Search

The Cratylus’ main concern is to outline and evaluate the competing views of language held by two characters, Hermogenes and Cratylus, who disagree about whether convention or nature (respectively) are the source of onomastic correctness. Hermogenes has been thought to hold two radically different views by different scholars, one extreme conventionalism whereby all names are correct relative to their speakers, and another modest conventionalism according to which distinct naming actions – establishment and employment – explain why some names are correct and others are not, depending on the speaker. In this paper I argue that, though Hermogenes ultimately endorses a conventionalism of the latter kind, it is a mistake to assign him this position from the outset. Rather, to understand the structure of the conversation about conventionalism, we must view Hermogenes’ position, and Socrates’ understanding of it, as developing instead of settled. For it is only by discussing the matter that Hermogenes comes to express a moderate conventionalist view and Socrates comes to appreciate the position Hermogenes actually holds.

Similarities between ancient Greek philosophy and Indian philosophy have long been recognized and are usually ascribed to East-West contact. However, when similarities are recognized between Greek and Indian poetic diction or, more generally, between the myths and the poetry of the two cultures, they are often ascribed to Indo-European common origin; and one asks whether the same explanation could apply in philosophy. The two types of explanation are not incompatible, for a remote common origin could have been followed by one or more periods of interaction. Nevertheless, it is worth seeing how far an explanation of common origin can be pressed before falling back on the explanation of contact.

Στην παρούσα διδακτορική διατριβή, στην οποία ως κείμενο αναφοράς χρησιμοποιούμε την Παράφραση του Γεωργίου Παχυμέρη στο Περί Θείων Ονομάτων του Διονυσίου του Αρεοπαγίτου, επιχειρούμε να εντοπίσουμε τον βαθμό της γόνιμης συμπλοκής της Φιλοσοφίας της Ύστερης Αρχαιότητας με την Θεολογία της Ορθόδοξης Ανατολής, έτσι όπως αυτή διαμορφώθηκε κυρίως κατά την εποχή της Παλαιολόγειας Αναγέννησης. Πρόκειται για ένα πεδίο έρευνας το οποίο, καθώς δομείται από την συνάρθρωση ποικίλων θεωρητικών επιπέδων και θεματικών ενοτήτων, φέρει στο προσκήνιο ένα πλέγμα ανεξάντλητων εξειδικεύσεων, με τις συνάφειες και τις διαφορές να αναδεικνύονται συνεχώς. Δύο είναι ειδικότερα οι κατευθύνσεις μας, οι οποίες παρουσιάζουν σαφώς και ιστορικό ενδιαφέρον: α) η σχέση θεολογίας και φιλοσοφίας στο Βυζάντιο και β) η παρουσία των πλατωνικών, των αριστοτελικών και, κυρίως, των νεοπλατωνικών θεωρητικών στοιχείων του Πρόκλου στο κείμενο του Παχυμέρη, ο οποίος, σημειωτέον, είναι από τους ελάχιστους βυζαντινούς συγγραφείς που χρησιμοποιούν το σύνολο του εννοιολογικού οπλοστασίου της αρχαίας ελληνικής φιλοσοφίας. Η ερευνητική παράμετρος που κυρίως μας ενδιαφέρει, είναι η ανάγνωση ή η χρήση των εννοιών από τον Γ. Παχυμέρη. Ερευνούμε δηλαδή τον βαθμό στον οποίο η ελληνική εννοιολογία διασώζει την ακεραιότητά της ή υποτάσσεται στους σκοπούς που θέτει ο ιδεολογικός, με την ευρεία σημασία του όρου, χώρος στον οποίο έχει πλέον υπαχθεί. Αναφορικά με τον Γ. Παχυμέρη, η επιλογή μας εδράζεται στο ότι δεν πρόκειται για έναν απλό υπομνηματιστή του Διονυσίου, αλλά για έναν φιλόσοφο εκλεκτικιστή, ο οποίος συνιστά σταθμό στην πρόκλεια παράδοση, χωρίς ωστόσο αυτή η ανάγνωση να επηρεάζει στο ελάχιστον την χριστιανική συνέπειά του. Είναι σαφές ότι συγκροτεί ένα πλήρες σύστημα θεογνωσίας και ονοματοθεσίας με αιτιολογήσεις και θεμελίωση των αρχών του και παρά το ότι κινείται παράλληλα με τον Πρόκλο και δίδει πλείστες απαντήσεις, δεν συγκρούεται μαζί του, καθότι έχει απόλυτη επίγνωση της επιστημονικής αποστολής του. Ως προς την δομή της μελέτης μας, θα σημειώναμε τα εξής: Στο εκτενές εισαγωγικό σημείωμα, επεξεργαζόμαστε ζητήματα τα οποία κρίνουμε ότι συνιστούν αναγκαίες προϋποθέσεις για την εις βάθος μελέτη των πηγών και οριοθετούμε, όσο είναι εφικτό, τα στοιχεία εκείνα τα οποία διεμόρφωσαν την περί θεωνυμιών θεωρία, η οποία προέκυψε από την γόνιμη συμπλοκή της νεοπλατωνικής με την χριστιανική φιλοσοφία τον πέμπτο αιώνα και η οποία, αντλώντας το εννοιολογικό υλικό της από την αρχαιοελληνική, την ελληνιστική, την βιβλική και την πρώιμη χριστιανική παράδοση, κριτικά το ανακατασκευάζει και το μεθερμηνεύει. Στην συνέχεια, αναλαμβάνουμε την προσέγγιση των εξειδικευμένων οπτικών του Πρόκλου σχετικά με την θεωνυμία τού Είναι. Οι αναφορές μας εστιάζουν στο τρίτο βιβλίο της Περί της κατά Πλάτωνα θεολογίας και σε συγκεκριμένα εδάφια, τα οποία έχουν ως κύριο άξονα για την ανάπτυξή τους τον πλατωνικό διάλογο Παρμενίδης. Ο στόχος μας είναι να αναδειχθεί, αφενός, το πώς η μεταφυσική Οντολογία υποτάσσεται στην ανώτερή της Ενολογία, και, αφετέρου, η κατά τον Λύκιο φιλόσοφο αναγκαιότητα της οντολογικής υποβάθμισης του μεταφυσικού συστήματος, προκειμένου να προκύψει το σύνολο του αντιληπτού διά των αισθήσεων φυσικού κόσμου. Στο επόμενο κεφάλαιο, μεταφέρουμε το ζήτημα περί τού Είναι στον βυζαντινό φιλόσοφο Γεώργιο Παχυμέρη. Συγκεκριμένα, εστιάζουμε στο πέμπτο κεφάλαιο της Παράφρασής του, το πιο αποφασιστικό αναφορικά με κεφαλαιώδους σημασίας έννοιες για την κατανόηση του χριστιανικού κοσμοειδώλου, κυριότερη εκ των οποίων αναδύεται ότι είναι το «πλήθος», και μάλιστα κατά την μεταφυσική παρουσία του. Επιπλέον, στο κεφάλαιο αυτό, όχι μόνον αναδεικνύουμε το πώς ο Παχυμέρης τεκμηριώνει τον μονοθεϊσμό διά της συζήτησης περί των θείων ουσιωνυμιών και περί των παραδειγμάτων, αλλά και το πώς μία πληθώρα όρων οι οποίοι αντλούνται από το νεοπλατωνικό οπλοστάσιο, αλλά και το πλατωνικό και το αριστοτελικό, αντιπροσωπεύουν το περιεχομενικά καινόν. Κατόπιν, επιχειρούμε μία συγκριτική συνεξέταση του ζητήματος περί του πώς ακριβώς αξιοποιείται ο πλατωνικός διάλογος Παρμενίδης από τους δύο στοχαστές. Εν συνεχεία, παραθέτουμε ένα εκτενές εγκυκλοπαιδικό-εννοιολογικό λεξικό, το οποίο περιλαμβάνει την αλφαβητική κατάταξη εννοιών, οι οποίες αντλούνται αποκλειστικά από το πέμπτο κεφάλαιο της Παράφρασης του Γ. Παχυμέρη. Πρόκειται για ένα εγχείρημα το οποίο δεν έχει παρουσιασθεί ποτέ ως τώρα ούτε στην εγχώρια ούτε στην διεθνή έρευνα. Η τελευταία ενότητα της μελέτης μας περιλαμβάνει κατηγορίες οι οποίες ανήκουν και στα δύο θεωρητικά παραδείγματα, αφενός, του Χριστιανισμού και, αφετέρου, του Νεοπλατωνισμού. Σημειωτέον ότι η συστηματικότητα η οποία προσδιορίζει το εδώ εγχείρημα, καταγράφεται διά θεωρητικώς ιεραρχικών διαβαθμίσεων, σύμφωνα δηλαδή με τις προτεραιότητες τις οποίες θα όριζε τόσο ένας χριστιανός όσο και ένας νεοπλατωνικός διανοητής. Με βάση τις εν λόγω ενότητες, αποκτούμε τις προϋποθέσεις, προκειμένου να καταγράψουμε με ιδιαίτερη σαφήνεια τις συνάφειες και τις διαφορές μεταξύ του Χριστιανισμού της Ανατολής και του Νεοπλατωνισμού στους τομείς πρωτίστως της Ενολογίας, της Κοσμολογίας και της Γνωσιολογίας. Ως γενική διαπίστωση, θα μπορούσαμε να σημειώσουμε ότι το ριζοσπαστικό στοιχείο, το οποίο απορρέει εκ του συνόλου των όσων διημείφθησαν, δεν είναι η εξύμνηση της θεολογίας, αλλά η προοπτική της ερμηνείας, παράμετρος εκ της οποίας καθίσταται σαφές ότι η σύνδεση της Φιλοσοφίας με την Θεολογία είναι άρρηκτη.

The article reveals the evolution of the concept of σοφία in the ancient philosophical tradition. It is established that in ancient texts, for the most part, attention is focused on the general understanding of this concept, namely on the interpretation of σοφία as wisdom, practicality, and abilities. It is proved that in the Neoplatonic tradition, primarily in Plotinus’ works, σοφία acquires a cosmological character, and therefore in the ancient Greek culture, we can see the transformation of the understanding of this term in the displacement of its interpretation from purely earthly to heavenly. Philosophy of Plotinus, according to Alexei Losev, has a speculative-theoretical nature, which allows us to study the specifics of the abstract understanding of cosmology in ancient culture. Plotinus focuses his attention on such concepts as the One, the Mind, and the Soul. The specifics of the existence of the concept of σοφία is revealed through an appeal to the One in the philosophy of Plotinus. The One acts as an intermediary, which ensures the emanation of σοφία from God to the world. In the concept of Plotinus, the theory of the ascent of the soul from sensual fragmentation to spiritual concentration, when the mind concentrates in the One, is also important. Plotinus, accordingly, refers in this context to the concept of νους, which is an ideal world of forms. It is found that the external nature of this concept in Neoplatonism is revealed in the fact that σοφία refers not so much to earthly wisdom as to the understanding of man’s place in the universe. The Logos, which is realized on the basis of the Mind, Plotinus calls εἶδος, in relation to which the philosopher uses the term σοφία (wisdom, sophia). It is the main principle of the Plotinus’ aesthetics. Thus, in the center of Plotinus’ thinking is the problem of the unhappy situation of human in the world, the person who suffers. Accordingly, cosmology (and cosmogony) go alongside with the concept of Plotinus about the human. Plotinus tries to comprehend the reasons that led to such consequences. Sophia devoted a separate doctrine — sophiology. It is presented especially vividly in Russian philosophical thought. In particular, this article examines the concept of sophiology in the philosophy of Sergei Bulgakov, where the Sophia is the basis of the world’s ontological unity of the (sophological monism). Pagan, ancient interpretations of the concept of σοφία, thus, turn into the biblical image of Sophia, which receives a broad philosophical (abstract) interpretation.

This chapter addresses Diogenes Laertius’ Lives of Eminent Philosophers, which recounts the doings, sayings, and writings of the leading figures of ancient Greek philosophy from its origins down to its rapid efflorescence and institutionalization in the fourth and third centuries bc, with occasional glimpses of its continuing vitality in the centuries beyond. Diogenes’ Lives is an exceptional work on many counts. For one, it is the single largest collection of Lives to survive from classical Antiquity, handily surpassing Plutarch in number and scope if not in depth or length, and so too Philostratus and Suetonius. It is also a key witness to the early stages of biographical literature in the fourth and third centuries bc. At the same time, it presents the single most comprehensive account of the origins and development of an entire discipline, and a distinctive form of intellectual history from a biographical perspective. It also, accordingly, represents a distinctive form of life-writing, framed by basic biographical data but lean, often very lean on the standard biographical fare—from a modern perspective at least—of incident and narrative, and governed instead by its disciplinary orientation, and its sustained focus on philosophy as a distinctive cultural practice and way to live.

The article is devoted to Plato’s Alcibiades I and explores its main question: what is your proper self? The author pays special attention to the concept of “ayto to ayto”, which he takes to mean “selfhood”. This concept is analyzed as the first fundamental philosophical form of understanding of human identity, which Plato viewed as a soul. Plato fundamentally distinguishes essence of a person (ayto to ayto) from things that belong to a person, the attributes of human being (such as his body and material property). The author explores the Platonic understanding of human identity in the context of ancient ontology and anthropology, which includes an analysis of the relationship of a single person and universal being, authentic and inauthentic Ego, the soul (mind) and the body, the significance of “care about self” (epimeilea heautou) and “cognition of self” (gnothi seautou), etc. The concept of Plato represents the first experience of comprehending the human identity ("ayto to ayto" as soul) which appears as impersonal subject and media Being, but realized in perspective of self-correlation "care of self" and "cognition of self" by particular man.

The preparation of food and nutrition is a pervasive techne in the classical Greek world. Indeed, food technology may be a defining characteristic of humanity (Levi-Strauss, 1964). We begin with a glimpse of a tension in the use of the word techne in relation to the preparation of food in Plato’s Gorgias 462d-e. Turning to the Presocratics, we discern three distinct perspectives on food, those of Empedocles, Anaxagoras, and the treatise Regimen (Περὶ Διαίτης). In Regimen, we find an anticipation of the distinctions made by Plato in the Gorgias passage, and trace some of the implications in what we may call the “food technology” of this treatise that manages to be both philosophical and technically informative.

The role of leadership in an organizational system has remained of central concern in organization studies. Over the time, the emergence of various theories has unfolded the unique influential roles of leadership embedded in organizational management. Among various leadership styles and theories, a relatively new concept of Authentic Leadership (AL) is worthy of attention with respect to the changing demands of the media industry. The origin of the concept of authenticity is found in ancient Greek philosophy and it is defined in history as “being true to oneself”. Trust is the basic constituent based on which people can count on one another and work together in a conducive environment. AL is an idea to leadership that focuses on developing leader’s legitimacy via “honest relationships with followers”. In this study, AL is measured through four dimensions that include Self-awareness, Balanced Processing, Moral Perspective and Relational Transparency. Media is expected to be a watchdog on affairs of the state and government, therefore, the public requires media industry to be responsive, transparent and unbiased based on principles of ethics and true reporting. In order to achieve a positive environment and culture in the organization, this study focuses on the idea of Organization Citizenship Behavior (OCB) in connection with AL. This paper investigates the relationship between the said variables and tries to find out the impact of AL on OCB, for that matter, a quantitative research strategy has been followed. Respondents for this study were conveniently selected from bureau offices of six news channels making the sample size to be 220

Recent studies have discussed Paul's letters against the backdrop of ancient Greek philosophy, particularly of Stoicism, Platonism and Cynicism. This article will take up the latter suggestion, as it shows significant similarities between Paul's argument in Rom 1–2 and the Cynic tradition, which is a neglected aspect in scholarly discussion. A comparison of Rom 1.18–32; 2.14–29 and the Cynic epistle Ps.-Diogenes,Epistula28 will outline decisive assumptions and argumentative patterns that both letters have in common.

This article sketches, and works to motivate, a controversial approach to Posterior Analytics II.19. But its primary goal is to recommend a novel solution to one particular interpretive aporia that’s especially vexed recent scholars working on Post. An. II.19. The aporia concerns how to understand the enigmatic ē ek pantos... (≈ “or from all...”) in the genealogical account of foundational knowledge at II.19 100a3-9. Our proposed solution to the aporia is discussed in connection with a number of larger philosophical issues concerning Aristotle’s theory of epistē mē.

It is generally acknowledged that the insanity defense has its roots in ancient Greek philosophy. There are references to the insanity defense in the works of Plato and Homer. Little, though, is known about how non-Western cultures dealt with the insane who commit crimes. This article focuses on one non-Western culture: ancient India. The author refers to extant medical texts and Sanskrit literature to argue that the notion that the insane are not responsible for criminal acts was current during that epoch.

Scholars have characterised the trial of the life of pleasure in Philebus 20b-21d as digressive or pejorative. I argue that it is neither: it is a thought experiment containing an important argument, in the form of a reductio, of the hypothesis that a life could be most pleasant without cognition. It proceeds in a series of steps, culminating in the precisely chosen image of the jellyfish. Understanding the intended resonance of this creature, and the sense in which it is deprived, is critical for reconstructing the argument, and yields new insight into Plato’s views on the minimal conditions for pleasure.

This paper presents an attempt to apply Jacques Ranciere’s emancipatory pedagogy of ‘the ignorant schoolmaster’ to environmental education, which emphasises environmental ethics. The paper tells the story of a philosophy of nature project in the framework of an environmental adult education course at a Second Chance School in Greece, where adult students researched ancient Greek philosophy of nature, discovered and adopted environmental values and taught their schoolmates. The paper presents the findings of this pedagogical experiment and evaluates the benefits and the skills that students can acquire through emancipatory pedagogy and through peer teaching and learning. Α cross-disciplinary combination of emancipatory pedagogy, environmental education, philosophy of nature and environmental ethics that can empower students and strengthen their environmental conscience with emphasis in ecocentric and ecojustice values is proposed. Τhe role of the teacher as a student, who continues to investigate a...

Notably since Thomas Hobbes, canonically with Benjamin Constant, and conventionally amid Nietzschean, Popperian, Straussian, Arendtian, liberal (sc. Madison, Mill, Berlin, Rawls, Vlastos, Hansen), republican (sc. Skinner), political (sc. Finley), and sociological (sc. Ober) readings of ancient texts, contemporary scholarship on the ancients often has employed some version of the dichotomous ancient/modern or ancient/contemporary contrast as a template for explaining, understanding, and interpretively appropriating ancient texts and political practices – particularly those of ancient Greek philosophy and democracy (although Roman ideas and practices also have been invoked). In particular, this has been done to argue for some conception of political ethics and democracy. I argue that this rhetorical trope, often using Athens and Europe/America as synecdoches for antiquity and modernity, has generated narrow and distorted views of ancient texts and political practices, on the one hand, and their contemporary relevance, on the other – views that misinterpret the theoretical significance of historical phenomena and misread the potential lessons of ancient authorities. Instead, texts and practices should be read either with more qualifications or more fully against a historical dynamic of critical philosophy and political power – including its ethical, cultural, institutional, and governing elements – that is not framed by this dichotomy.

Poetry is the praxis of the eternal return of the same: the same difficulty, difficulty itself. In other words, the relation of image to sense is the very eternal return of the same. Brazilian poet Jorge de Lima reads Dante, Baudelaire, Lautreamont, Rimbaud, Michaux, Bergson and doing so he is positioning Lima’s work within a contemporary philosophical scene definitively characterised by its exposure to Ancient Greek philosophy and Christian tradition.

In the history of thought it has been common to inquire about the relation between personal freedom and necessity. The question of self-determination and self-sufficiency was an essential question for the ancient philosophers and poets in their enquiries about how to live a good life. In this paper we will discuss the ancient Greek interpretation of freedom and its collateral of responsibility. This will bring us to three important questions for scientific research and education: 1) Are scientific deliberation and practical wisdom exclusive skills? 2) Is the will an unneeded faculty of the soul? 3) Is the katharsis a footnote for the lucid and robust contemporary state of mind?

The study in its scope questions the historical existence of ancient Greek philosophers; while it focuses on two educational relevance themes a) that there is strength in recent insinuations that classical (ancient) Greek philosophers are only but true to reality, existing in nothing but personified names bearing their philosophical (teachings) in the meanings of their names; e.g. Heraclitus, simply is fire, Socrates is sorcery, then Pythagoras is puthon, i.e. fortune teller, since his history is replete with occult learning in Egypt and the Chaldea; b) our classist method of research leading to our research conclusions and findings touches on the second angle to this essay, which is a frank educational demand for the original Greek documents of these Greek classical philosophers, since it is suspected that these documents (e.g. Dialogues and Phaedo of Plato etc.) never existed or that translations to English had been manipulated, hence the truth was yet to be told about the true origins and the true meaning of philosophy. Particularly, if philosophy is merely love for wisdom, how come the Bible totally condemned it (Colossians 2:8, 2 Peter 1:16). Then how come Emperor Justinian banned it in 529 CE. (New & Philips, 1953, Brockman and Pescantini, 2004, philosophy NET, 2015). Justinian banned philosophy, since medieval Christian heretical teachings were products of Christian philosophical arguments which almost destroyed Christianity in it earliest stages (i.e. 1300 CE - 526 CE) Boer, 1980: pp. 41-60.

1. INTRODUCTION: WHY KSENIJA ATANASIJEVIC?There are many ways we can approach and investigate the life and thought of Ksenija Atanasijevic (1894-1981).1 We can try to 'vivisect' her life through her comprehensive biography The Life and Thought of Ksenija Atanasijevic.2 We could examine her significance through the history of University of Belgrade where Atanasijevic spent her career as a university professor. We can critically examine her philosophical writings, especially at her peak, in the 1920s and 1930s. Or, we can focus more on her role in the feminist movement in Yugoslavia that emerged during 1920s, in which she was one of the prominent figures.Usually authors who write about Ksenija Atanasijevic focus on the facts mentioned in note l.3 Few critical essays have been written about Atanasijevic as a feminist philosopher, and my aim is to open discussion about Atanasijevic as a philosopher who approached philosophy from a feminist perspective, and who can be seen as a forerunner of the feminist philosophy that we know today.Atanasijevic was the first philosopher on the Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade to specialize in ancient philosophy, and accordingly she influenced the development of courses in Greek and Roman philosophy.4 This is one of the most important facts about her philosophical work that is usually not sufficiently emphasized. During the 1920s, Atanasijevic started work mapping the status of women within the philosophical canon, investigating the works of women philosophers in ancient times, and thus anticipating the systematic work of feminist philosophers in their analyses of the philosophical canon that began only in the 1970s.2. FEMINIST PHILOSOPHY AND INTERVENTIONS INTO THE PHILOSOPHICAL CANONAs a field of research, feminist philosophy did not exist until the early 1970s. As a discipline,feminist philosophy is very broadly concerned with issues of justice for women-that is why it is feminist and not feminine. This suggests that it is an area of philosophy that has a political agenda.5In this area of philosophy with a political agenda, "examination of the history of philosophy can be seen as providing one of the central catalysts for the feminist political project."6 For the history of (Western) philosophy, reading and rereading the philosophical canon were necessary initial steps in building the field of feminist philosophy.Feminist philosophers have noticed three different strands in feminist work in the history of philosophy since 1970s.7 The first represents the explicit critique of the canon as misogynist. The second could be described as providing the "alternative canon,"8 which means inclusion of "an alternative selection of figures or texts that should be viewed as canonical. This strategy includes the attempt to record lost voices of women philosophers."9 This "revision of the history of philosophy"10 has resulted in a different landscape of that history in which women philosophers are not mere objects of inquiry or observers, but active contributors to the philosophical canon. Finally, the third strand represents "the positive relation to the philosophical canon"11 or "appropriation of canonical philosophers.. .as a resource"12 for contemporary feminist philosophy.Although these three feminist approaches to the history of philosophy should be seen as provisional, they shed an interesting light on Atanasijevic's work. Atanasijevic acknowledged that the philosophical canon is misogynist, but she did not leave any article that dealt with this aspect of negative analysis of the canon. However, she did make an important contribution to the other two strands of feminist work in the history of philosophy as early as the 1920s. Atanasijevic wrote about important women philosophers in order to show that women did philosophy in almost all philosophical schools of ancient times. Focusing not only on women philosophers but on other neglected figures and alternative interpretations in the history of philosophy, she also started the work on development of the alternative canon. …

Speaking of “delight of knowledge” al-Māwardī- explains the meaning of knowledge (‘ilm) in a sense which is alien to the philosophical tradition, but well known in the ancient Greek rhetoric. Some signs indicate that the Arabic adab-literature is in a certain respect heir to the Greek rhetoric. The presence of some elements of philosophy in al-Māwardī’s writings can be explained by the fact that the traditional rhetoric formation relied on a basic knowledge of philosophy too. This kind of the popular version of philosophy has been conveyed to al-Māwardī, and through him to the Arab readers. One has to take into account the ancient rhetoric and the adab-literature as an alternative channels through which Greek philosophy has been transmitted to the Islam.

Describing the birth of the universe, Plato stated in Timaeus that, as human nature was of two kinds, the superior race would hereafter be called manand inferior race woman. It is interesting to connect the myth of the cave and the passage on the chora in the Timaeus. Feminist interpretations of ancient philosophy are affected by the various vicissitudes that, in the feminism of the last decades, have seen the term gender placed side by side, sometimes polemically and at other times in a conciliatory fashion, with that of sexual difference. In the field of ancient philosophy, just as in every other field of knowledge, feminist studies are a very rich constellation, articulated in many theoretical perspectives and multiple styles of thought, which cannot be traced to a simple framework. With Aristotle the organization of philosophical writing becomes more systematic and takes the form of the treatise, which will later become customary.

As becomes apparent from his cursory treatment of the earlier philosophical systems of the East, Hegel’s account of the history of philosophy is decidedly Eurocentric, and this in turn reflects an important feature of his conception of the nature of philosophy itself. While abstraction plays a crucial role in its method, philosophy is not ultimately about the abstractions belonging to some purported platonic realm: it is about the actual, concrete world. Thus the invention of philosophy reflected a peculiarity of the outlook of its Greek inventors: their Heimatilichkeit, their distinct sense of feeling at home in the world. The Greeks, he claimed, did not employ abstract thought in an attempt to escape into a realm of abstractions. Rather, they employed systematic thought as part of the process of creating their own way of life in their world, thus linking the development of philosophy to the development of democratic institutions.

The idea of universals underwent surprising changes during the 1000 years of ancient Greek philosophy. This applies both to universal concepts in the mind and to universals as things. I shall deal with universals as things first and concepts second, but it will turn out that the two subjects are connected, and that both underwent big changes.1

This is a case study of my reflections on teaching a first-year undergraduate tutorial on Ancient Greek Philosophy in the UK. This study draws upon the notion of reflective practice as an essential feature of teaching, in this case applied to Higher Education. My aim is to show how a critical engagement with my teaching practices and the overall learning experience modified, developed, or strengthened my practices, attitudes, and teaching philosophy during the course of one term. Methods for data collection included a weekly logbook, student questionnaires, teaching observations, reflective exercises, and peer discussions. The findings shed light on the complexities of teaching Greek philosophy to small groups and the challenges of the practitioner's reflective process in this teaching.

The article is to examine Feng Youlan's views about the differences and similarities between Chinese and Greek philosophy, to show the role of Greek philosophy in his effort to establish the study of Chinese philosophical thought as a modern discipline. It starts with a discussion of how Feng argues for what he thinks to be the two major features of Chinese philosophy: (a) China is weak in metaphysics/epistemology, and (b) Chinese philosophy concentrates on the philosophy of life. It proceeds to examine to what extent they are really in contrast to Greek philosophy, and it ends up with a reconsideration of the relation of these two features.

European enquiry into the nature and meaning of the world started in ancient Greece. By the fourth century BC, a substantial body of philosophy emanated from several schools: from Thales and his followers in the city of Miletos in Ionia in Asia Minor, from the Pythagorean school in Croton (Crotone) in Calabria, and from the Eleatic School in Sicily. The Sophist philosophy of Protagoras, Hippias, Cratylus, and others was to create much controversy and opposition later. Interestingly, deliberations of the earliest philosophers focused on the physical world: in this respect they were protoscientists; with time their natural philosophy evolved into science (1). In the fifth to the fourth centuries BC the Athenian city-state, then at the peak of its political power, became the intellectual center of the Greek world. This is mainly due to the succession of three men: Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle (2, 3). Socrates did not leave a written legacy. We know of his philosophy through his pupil, Plato. Aristotle, who had studied with Plato (indeed he was Plato's most brilliant student, whom Plato nicknamed the Mind), had developed his own enormous body of work, which had a major impact on the philosophy of the Middle Ages and beyond (4). Plato was born in 420s BC in Athens and died there in 348 or 347 BC. Reportedly, he travelled widely and …

International audience; A first attempt at gathering statistics borrowed from the Dictionary of Ancient Philosophers about the philosophical “population” of Antiquity.

Ancient Greek philosophy begins with natural philosophy (the Milesians, Heraclitus, Empedocles, Anaxagoras), followed after about a century by a focus on moral philosophy (Socrates and the sophists). The pattern is repeated in the Modern period: first natural philosophy re-emerged after the Dark and Middle Ages (Copernicus, Galileo, Descartes, Newton) followed by a correlative revolution in moral philosophy (Hobbes, Hume, Kant). In particular, moral ontology (externally related individuals) reflected the ontology of physics (externally related atoms). Individuals are, in effect, social atoms. Curiously, 20 th -century philosophy has largely turned a blind eye and deaf ear to the vast philosophical implications of the second scientific revolution in 20 th -century science, among them a correlative moral ontology of internal relations and social wholes. The environmental turn in the humanities, grounded in ecology and evolutionary biology, is a harbinger of the re-orientation of philosophy to the revolutionary ideas in the sciences and foreshadows an emerging NeoPresocratic revival in 21 st -century philosophy. According to Aristotle in Book IV (Γ) of the Metaphysics, the philosophy of being as such— being qua being—is "first philosophy." By "first," Aristotle did not mean that the philosophy of being as such was first in the order of time—although Heidegger seems to ignore the distinction—but rather first in the hierarchical order of thought. In the temporal sequence that Aristotle himself outlines in Book I (A) of the Metaphysics, the first philosophy that the Greeks pursued—beginning with Thales, according to Aristotle—was natural philosophy. Aristotle maps the progress of the natural philosophy of his predecessors onto his own scheme of causes. Thales and his fellow Milesians in the sixth century BCE were concerned with the material cause (positing water, air, and the like as the material "substrate"). After Parmenides had problematized motion and change, fifth century philosophers, such as Anaxagoras and Empedocles also concerned themselves with the moving or "efficient" cause (Mind and Love and Hate, respectively)—the force or forces that move material things. Following the fifth century Pythagoreans, Plato, in the fourth century, focused attention on the formal cause—the Numbers, according to Aristotle, who was certainly in a better position to know than we. (To understand this equation of Number and Form, we must remember that the ancient Greeks thought of number exclusively in geometrical terms—such "numbers" as the several species of triangle, the circle, the several species of polyhedron, and the sphere.) We call the ancient Greek natural philosophers the "pre-Socratics"—but not just because they lived and worked before Socrates. Indeed many were contemporaries of Socrates.

It is a well-known teaching in the writings of both Plato and Aristotle that wonder (thauma) is the beginning of philosophy. But few philosophers have given wonder much thought—certainly, no philosopher that I am aware of has, like Professor Sallis, returned time and again to think through wonder. Sallis’s thinking through wonder is guided by his reading of ancient Greek philosophy, and furthermore, as I hope to show, it opens up a reengagement with Greek philosophers—in particular, with those early Greek thinkers who are known collectively as the “Pre-Socratics.” In what follows I hope to make clear, first, what Sallis understands by wonder as the archē of philosophy and, second, how his own “rememorative” thinking of this archē—especially by way of what he calls “the elemental”—remains attentive to the wondrous in such a way as to return us to the insights of Pre-Socratic thought. But to understand wonder in the way that Sallis does requires that we have a sense of what it does not mean for wonder to be the beginning of philosophy. The Elemental Sallis: On Wonder and Philosophy’s “Beginning”

Over the past few decades, literature related to spirituality presents rising interest within researchers. Many tried to encode the term but there is not a widely agreed definition of spirituality. My interest in investigating the terminology led me to some hypothesis. Τhe antiquity of the word must be important in order to understand how the word was originally used. The purpose of this short communication is giving flesh to the notion of spirituality as it goes into the heart of Ancient Greek philosophy in order to encode the term. A large body of literature acknowledges the connectedness between spirituality and the Greek word πνeIμα (pneuma) which means spirit, mind, soul, and breathing. The semantic root of the English term spirituality is the Latin word spirare which meant to breathe, to blow and to live. Spirituality does elicit an experiential sense by force of the words’ own signification and etymology. Based on the definitions of spirit outlined in this manuscript; the spirit animates not only human beings but all beings. This analysis shows that since “air” is an extension of breath, spirituality must possibly be as vital as the air we breathe. It must be our ‘Breath of Life’. Air has also been ascribed divine attributes, so spirituality could also be the ‘Breath of God’. This ‘Breath’ could help people understand answers to ultimate questions about life, about meaning and about the relationship to the sacred, the transcendent, and the Divine.

For followers of religions which take solid cultural form of coherent doctrinalsystems, the fact that other comparable religious systems exist may posea difficult theoretical and existential problem that needs to be addressed ata number of levels, including the one of human existential experience. This isthe problem that was faced by the original followers of the Christian religionin relation to the Greek spiritual culture, and ancient Greek philosophy inparticular, at the time when it boldly explored spiritual areas closely connectedto Christianity. The problem became particularly significant in the secondcentury CE. It was tackled by early Christian thinkers that were educated inGreek philosophy themselves and used its ideas to solve the above-mentionedproblem.

Because of history, culture, and politics, European identity has its archetypical elements in ancient Greek culture. Ancient Greek philosophy brought Logos to fore and defined it as the crucial problem and the postulate of the human. We translate the Greek term Logos in English as reason or rationality. These terms, however, do not cover the semantic field of Logos since this includes, among other things, order of being, ground, language, argument etc. The juxtaposition of Logos (reason) to myth makes up the matrix of rationalism. Ancient Greek culture, however, was a culture of Logos (reason) as well as of myth and had enough room for forms, gods, and heroes, for science, poetry, and religious festivities. While ancient Greek culture seems to follow the logic of forms, modern European culture follows the logic of things. Plato criticizes myth and, at the same time, he sets out a philosophy of myth. He follows the principle of ‘giving reason’ (logon didonai) about things, as his master Socrates did. He establishes dialogue and defines dialectics as the science of principles and ideas and their relations to the things of this world. Aristotle did not accept Plato’s interpretation of Logos. He considered dialectics only as a theory of argumentation and defined his ‘first philosophy’ or ‘theology’ as the science of highest Being. His program of rationalism is based on ontology and accepts the primordial relation of Logos, life, and order of things. European modernity begins in philosophy with Descartes’ turn to the subject. Descartes defines the main elements of European rationality and their problems. He brings to fore the human subject as the ‘I’ that is free to doubt about everything it can know except itself. Knowledge has to consolidate the power and the mastery of humans over things and nature. Besides, the distinction between soul and body in terms of thinking thing and extended thing does not allow a unique conception of the human. Especially Kant and Hegel attempted to eliminate the impasses of Descartes’ and of Cartesians. While Kant defined freedom as the transcendental idea of reason, Hegel highlighted the reconciliation of spirit and nature. Nowadays there is a confusion regarding rationality. The power of humans over nature and over other humans as nature is increasing. We have lost the measure of our limits. Perhaps we need the ancient Greek grammar of Logos in order to define the measure and the limits of modern European rationality.

The chapter deals with the metaphysical section (Ilāhiyyāt, “Science of Divine Things”) of Avicenna’s philosophical masterpiece Kitāb al-Šifāʾ (Book of the Healing), discussing preliminarily its presumed date of composition and place within Avicenna’s biography, and its distinctive traits with respect to other works of Avicenna dealing with metaphysics. Three further issues are then primarily addressed: the Ilāhiyyāt as a prime example of the idea that the science of metaphysics is first among the philosophical disciplines and possesses epistemological unity despite its internal articulation; the philosophical sources of the work, both in ancient Greek philosophy and in Arabic pre-Avicennian falsafa, and the cultural setting in which the Ilāhiyyāt is meant to circulate as well as its intended audience; its main doctrines, pertaining both to ontology (the doctrine of being qua being and its afferents) and to philosophical theology (God’s existence, nature, and agency).

Comparative philosophers are well aware of the interpretive difficulties that arise when using the methodological tools of one tradition to understand another. Such difficulties, however, also arise when looking back through traditions. This is especially the case with ancient Greek philosophy understood as the foundation of the Western philosophical tradition. Unreflective application to ancient Greek thought of methodologies that developed later in the tradition can introduce ways of thinking as foreign to it as to a non-Western tradition. This essay demonstrates how certain strategies developed by comparativists can and should be employed in interpreting ancient Greek philosophy.

It is a puzzling fact that the Greek term for Nature ‘physis’ could be used to refer to (inter alia) i) reality as a whole, ii) the nature (essence) of something, iii) to individual material beings or materiality and iv) all things that are self-generating. In order to understand and tie together this wide array of possible meanings, I will consider the thesis that ‘physis’ was in fact used as a concept of being, a term naming the fundamental property of all of reality in the early pre-Socratics, poets and scientists before 500 BCE. Investigating ‘physis’ in this way can give us a way of thinking about Nature as a dynamic and creative but material process that goes far beyond the classical understanding of Nature as the sum of things that self-generate or the modern mathematical understanding of Nature born with Galileo, dominant to this day.

The pseudo-Aristotelian Mechanical Problems is the earliest known ancient Greek text on mechanics, principally concerned with the explanation of a variety of mechanical phenomena using a particular construal of the principle of the lever. In the introduction, the author—thought to be an early Peripatetic—quotes the tragic poet Antiphon to summarise a discussion of the technē - physis (art-nature) relationship and the status of mechanics as a technē . I argue that this citation of a poet is an Aristotelian cultural signature, intended to guide its readers towards a better understanding of the nature of mechanics as expounded in the Mechanical Problems . By analysing several instances where Aristotle cites Antiphon (as well as other tragic poets) in the Aristotelian corpus, I propose that both the author of the Mechanical Problems and Aristotle use poets for the purpose of persuasion. This is in turn explained by understanding the homologous relationship between mechanics-as- technē (according to the author of the Mechanical Problems ) and poetics-as- technē (according to Aristotle) in terms of their shared status as poiētikē technē (productive art) and claims to universal knowledge. A final facet of the proposed relationship between mechanics and poetry is hypothesised on the grounds of their mimetic nature.

Catherine Zuckert's Plato's Philosophers argues that the central concern of the Platonic dialogues, read as a single corpus, is to examine the character of philosophy as represented in the activiti...

No Abstract