DOCSLIB.ORG

The Avicennian Moment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Avicennian Moment The Avicennian Moment Separation and the science of being (qua being) in Aristotle and Avicenna Timothy Mark Johannessen Submitted in total fulfillment of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Arts) June 2019 Asia Institute University of Melbourne ORCID: 0000-0002-9551-0198 Abstract This thesis considers the fundamental conception of first philosophy (metaphysics) in the Metaphysics of Aristotle and its reception–reform in a major work of Abū ‘Alī al-Husayn Ibn-Sīna (Avicenna): the Metaphysics of the Healing (al-Ilāhiyyāt: al-Shifā’). Specifically, it examines some of the main theoretical features that underpin both the conception and programme of first philosophy (understood as a study both of being qua being and of immaterial being) in these works, including the notions of ‘separation’ and ‘abstraction’, which both Aristotle and Avicenna employ pervasively. In doing so, this thesis seeks to show, first of all, how each thinker solves the problem of the relationship between the ontological and theological dimensions of first philosophy, and how their solutions, and the arguments they depend on, both reflect and are reflected in their wider views on being and the nature of scientific enquiry. It is argued that while the notion of separation as independence is fundamental for Aristotle (as seen, for example, in his treatment of the aporiai of Metaphysics B), by contrast, for Avicenna, the notion of abstraction as immateriality, is central. Similar points of comparison are presented, such as the very notion of a notion or meaning which Avicenna employs constantly, as in his unique treatment of the problem of the homonymy of being; and it is argued that the conception of meaning that Avicenna uses here is not, as such, found in Aristotle, who instead relies on a notion of logoi. These differences, then, represent some of the main sources of disagreement between the two philosophers with respect to their accounts of being. Finally, the preceding questions are also examined in connection with the problem of whether we find a distinct notion of existence in Aristotle, such as we find in Avicenna, and if so, how this notion is treated in the context of his scientific investigation of being and its divisions. In this way, this thesis seeks to illuminate, from one perspective, what separates and connects these two key moments in the history of philosophy and the reception–history of the Metaphysics. i Declaration This thesis comprises only my original work towards the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, and due acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used. The thesis is fewer than 100,000 words in length, exclusive of tables, bibliography and appendices. Timothy Mark Johannessen ii Table of Contents Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... i Declaration ............................................................................................................................... ii Table of Contents .................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. v Introduction ................................................................................................................................. vi I. Preliminary remarks ............................................................................................................ vi II. Research questions ........................................................................................................... viii III. Scope and approach ........................................................................................................ viii IV. Method .............................................................................................................................. ix V. Objectives .......................................................................................................................... ix VI. Chapter summaries ........................................................................................................... xi VII. Literature ........................................................................................................................ xv Chapter 1: First things ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 The reception–history of Aristotle’s Metaphysics .......................................................... 1 1.2 The structure of Aristotelian first philosophy .............................................................. 16 Chapter 2: Separation ................................................................................................................. 31 2.1 Separation and abstraction ............................................................................................ 32 2.2 Abstraction and reduplicative analysis in Aristotle ...................................................... 37 2.3 Avicenna on abstraction and immateriality .................................................................. 46 2.4 Quiddity in Itself .......................................................................................................... 50 2.5 The essence–existence distinction ............................................................................... 58 2.6 Varieties of separation and their logical foundation in Avicenna ............................... 63 Chapter 3: Separation problems ................................................................................................. 67 3.1 Metaphysics B .............................................................................................................. 68 3.2 The eleventh aporia about being and one .................................................................... 73 3.3 Avicenna and the eleventh aporia ................................................................................ 88 Chapter 4: The meaning of being .............................................................................................. 99 4.1 Signification ................................................................................................................. 99 4.2 Language–thought–reality .......................................................................................... 105 4.3 Avicenna on the modulated equivocity of ‘being’ ..................................................... 114 4.4 The notion of ma’ānī in Avicenna and the Arabic (Aristotelian) tradition ................ 122 Chapter 5: Dividing being ........................................................................................................ 129 5.1 Being and existence in Greek and Arabic philosophy ................................................ 131 5.2 Aristotle on the ‘senses’ of being in Δ.7 .................................................................... 134 5.3 The role of ‘be’ in Aristotle’s analysis of the statement-making sentence ................ 142 iii 5.4 The categories of being .............................................................................................. 150 5.5 The two senses of per se ‘belonging’ ........................................................................ 164 5.6 Predication and existence .......................................................................................... 171 Chapter 6: Ontology and theology ........................................................................................... 173 6.1 The problem restated in the light of its solution ........................................................ 173 6.2 The Ancient Commentators on being qua being and the divine ............................... 175 6.3 Islamic Neoplatonism ................................................................................................ 179 6.4 Modern interpretations .............................................................................................. 181 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 185 Bibliography ............................................................................................................................ 189 Primary Sources ................................................................................................................... 189 Secondary Literature ............................................................................................................ 191 iv Acknowledgements Thank you Dr Muhammad Kamal, my primary supervisor, for the wisdom and careful guidance you have provided me throughout my candidature. Without your calm encouragement from beginning to end, writing this thesis would not have been possible. Your dedication to philosophy is also remarkable and a great source of inspiration. Thank you Dr Lewis Mayo for showing us that language matters, that ideas matter, and that the well-being of others matters to you before all else. You are a demonstration that the most refined thought and a true sense of egalitarianism can exist in one person. Thanks to Nick Tumbas and to Redha Ameur for your goodness, friendship, and many hours of conversation. Thanks to Leena Sookramanien for the important work that you do with such good spirit, and to Dr Edwin Jurriens for your additional supervision. Thanks to my
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Malebranche's Augustinianism and the Mind's Perfection
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations Spring 2010 Malebranche's Augustinianism and the Mind's Perfection Jason Skirry University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the History of Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Skirry, Jason, "Malebranche's Augustinianism and the Mind's Perfection" (2010). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 179. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/179 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/179 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Malebranche's Augustinianism and the Mind's Perfection Abstract This dissertation presents a unified interpretation of Malebranche’s philosophical system that is based on his Augustinian theory of the mind’s perfection, which consists in maximizing the mind’s ability to successfully access, comprehend, and follow God’s Order through practices that purify and cognitively enhance the mind’s attention. I argue that the mind’s perfection figures centrally in Malebranche’s philosophy and is the main hub that connects and reconciles the three fundamental principles of his system, namely, his occasionalism, divine illumination, and freedom. To demonstrate this, I first present, in chapter one, Malebranche’s philosophy within the historical and intellectual context of his membership in the French Oratory, arguing that the Oratory’s particular brand of Augustinianism, initiated by Cardinal Bérulle and propagated by Oratorians such as Andre Martin, is at the core of his philosophy and informs his theory of perfection. Next, in chapter two, I explicate Augustine’s own theory of perfection in order to provide an outline, and a basis of comparison, for Malebranche’s own theory of perfection.
    [Show full text]
  • Yahya Ibn „Adi on Psychotherapy
    Available online at www.globalilluminators.org GlobalIlluminators FULL PAPER PROCEEDING Multidisciplinary Studies Full Paper Proceeding ETAR-2014, Vol. 1, 60-69 ISBN: 978-969-9948-07-7 ETAR 2014 Yahya Ibn „Adi On Psychotherapy Mohd. Nasir Omar1*, Dr. Zaizul Ab Rahman2 1,2National University of Malaysia, Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia. Abstract Among Christian scholars who especially distinguished themselves in the 10th/11th century Islamic Baghdad were Yahya Ibn „Adi (d.974), Ibn Zur„ah (d.1008), Ibn al-Khammar (d.1017) and Abu „Ali al-Samh (d.1027). Some of these Christian translators were no longer relying on the Caliphs or other patrons of learning, but often found their own means of living which in turn prolonged their own academic interest. Consequently, some of them were no mere translators any more, but genuine scholars. The chief architect among them was Yahya Ibn „Adi. He was not only the leader of his group but was also dubbed as the best Christian translator, logician and theologian of his times. This is justified, in addition, by his ample productivity in those fields of enquiry. A considerable number of such works have evidently been used by contemporary and later writers, an d have also reached us today. Hence we consider that it is in these aspects that his distinctive contributions to scholarship lie, and therefore he deserves more serious study. Thus, this qualitative study which applies conceptual content analysis method, seeks to make an analytical study of Yahya Ibn „Adi‟s theory of psychotherapy as reflected in his major work on ethics, Tahdhib al-Akhlaq (The Refinement of Character).
    [Show full text]
  • The Life of Yahya Ibn 'Adi: a Famous Christian Philosopher of Baghdad
    ISSN 2039-2117 (online) Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol 6 No 2 S5 ISSN 2039-9340 (print) MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy April 2015 The Life of Yahya Ibn ‘Adi: A Famous Christian Philosopher of Baghdad Mohd. Nasir Omar Department of Theology and Philosophy, Faculty of Islamic Studies, National University of Malaysia, 43600 Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia [email protected] Doi:10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n2s5p308 Abstract Among Christian translators who especially distinguished themselves in the 10th/11th century Baghdad were Yahya Ibn ‘Adi (d.974), Ibn Zur‘ah (d.1008), Ibn al-Khammar (d.1017) and Abu ‘Ali al-Samh (d.1027). Some of these Christians were no longer relying on the Caliphs or other patrons of learning, but often found their own means of living which in turn prolonged their own academic interest. Consequently, some of them were no mere translators any more, but genuine scholars. The chief architect among them was Yahya Ibn ‘Adi. He was not only the leader of his group but was also dubbed as the best Christian translator, logician and theologian of his times. This is justified, in addition, by his ample productivity in those fields of enquiry. A considerable number of such works have evidently been used by contemporary and later writers, and have also reached us today. Hence we consider that it is in these aspects that his distinctive contributions to scholarship lie, and therefore he deserves more serious study. Thus, this qualitative study which uses content analysis method seeks to introduce Yahya Ibn ‘Adi in terms of his history, life, career, education and writings.
    [Show full text]
  • The Coherence of Stoic Ontology
    UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title The Coherence of Stoic Ontology Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3wg7m1w0 Author de Harven, Vanessa Publication Date 2012 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California The Coherence of Stoic Ontology by Vanessa de Harven A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Prof. Dorothea Frede, Co-chair Prof. Klaus Corcilius, Co-chair Prof. A.A. Long Spring 2012 Abstract The Coherence of Stoic Ontology by Vanessa de Harven Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy University of California, Berkeley Professors Dorothea Frede and Klaus Corcilius, Co-chairs Any thoroughgoing physicalist is challenged to give an account of immaterial entities such as thoughts and mathematical objects. The Stoics, who eagerly affirmed that only bodies exist, crafted an elegant solution to this challenge: not everything that is Something (ti) exists. Rather, some things have a derivative mode of reality they call subsistence: these entities are non-existent in that they are not themselves solid bodies, but they are nonetheless Something physical because they depend on bodies for their subsistence. My dissertation uncovers the unifying principles of Stoic subsistence, and shows how they can account for thoughts and other immaterial entities without running afoul of their physicalist commitments. While all commentators agree that the Stoics posited Something as the highest category of being, they have failed to find a coherent physicalist account of Stoic ontology.
    [Show full text]
  • Nous As the Ground of Aristotle's Metaphysics?
    Binghamton University The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB) The Society for Ancient Greek Philosophy Newsletter 12-1993 Nous as the Ground of Aristotle's Metaphysics? John J. Cleary Boston College Follow this and additional works at: https://orb.binghamton.edu/sagp Part of the Ancient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquity Commons, Ancient Philosophy Commons, and the History of Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Cleary, John J., "Nous as the Ground of Aristotle's Metaphysics?" (1993). The Society for Ancient Greek Philosophy Newsletter. 164. https://orb.binghamton.edu/sagp/164 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB). It has been accepted for inclusion in The Society for Ancient Greek Philosophy Newsletter by an authorized administrator of The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB). For more information, please contact [email protected]. Nous as the Ground of Aristotle's Metaphysics? — John J. Cleaiy Introduction: This paper explores the implications of Aristotle's puzzling suggestions that the possibility of first philosophy somehow depends on whether part of the soul is separable from material body. My Conjecture1 is that for Aristotle the science of metaphysics depends on a special activity of nous that grasps die self-identical essences which are objects of first philosophy, as distinct from physics and mathematics. From Aristotle's perspective, of course, it is the existence of such essences that makes metaphysics possible, but it is arguable that without a corresponding mode of cognition this would not be a human science. It is a moot question whether it could be a divine science either, though one can argue that for Aristotle the divine mode of cognition, involving the complete identity of knower and known, represents the ideal to which human noetic activity aspires.
    [Show full text]
  • Aristotle's Theory of Powers
    Aristotle’s Theory of Powers by Umer Shaikh A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Philosophy) in the University of Michigan 2019 Doctoral Committee: Professor Victor Caston, chair Professor Sara Abhel-Rappe Professor David Manley Professor Tad Schmaltz Umer Shaikh [email protected] ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8062-7932 © Umer Shaikh 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ....................................... v Chapter 1 Introduction ................................... 1 1.1 The Question ............................... 1 1.2 Powers and Dispositions ......................... 2 1.3 Remark on Translation and Texts .................... 3 1.4 Preliminary Answers ........................... 3 1.4.1 Powers are Efficient Causes ................... 4 1.4.2 Powers and Change ....................... 5 1.4.3 Being in Potentiality and Possibility .............. 6 1.4.4 The Foundation of Modality .................. 8 1.4.5 Possibilities from Powers .................... 9 1.4.6 Conclusion ............................ 11 1.5 Remarks About Scope of Discussion and About the Development of the δύναμις Concept ........................... 12 1.5.1 Scope ............................... 12 1.5.2 Δύναμις in Various Texts .................... 12 1.5.3 Previous Attempts to Find Consistency ............ 18 1.5.3.1 Kenny .......................... 18 1.5.3.2 Hintikka ......................... 21 1.5.4 Drawing Some Morals ..................... 22 2 Powers and Efficient Causation ......................... 24 2.1
    [Show full text]
  • Hellenistic and Early Modern Philosophy
    CY155/Miller 0521821681 February 10, 2003 21:25 Hellenistic and Early Modern Philosophy Edited by JON MILLER Queen’s University BRAD INWOOD University of Toronto iii CY155/Miller 0521821681 February 10, 2003 21:25 published by the press syndicate of the university of cambridge The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, United Kingdom cambridge university press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge cb2 2ru, uk 40 West 20th Street, New York, ny 10011-4211, usa 477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, vic 3207, Australia Ruiz de Alarcon´ 13, 28014 Madrid, Spain Dock House, The Waterfront, Cape Town 8001, South Africa http://www.cambridge.org C Cambridge University Press 2003 This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 2003 Printed in the United Kingdom at the University Press, Cambridge Typeface itc New Baskerville 10/12 pt. System LATEX 2ε [tb] A catalog record for this book is available from the British Library. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Hellenistic and early modern philosophy / edited by Jon Miller, Brad Inwood. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn 0-521-82385-4 1. Philosophy, Modern – 17th century – Congresses. 2. Philosophy, Modern – 18th century – Congresses. 3. Philosophy, Ancient – Congresses. i. Miller, Jon, 1970– ii. Inwood, Brad b801 .h45 2003 190–dc21 2002031073 isbn 0 521 82385 4 hardback iv CY155/Miller 0521821681 February 10, 2003 21:25 Contents List of Abbreviations page vii Notes on Contributors ix Preface xi Jon Miller and Brad Inwood Introduction 1 J.
    [Show full text]
  • Plotinus' Epistemology and His Reading of the Theaetetus
    Plotinus' epistemology and his reading of the Theaetetus Sara Magrin Department of Philosophy McGill University, Montreal July 2009 A thesis submitted to McGill University in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Copyright Sara Magrin 2009 Abstract: Plotinus' epistemology and his reading of the Theaetetus The thesis offers a reconstruction of Plotinus’ reading of the Theaetetus, and it presents an account of his epistemology that rests on that reading. It aims to show that Plotinus reads the Theaetetus as containing two anti-sceptical arguments. The first argument is an answer to radical scepticism, namely, to the thesis that nothing is apprehensible and judgement must be suspended on all matters. The second argument is an answer to a more moderate form of scepticism, which does not endorse a universal suspension of judgement, but maintains nonetheless that scientific knowledge is unattainable. The first chapter opens with a reconstruction of Plotinus’ reading of Theaet., 151e-184a, where Socrates examines the thesis that knowledge is sensation in light of Protagoras’ epistemology. In this chapter it is argued that Plotinus makes a polemical use of the discussion of Protagoras’ epistemology. Plotinus takes Plato to show that Protagoras’ views imply radical scepticism; and he attack the Stoics’ epistemological and ontological commitments by arguing that they imply Protagoras’ views, and thus lead to radical scepticism, too. The second chapter examines Plotinus’ interpretation of the ontology of the Timaeus. In Theaet., 151e-184a Plato shows that Protagoras’ epistemology leads to radical scepticism by arguing that it implies an allegedly Heracleitean conception of the sensible world.
    [Show full text]
  • SAGP Newsletter 1999-2000.2 November Anthony Preus
    Binghamton University The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB) The ocS iety for Ancient Greek Philosophy Newsletter 11-1999 SAGP Newsletter 1999-2000.2 November Anthony Preus Follow this and additional works at: https://orb.binghamton.edu/sagp Part of the Ancient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquity Commons, Ancient Philosophy Commons, and the History of Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Preus, Anthony, "SAGP Newsletter 1999-2000.2 November" (1999). The Society for Ancient Greek Philosophy Newsletter. 226. https://orb.binghamton.edu/sagp/226 This Announcement is brought to you for free and open access by The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB). It has been accepted for inclusion in The ocS iety for Ancient Greek Philosophy Newsletter by an authorized administrator of The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB). For more information, please contact [email protected]. SOCIETY FOR ANCIENT GREEK PHILOSOPHY Founded 1951 Executive Office: President: Fred Miller, Jr. Binghamton University, Philosophy Bowling Green State University Binghamton, NY 11902-6000 Secretary: Anthony Preus (607) 777-2886 FAX [email protected] Binghamton University http://philosophv.binghamton.edu/ssips/sagpnews.html NEWSLETTER 1999/2000.2 You are invited to attend the meeting of the Society with the Eastern Division of the American Philosophical Association, December 28, 5:15 p.m. in the Wellesley Room of the Marriott Copley Place Hotel in Boston: Meeting of the SAGP Chair: Patricia Curd, Purdue University Patricia Sakezles, University o f Akron, “ The Socratic Fallacy in the Early Dialogues” David Levy, University o f Rochester, “ The ‘Digression’ in the Theaetetus: A New Interpretation” Geert van Cleemput, University o f South Florida at Tampa, “ Aristotle on the Philosophical and Political Life” You are also invited to attend the meeting of the Society with the American Philological Association,at 11 a.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Katja Vogt Stoic Virtue&Happiness.Pages
    Katja Maria Vogt, katjavogt.com, Columbia University "1 The Virtues and Happiness in Stoic Ethics, for ed. Chris Bobonich, Cambridge Companion to Ancient Ethics The Virtues and Happiness in Stoic Ethics1 ! ! The Stoics hold that virtue is knowledge, and that knowledge is one: the good state of the rational soul. Unlike the rest of us, a person who is in this state of mind is happy. Today and throughout much of antiquity, Stoic ethics is compared to Platonic and Aristotelian views. The Stoics’ immediate interlocutors, however, are skeptics.2 With them the Stoics discuss how hard it is to think straight, to arrive at carefully considered views and stable insights. The skeptics regularly suspend judgment, assessing disputes as unresolved. The questions of what is good and bad and how to live appear to them difficult and deserving of extensive study.3 The Stoics largely agree with the skeptics: these questions appear to them to be in need of further investigation. The Stoic approach is to ask what a person would be like who has the answers: how she would think, feel, and act. ! A brief disclaimer. “The Stoics” as I speak of them never existed. Instead, there were individual philosophers. Stoic philosophy begins with Zeno (334/3-262/1 BCE), who spent more than twenty years in Plato’s Academy, developing his views in conversation with the then emerging Academic skepticism (Zeno was roughly 20-30 years older than 1 I am grateful to Jens Haas, Sam McVane, and Nandi Theunissen for comments. 2 On the closeness of skeptic and Stoic philosophy, cf.
    [Show full text]
  • The Elements of Avicenna's Physics Greek Sources And
    The Elements of Avicenna’s Physics Greek Sources and Arabic Innovations Andreas Lammer München 15. März 2016 The Elements of Avicenna’s Physics Greek Sources and Arabic Innovations Inaugural-Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades der Philosophie an der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München vorgelegt von Andreas Lammer aus Würzburg am 15. März 2016 Erstgutachter: Prof. Dr. Peter Adamson Zweitgutachter: Prof. Dr. Dag Nikolaus Hasse Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 27. Juni 2016 Contents Preface vii Introduction 1 1 The Arabic Fate of Aristotle’s Physics 9 1.1 Transmission and Translation . 10 1.2 The Commentators on the Aristotelian Text . 17 1.3 Avicenna’s Copy of the Physics ....................... 29 2 The Methodology of Teaching and Learning 35 2.1 The Method of Physics . 35 2.2 Method and Principles between Physics and Metaphysics . 72 3 The Subject-Matter of Physics 97 3.1 Body, Substance, and Corporeality . 100 3.2 Matter and Form as Common Principles . 138 3.3 Change and an Additional Principle . 183 4 Nature and Power 195 4.1 Nature, and Soul, in the Greek Philosophical Tradition . 196 4.2 Avicenna’s Commentary on Physics II.1, 192b20–23 . 207 4.3 Avicenna, and Philoponus, on Inclination . 222 4.4 Bad Readings of Aristotle . 233 4.5 Avicenna’s Account of Nature and its Relation to Soul . 260 5 Place, Space, and Void 285 5.1 A Troubled Account of Place . 287 5.2 Clarifying Aristotle’s Troubled Account of Place . 303 5.3 Eliminating Void and Space . 343 v vi Contents 6 Time and Temporality in the Physical World 397 6.1 A New Approach to an Old Definition .
    [Show full text]
  • Plotinus' Epistemology and His Reading of the Theaetetus
    Plotinus' epistemology and his reading of the Theaetetus Sara Magrin Department of Philosophy McGill University, Montreal July 2009 A thesis submitted to McGill University in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Copyright Sara Magrin 2009 Abstract: Plotinus' epistemology and his reading of the Theaetetus The thesis offers a reconstruction of Plotinus’ reading of the Theaetetus, and it presents an account of his epistemology that rests on that reading. It aims to show that Plotinus reads the Theaetetus as containing two anti-sceptical arguments. The first argument is an answer to radical scepticism, namely, to the thesis that nothing is apprehensible and judgement must be suspended on all matters. The second argument is an answer to a more moderate form of scepticism, which does not endorse a universal suspension of judgement, but maintains nonetheless that scientific knowledge is unattainable. The first chapter opens with a reconstruction of Plotinus’ reading of Theaet., 151e-184a, where Socrates examines the thesis that knowledge is sensation in light of Protagoras’ epistemology. In this chapter it is argued that Plotinus makes a polemical use of the discussion of Protagoras’ epistemology. Plotinus takes Plato to show that Protagoras’ views imply radical scepticism; and he attack the Stoics’ epistemological and ontological commitments by arguing that they imply Protagoras’ views, and thus lead to radical scepticism, too. The second chapter examines Plotinus’ interpretation of the ontology of the Timaeus. In Theaet., 151e-184a Plato shows that Protagoras’ epistemology leads to radical scepticism by arguing that it implies an allegedly Heracleitean conception of the sensible world.
    [Show full text]