecting surface has an albedo of 0.0. The Moon is a fairly dark object with a combined albedo of 0.07 (reflecting 7% of the sunlight that falls upon it). The albedo range of the lunar maria is between 0.05 and 0.08. The brighter highlands have an albedo range from 0.09 to 0.15. Anorthosite Rocks rich in the mineral feldspar, making up much of the Moon’s bright highland regions. Aperture The diameter of a telescope’s objective lens or primary mirror. Apogee The point in the Moon’s orbit where it is furthest from the Earth. At apogee, the Moon can reach a maximum distance of 406,700 km from the Earth. Apollo The manned lunar program of the United States. Between July 1969 and December 1972, six Apollo missions landed on the Moon, allowing a total of 12 astronauts to explore its surface. Asteroid A minor planet. A large solid body of rock in orbit around the Sun. Banded crater A crater that displays dusky linear tracts on its inner walls and/or floor. 250 Basalt A dark, fine-grained volcanic rock, low in silicon, with a low viscosity. Basaltic material fills many of the Moon’s major basins, especially on the near side. Glossary Basin A very large circular impact structure (usually comprising multiple concentric rings) that usually displays some degree of flooding with lava. The largest and most conspicuous lava- flooded basins on the Moon are found on the near side, and most are filled to their outer edges with mare basalts.
    [Show full text]
  • Aristotle's Methods
    3 History and Dialectic Metaphysics A 3, 983a24-4b8 Rachel Barney In Metaphysics A 3, Aristotle undertakes to confirm his system of the four causes as a framework for inquiry into first principles, the knowledge of which will constitute wisdom. His strategy will be to survey his philosophical predecessors, in order to establish that none has supplied a cause which cannot be subsumed under his own canonical four. Thus A 3 inaugurates a project not completed until the end of A 6—or, taken more inclusively, A 10, since A 7 summarizes its results, chapters 8 and 9 develop criticisms of some of the views discussed, and chapter 10 reads as a summation of the whole.1 (Much of Metaphysics α also reads, appropriately enough, like a series of reflections on this project: I will note its relevance on occasion below.) Our concern here is with the opening phase of this project. Here Aris- totle discusses the steps taken by the earliest philosophers and their successors towards determining the material cause, which led in turn to recognizing its inadequacy as sole first principle [archê]. I divide the text of A 3, 983a24-4b8 into five moves: (1) the introduction of the project (983a24-3b6); (2) the account of the reasoning of the first philosophers (983b6-20); (3) a discussion of Thales, with an excursus on his putative predecessors among the poets (983b20-4a5); (4) * I would like to thank all the participants in the Symposium Aristotelicum meeting for discussion of this paper, as well as Victor Caston, Nathan Gilbert, Phillip Horky, Brad Inwood, Stephen Menn, and Robin Smith for their comments.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Cambridge University Press 978-1-108-48147-2 — Scale, Space and Canon in Ancient Literary Culture Reviel Netz Index More Information
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-108-48147-2 — Scale, Space and Canon in Ancient Literary Culture Reviel Netz Index More Information Index Aaker, Jennifer, 110, 111 competition, 173 Abdera, 242, 310, 314, 315, 317 longevity, 179 Abel, N. H., 185 Oresteia, 197, 200, 201 Academos, 189, 323, 324, 325, 337 papyri, 15 Academy, 322, 325, 326, 329, 337, 343, 385, 391, Persians, 183 399, 404, 427, 434, 448, 476, 477–8, 512 portraits, 64 Achilles Tatius, 53, 116, 137, 551 Ptolemaic era, 39 papyri, 16, 23 Aeschylus (astronomer), 249 Acta Alexandrinorum, 87, 604 Aesop, 52, 68, 100, 116, 165 adespota, 55, 79, 81–5, 86, 88, 91, 99, 125, 192, 194, in education, 42 196, 206, 411, 413, 542, 574 papyri, 16, 23 Adkin, Neil, 782 Aethiopia, 354 Adrastus, 483 Aetia, 277 Adrastus (mathematician), 249 Africa, 266 Adrianople, 798 Agatharchides, 471 Aedesius (martyr), 734, 736 Agathocles (historian), 243 Aegae, 479, 520 Agathocles (peripatetic), 483 Aegean, 338–43 Agathon, 280 Aegina, 265 Agias (historian), 373 Aelianus (Platonist), 484 agrimensores, 675 Aelius Aristides, 133, 657, 709 Ai Khanoum, 411 papyri, 16 Akhmatova, Anna, 186 Aelius Herodian (grammarian), 713 Albertus Magnus, 407 Aelius Promotus, 583 Albinus, 484 Aenesidemus, 478–9, 519, 520 Alcaeus, 49, 59, 61–2, 70, 116, 150, 162, 214, 246, Aeolia, 479 see also Aeolian Aeolian, 246 papyri, 15, 23 Aeschines, 39, 59, 60, 64, 93, 94, 123, 161, 166, 174, portraits, 65, 67 184, 211, 213, 216, 230, 232, 331 Alcidamas, 549 commentaries, 75 papyri, 16 Ctesiphon, 21 Alcinous, 484 False Legation, 22 Alcmaeon, 310
    [Show full text]
  • The Presocratics in the Doxographical Tradition. Sources, Controversies, and Current Research*
    THE PRESOCRATICS IN THE DOXOGRAPHICAL TRADITION. SOURCES, CONTROVERSIES, AND CURRENT RESEARCH* Han Baltussen Abstract In this paper I present a synthetic overview of recent and ongoing research in the field of doxography, that is, the study of the nature, transmission and interrelations of sources for ancient Greek philosophy. The latest revisions of the theory of Hermann Diels (Doxographi Graeci 1879) regarding the historiography ought to be known more widely, as they still influence our understanding of the Presocratics and their reception. The scholarly study on the compilations of Greek philosophical views from Hellenistic and later periods has received a major boost by the first of a projected three-volume study by Mansfeld and Runia (1997). Taking their work as a firm basis I also describe my own work in this area and how it can be related to, and fitted into, this trend by outlining how two important sources for the historiography of Greek philosophy, Theo- phrastus (4th–3rd c. BCE) and Simplicius (early 6th c. AD) stand in a special relation to each other and form an important strand in the doxographical tradition. Introduction In this paper I present a review of recent research on the study of the Presocratics in the doxographical tradition, and how my own work in progress is connected to this area of research. By setting out recent, ongoing and forthcoming research I hope to make a con- tribution to mapping out some important characteristics of the field by way of a critical study of its main sources, since it is quite important that these new insights are more widely known.
    [Show full text]
  • DMAAC – February 1973
    LUNAR TOPOGRAPHIC ORTHOPHOTOMAP (LTO) AND LUNAR ORTHOPHOTMAP (LO) SERIES (Published by DMATC) Lunar Topographic Orthophotmaps and Lunar Orthophotomaps Scale: 1:250,000 Projection: Transverse Mercator Sheet Size: 25.5”x 26.5” The Lunar Topographic Orthophotmaps and Lunar Orthophotomaps Series are the first comprehensive and continuous mapping to be accomplished from Apollo Mission 15-17 mapping photographs. This series is also the first major effort to apply recent advances in orthophotography to lunar mapping. Presently developed maps of this series were designed to support initial lunar scientific investigations primarily employing results of Apollo Mission 15-17 data. Individual maps of this series cover 4 degrees of lunar latitude and 5 degrees of lunar longitude consisting of 1/16 of the area of a 1:1,000,000 scale Lunar Astronautical Chart (LAC) (Section 4.2.1). Their apha-numeric identification (example – LTO38B1) consists of the designator LTO for topographic orthophoto editions or LO for orthophoto editions followed by the LAC number in which they fall, followed by an A, B, C or D designator defining the pertinent LAC quadrant and a 1, 2, 3, or 4 designator defining the specific sub-quadrant actually covered. The following designation (250) identifies the sheets as being at 1:250,000 scale. The LTO editions display 100-meter contours, 50-meter supplemental contours and spot elevations in a red overprint to the base, which is lithographed in black and white. LO editions are identical except that all relief information is omitted and selenographic graticule is restricted to border ticks, presenting an umencumbered view of lunar features imaged by the photographic base.
    [Show full text]
  • 74 Diodorus Cronus and Hellenistic Philosophy §1
    74 DIODORUS CRONUS AND HELLENISTIC PHILOSOPHY §1. Introduction.1 During the last four decades historians of ancient logic have become increasingly aware of the importance of Diodorus Cronus and his pupil Philo as pioneers of the propositional logic which came to flourish in the Stoa.^ Their direct influence has so far been recognised in two main areas of Hellenistic controversy — the validity-criteria for conditional propo- sitions, and the definition of the modal terms 'possible' and 'necessary'. But some broader questions have not been satisfactorily answered. What were Diodorus' own philosophical allegiances and antecedents? What is his place in the history of Greek philosophy? How far-reaching was his influence on the post-Aristotelian philosophers? There was little chance of tackling these questions confidently until 1972, when Klaus Doring published for the first time the collected fragments of Diodorus, in his important volume Die Megariker. Meagre though they are, these fragments confirm my suspicion that Diodorus' philosophical background has not been fully explored, and also that his influence on the three emerging Hellenistic schools — the Stoics, Epicureans, and Sceptics — was far wider than has hitherto been recognised. There has been much discussion as to which earlier philoso- phers played the most decisive part in shaping Hellenistic philosophy, and the respective claims of the Platonists and of Aristotle have never lacked expert advocacy. In all this, the claims of so obscure a figure as Diodorus have been underrated. §2. Diodorus'school. Although Diodorus was not active before the last part of the fourth century, any discussion of his philosophical allegiances must begin with Euclides of Megara at the beginning of the century.
    [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]
  • A Concise History of the Philosophy of Mathematics
    A Thumbnail History of the Philosophy of Mathematics "It is beyond a doubt that all our knowledge begins with experience." - Imannuel Kant ( 1724 – 1804 ) ( However naïve realism is no substitute for truth [1] ) [1] " ... concepts have reference to sensible experience, but they are never, in a logical sense, deducible from them. For this reason I have never been able to comprehend the problem of the á priori as posed by Kant", from "The Problem of Space, Ether, and the Field in Physics" ( "Das Raum-, Äether- und Feld-Problem der Physik." ), by Albert Einstein, 1934 - source: "Beyond Geometry: Classic Papers from Riemann to Einstein", Dover Publications, by Peter Pesic, St. John's College, Sante Fe, New Mexico Mathematics does not have a universally accepted definition during any period of its development throughout the history of human thought. However for the last 2,500 years, beginning first with the pre - Hellenic Egyptians and Babylonians, mathematics encompasses possible deductive relationships concerned solely with logical truths derived by accepted philosophic methods of logic which the classical Greek thinkers of antiquity pioneered. Although it is normally associated with formulaic algorithms ( i.e., mechanical methods ), mathematics somehow arises in the human mind by the correspondence of observation and inductive experiential thinking together with its practical predictive powers in interpreting future as well as "seemingly" ephemeral phenomena. Why all of this is true in human progress, no one can answer faithfully. In other words, human experiences and intuitive thinking first suggest to the human mind the abstract symbols for which the economy of human thinking mathematics is well known; but it is those parts of mathematics most disconnected from observation and experience and therefore relying almost wholly upon its internal, self - consistent, deductive logics giving mathematics an independent reified, almost ontological, reality, that mathematics most powerfully interprets the ultimate hidden mysteries of nature.
    [Show full text]
  • Plutarch and Parmenides HERSHBELL, JACKSON P Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Summer 1972; 13, 2; Proquest Pg
    Plutarch and Parmenides HERSHBELL, JACKSON P Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Summer 1972; 13, 2; ProQuest pg. 193 Plutarch and Parmenides Jackson P. Hershbell LTHOUGH PLUTARCH is not a major source for interpretation of A Parmenides' poem, he preserves several fragments: B1.29-30; B8.4; B13, B14 and B15, the last two of which would otherwise be lost.1 He also makes observations on Parmenides' style and thought, and relates one biographical incident.2 Scholars of Plutarch and Parmenides are divided, however, on at least two problems: (1) What was the extent of Plutarch's knowledge ofParmenides, e.g. did he possess a copy of the complete poem, or was he working with second-hand sources such·as compendia 13 (2) How reliable and worth­ while is his interpretation of Parmenides 1 Among those denying Plutarch extensive knowledge of Parmen ides are Fairbanks, Ziegler and Taran. According to Ziegler, Plutarch gave more attention to Parmenides than to Xenophanes, "aber doch nicht eingehender studiert."4 Taran also remarks, "Plutarch's knowledge of Parmenides' text does not appear to have been extensive."5 H. Martin Jr and R. Westman, however, take a positive view. According to Mar­ tin, "Plutarch must have known Parmenides well, though he inter­ preted him anachronistically from a Platonicviewpoint."6 On Martin's latter point there seems to be no scholarly disagreement, though Westman's remark that Plutarch's conception of the relationship be­ tween 'A'\~O€ta; and Lloga in Parmenides' poem "war fur einen, der in 1 The list of quotations in W. C. Helmbold and E.
    [Show full text]
  • Aristotelian Temporal Logic: the Sea Battle
    Aristotelian temporal logic: the sea battle. According to the square of oppositions, exactly one of “it is the case that p” and “it is not the case that p” is true. Either “it is the case that there will be a sea battle tomorrow” or “it is not the case that there will be a sea battle tomorrow”. Problematic for existence of free will, and for Aristotelian metaphysics. Core Logic – 2005/06-1ab – p. 3/34 The Master argument. Diodorus Cronus (IVth century BC). Assume that p is not the case. In the past, “It will be the case that p is not the case” was true. In the past, “It will be the case that p is not the case” was necessarily true. Therefore, in the past, “It will be the case that p” was impossible. Therefore, p is not possible. Ergo: Everything that is possible is true. Core Logic – 2005/06-1ab – p. 4/34 Megarians and Stoics. Socrates (469-399 BC) WWW WWWWW WWWWW WWWWW WW+ Euclides (c.430-c.360 BC) Plato (c.427-347 BC) WWW WWWWW WWWWW WWWWW WW+ Eubulides (IVth century) Stilpo (c.380-c.300 BC) Apollonius Cronus Zeno of Citium (c.335-263 BC) gg3 ggggg ggggg ggggg ggg Diodorus Cronus (IVth century) Cleanthes of Assos (301-232 BC) Chrysippus of Soli (c.280-207 BC) Core Logic – 2005/06-1ab – p. 5/34 Eubulides. Strongly opposed to Aristotle. Source of the “seven Megarian paradoxes”, among them the Liar. The Liar is attributed to Epimenides the Cretan (VIIth century BC); (Titus 1:12).
    [Show full text]
  • The Sophistic Roman: Education and Status in Quintilian, Tacitus and Pliny Brandon F. Jones a Dissertation Submitted in Partial
    The Sophistic Roman: Education and Status in Quintilian, Tacitus and Pliny Brandon F. Jones A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2015 Reading Committee: Alain Gowing, Chair Catherine Connors Alexander Hollmann Deborah Kamen Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Classics ©Copyright 2015 Brandon F. Jones University of Washington Abstract The Sophistic Roman: Education and Status in Quintilian, Tacitus and Pliny Brandon F. Jones Chair of Supervisory Commitee: Professor Alain Gowing Department of Classics This study is about the construction of identity and self-promotion of status by means of elite education during the first and second centuries CE, a cultural and historical period termed by many as the Second Sophistic. Though the Second Sophistic has traditionally been treated as a Greek cultural movement, individual Romans also viewed engagement with a past, Greek or otherwise, as a way of displaying education and authority, and, thereby, of promoting status. Readings of the work of Quintilian, Tacitus and Pliny, first- and second-century Latin prose authors, reveal a remarkable engagement with the methodologies and motivations employed by their Greek contemporaries—Dio of Prusa, Plutarch, Lucian and Philostratus, most particularly. The first two chapters of this study illustrate and explain the centrality of Greek in the Roman educational system. The final three chapters focus on Roman displays of that acquired Greek paideia in language, literature and oratory, respectively. As these chapters demonstrate, the social practices of paideia and their deployment were a multi-cultural phenomenon. Table of Contents Acknowledgements ........................................................................... 2 Introduction ....................................................................................... 4 Chapter One.
    [Show full text]