PL EN


2014 | 5 | 1 | 43-58
Article title

The Historical Antecedents of Platonism: The Role of the Presocratics According to the Neoplatonists

Authors
Content
Title variants
EN
The Historical Antecedents of Platonism: The Role of the Presocratics According to the Neoplatonists
Languages of publication
IT
Abstracts
IT
One of the aims of the Neoplatonists is to demonstrate that ancient Presocratic thought is, in fact, a Preplatonic thought. According to the Neoplatonists, Presocratics, who were not far from the truth, employed an inaccurate and ambiguous language, whereas Plato spoke about the truth in a more appropriate and clear way. That is why the Presocratics are not necessarily erroneous and their theoretical originality and their terminology can be incorporated into the Neoplatonic philosophy. I would like to show how some Presocratic theories are embedded in the Neoplatonic metaphysical system of the three Hypostases. Regarding the One and the Intellect, Plotinus, Proclus and the Anonymous Author of the Prolegomena to Platonic Philosophy read and employ some Presocratic texts in order to harmonize the Platonic and the Presocratic accounts. Although the Neoplatonists see themselves as continuing the Greek philosophical tradition started by the Presocratics, their interpretation of Presocratic thought illustrates the birth of exegetic philosophy which is able to apply ancient concepts and predicates to its own metaphysical theory.
EN
One of the aims of the Neoplatonists is to demonstrate that ancient Presocratic thought is, in fact, a Preplatonic thought. According to the Neoplatonists, Presocratics, who were not far from the truth, employed an inaccurate and ambiguous language, whereas Plato spoke about the truth in a more appropriate and clear way. That is why the Presocratics are not necessarily erroneous and their theoretical originality and their terminology can be incorporated into the Neoplatonic philosophy. I would like to show how some Presocratic theories are embedded in the Neoplatonic metaphysical system of the three Hypostases. Regarding the One and the Intellect, Plotinus, Proclus and the Anonymous Author of the Prolegomena to Platonic Philosophy read and employ some Presocratic texts in order to harmonize the Platonic and the Presocratic accounts. Although the Neoplatonists see themselves as continuing the Greek philosophical tradition started by the Presocratics, their interpretation of Presocratic thought illustrates the birth of exegetic philosophy which is able to apply ancient concepts and predicates to its own metaphysical theory.   
Year
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
43-58
Physical description
Dates
published
2014-01-24
Contributors
author
References
  • AA.VV., 1974, Plotino e il Neoplatonismo in Oriente e in Occidente, Roma.
  • Abbate, M., 2000, “Il Bene nell’interpretazione di Plotino e di Proclo”, in: Vegetti (2000), pp. 625-678.
  • Abbate, M., 2001, Dall’etimologia alla teologia: Proclo interprete del Cratilo, Casale Monferrato.
  • Abbate, M., 2004, Proclo, Commento alla ‘Repubblica’ di Platone, Milano.
  • Abbate, M., 2005, Proclo, ‘Teologia Platonica’, Milano.
  • Abbate, M., 2008, Il divino tra unità e molteplicità: saggio sulla ‘Teologia Platonica’di Proclo, Alessandria.
  • Abbate, M., 2010, Parmenide e i neoplatonici. Dall’Essere all’Uno e al di là dell’Uno, Alessandria.
  • Atkinson, M., 1983, Plotinus: Ennead V.1. On the Three Hypostases, Oxford.
  • Aubenque, P. (dir.), 1987, Études sur Parménide, Paris.
  • Beierwaltes, W., 1961, „Die Metaphysik des Lichtes in der Philosophie Plotins“, Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung 15, pp. 334-362.
  • Beierwaltes, W., 1991, Il paradigma neoplatonico nell’interpretazione di Platone, Napoli.
  • Beierwaltes, W., 1992, Pensare l’Uno. Studi sulla filosofia neoplatonica e sulla storia dei suoi influssi, trad. M.L. Gatti, Milano.
  • Berti, E., 2005, “Il dio di Aristotele”, Humanitas 60, pp. 732-750.
  • Bonazzi, M., 2000, “Plotino e la tradizione pitagorica”, Acme 53, pp. 39-73.
  • Bonazzi M., Lévy, C., Steel, C. (eds.), 2007, A Platonic Pythagoras: Platonism and Pythagoreanism in the Imperial Age, Turnhout.
  • Bonelli M., Longo, A. (dir.), 2010, « Quid est veritas? » Hommage à Jonathan Barnes, Napoli.
  • Bonelli, M., 2010, “L’origine eleatica della scienza degli esseri”, in: Bonelli, Longo (2010), pp. 15-38.
  • Bos E.P., Meijer, P.A. (eds.), 1992, On Proclus and his Influence in Medieval Philosophy, Leiden and New York and Köln,
  • Cambiano, G., Canfora, L., Lanza, D. (cur.), 1994, Lo spazio letterario della Grecia antica, vol. I: La produzione e la circolazione del testo, t. III, I Greci e Roma, Roma.
  • Cambiano, G., 2013, I filosofi in Grecia e a Roma. Quando pensare era un modo di vivere, Bologna.
  • Casanova, A. (cur.), 2013, Figure d’Atene nelle opere di Plutarco, Firenze.
  • Casertano, G., 1989, Parmenide il metodo la scienza l’esperienza, Napoli.
  • Casertano, G. (cur.), 2011, Il Fedro di Platone: struttura e problematiche, Napoli.
  • Centrone, B., 1996, Introduzione ai Pitagorici, Roma e Bari.
  • Chiaradonna, R., 2009, Plotino, Roma.
  • Chiaradonna, R., 2010, “Esegesi e sistema in Plotino”, in: Neschke-Hentschke (2010), pp. 101-117.
  • Chiaradonna, R., 2012, Filosofia tardoantica, Roma.
  • D’Ancona, C., 1992, “Amorphon kai aneideon. Causalité des formes et causalité de l’Un chez Plotin”, Revue de Philosophie Ancienne 10, pp. 71-113.
  • D’Ancona, C., 2005, “Il neoplatonismo alessandrino: alcune linee della ricerca contemporanea”, Adamantius 11, pp. 9-38.
  • Di Pasquale Barbanti M., Romano F. (cur.), 2002, Il Parmenide di Platone e la sua tradizione. Atti del III Colloquio Internazionale del Centro di Ricerca sul Neoplatonismo, Catania.
  • Dixsaut, M. – Brancacci, A., 2002, Platon, source de présocratiques : exploration, Paris.
  • Dodds, E.R., 1928, “The Parmenides of Plato and the Origin of the Neoplatonic One”, Classical Quarterly 22,pp. 129-142.
  • Donini, P.L., 1982, Le scuole, l’anima, l’impero: la filosofia antica da Antioco a Plotino, Torino.
  • Donini, P.L., 1994, “Testi e commenti, manuali e insegnamento: la forma sistematica e i metodi della filosofia in età postellenistica”, in: Haase (1994), pp. 5027-5100.
  • Donini, P.L., 1999, “Platone e Aristotele nella tradizione pitagorica secondo Plutarco”, in: Pérez Jiménez, Garzia Lopez, Aguilar (1999), pp. 9-24.
  • Dörrie, H., 1974, “Plotino: tradizionalista o innovatore?”, in: AA.VV. (1974), pp. 195-201.
  • Edwards, M., 2000, Neoplatonic saints: the lives of Plotinus and Proclus by their students, Liverpool.
  • Elsner, J., 2004, “Late Antique Art: The Problem of Concept and Cumulative Aesthetic”, in: Swain, Edwards (2004), pp. 271-308.
  • Emilsson, E.K., 1999, “Neo-Platonism”, in: Furley (1999), pp. 356-387.
  • Ferrari, F., 2003, “Verso la costruzione del sistema: il medioplatonismo”, Paradigmi 21, pp. 343-354.
  • Ferrari, F., 2013, “Filone, Antioco e l’unità della tradizione platonica nella testimonianza di Plutarco”, in: Casanova (2013), pp. 219-231.
  • Finamore, J.F., Johnston, S.I., 2010, “The ‘Caldaean Oracle’”, in: Gerson (2010), pp. 161-173.
  • Fowden, G., 1982, “The Pagan Holy Man in the Late Antique Society”, Journal of Hellenic Studies 102, pp. 33-59.
  • Furley, D. (ed.), 1999, Routledge History of Philosophy, vol. II: From Aristotle to Augustine, London and New York.
  • Gerson L. (ed.), 2010, The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity, vol. I-II, Cambridge.
  • Giardina, G.R., 2011, “L’Anassagora di Aristotele fra Fisica e Metafisica”, in: Palumbo (2011b), pp. 759-777.
  • Guérard, C., 1987, “Parménide d’Élée chez les Néoplatoniciens”, in: Aubenque (1987), pp. 294-313.
  • Haase, W. (hrsg.), 1994, Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, II 36.7, Berlin and New York.
  • Hadot, P., 1998, Che cos’è la filosofia antica?, trad. E. Giovanelli, Torino.
  • Huffman, C.A., 1993, Philolaus of Croton: Pythagorean and Presocratic, Cambridge.
  • Kahn, C.H., 1979, The Art and the Thought of Heraclitus, Cambridge.
  • Karamanolis, G., 2006, Plato and Aristotle in agreement? Platonists on Aristotle from Antiochus to Porphyry, Oxford.
  • Lewy, Y., 1978, Chaldean Oracles and Theurgy. Mysticism, Magic and Platonism in the Later Roman Empire, Paris.
  • Linguiti, A., 2003, “Gli studi neoplatonici nel ‘900: caratteri generali, tendenze attuali”, Paradigmi 62, pp. 355-366.
  • Long, A.A. (ed.), 1999, The Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy, Cambridge.
  • Longo, A. (dir.), 2009, Syrianus et la Métaphysique de l’Antiquité Tardive, Napoli.
  • Luna, C., Segonds, A.-Ph. (éds), 2007, Proclus, Commentaire sur le ‘Parménide’ de Platon, 1, 2: Livre I, Paris.
  • Mansfeld, J., 1992, Heresiography in Context: Hyppolitus’ Elenchos as a Source for Greek Philosophy, Leiden.
  • Mansfeld, J., 1999, Sources, in: Long (1999), pp. 22-44.
  • Motta, A. (cur.), 2014a, Anonimo, Prolegomeni alla filosofia di Platone, Roma.
  • Motta, A., 2014b, “La Sibilla di Eraclito e l’ispirazione del filosofo: i neo-contesti citatori del frammento DK 22 B 92”, in: Pozzoni (2014), pp. 209-233.
  • Neschke-Hentschke, A. (hrsg.), 2010, Argumenta in dialogos Platonis, Teil 1: Platoninterpretation und ihre Hermeneutik von der Antike bis zum Beginn des 19. Jahrhunderts. Akten des internationalen Symposiums von 27-29 April 2006 im Istituto Svizzero di Roma, Basel.
  • O’Meara, D.J., 1989, Pythagoras revived. Mathematics and philosophy in late Antiquity, Oxford.
  • O’Meara, D.J., 2010, Plotino. Introduzione alle Enneadi, trad. S. Mattei, Bari.
  • Palumbo, L., 1994, Il non essere e l’apparenza. Sul Sofista di Platone, Napoli.
  • Palumbo, L., 2011a, “Mimesis ed enthousiasmos in Platone. Appunti sul Fedro”, in: Casertano (2011), pp. 157-172.
  • Palumbo, L. (cur.), 2011b, Λόγον διδόναι. La filosofia come esercizio del render ragione, Napoli.
  • Pépin, J., 2000, “Les modes de l’enseignement théologique dans la Théologie platonicienne”, in: Segonds, Steel (2000), pp. 1-14.
  • Pérez Jiménez, A., Garzia Lopez, J., Aguilar, R. (eds.), 1999, Plutarco, Platón y Aristóteles. Actas del V Congreso internacional de la I. P. S., Madrid-Cuenca, 4-7 de mayo de 1999, Madrid.
  • Pozzoni, I. (cur.), 2014, L’oscurità di Eraclito d’Efeso. Frammenti e «leggenda», Villasanta.
  • Riedweg, C., 2002, Pitagora. Vita, dottrina e influenza, Milano.
  • Rist, J.M., 1967, Plotinus: The Road to Reality, Cambridge.
  • Romano, R., 1994, “La scuola filosofica e il commentario”, in: Cambiano, Canfora, Lanza (1994), pp. 587-611.
  • Saffrey, H.D., 2000, Le néoplatonisme après Plotin, vol. II, Paris.
  • Schwyzer, H.-R., 1944, „Die zwiefache Sicht in der Philosophie Plotins“, Museum Helveticum 1, pp. 87-99.
  • Segonds, A.-Ph., Steel, C. (éds), 2000, Proclus et la « Théologie platonicienne », Leuven et Paris.
  • Seng, H., Tardieu, M., 2011, Die Chaldaeischen Orakel. Kontext – Interpretation – Rezeption, Heidelberg.
  • Stamatellos, G., 2007, Plotinus and the Presocratics. A Philosophical Study of Presocratic Influences in Plotinus’ Enneads, Albany.
  • Steel, C., 1992, “Le Sophiste comme texte théologique dans l’interprétation de Proclus”, in: Bos, Meijer (1992), pp. 51-64.
  • Steel, C., 2002, “Une histoire de l’interprétation du Parménide dans l’antiquité”, in: Di Pasquale Barbanti, Romano (2002), pp. 11-40.
  • Swain, S., Edwards M. (eds.), 2004, Approaching Late Antiquity, Oxford.
  • Trouillard, j., 1960, “Un et Etre”, Les Etudes philosophiques 15, pp. 185-196.
  • Turner, J.D., 2006, “The Gnostic Sethians and Middle Platonism: Interpretations of the Timaeus and Parmenides”, Vigiliae Christianae 60, pp. 9-64.
  • Van Campe, L., 2009, “Syrianus and Proclus on the attributes of the One in Plato’s Parmenides”, in: Longo (2009), pp. 247-280.
  • Vegetti, M., 19902, L’etica degli antichi, Roma e Bari.
  • Vegetti M. (cur.), 2000, Platone. ‘La Repubblica’, vol. V, Napoli.
  • Wallis, R.T., 1995, Neoplatonism, London.
  • Zambon, M., 2002, Porphyre et le Moyen Platonisme, Paris.
Document Type
Publication order reference
Identifiers
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.ojs-doi-10_14746_pea_2014_1_2
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.