Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Epicureanism
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
PL
Polemic against polemics. Plutarch’s attacks on Epicureanism Plutarch’s attitude toward Epicurean philosophy is extremely hostile. According to him, at the core of Epicureanism is subversiveness, an attempt to attack the most fundamental components of Greek culture: traditional morality, religious beliefs, educational, and political commitment. Moreover, the Epicureans were the only philosophers in antiquity who openly criticised Socrates, first and foremost for his εἰρωνεία and “unreasonable” death. In the article, the main tenets of Epicureanism, as well as Plutarch’s polemical efforts, are centered around the figure of τετραφάρμα-κος, or the “fourfold remedy”.
Rocznik Lubuski
|
2016
|
vol. 42
|
issue 2
189-202
EN
Julian A. Kułakowski (1855-1919), Professor of the Roman rhetoric on the Imperial St. Włodzimierz’s University, Russified Pole, gave two public lectures in Kiev, one was about Lucretius (in 1887), the second one about Epicurus (in 1889). In 1899 he published the book titled: "Death and immortality in the ancient Greeks’ images". Taken together, they are probably the first in the Russian humanities historico-philosophical views that concern the process of the integration of the form of Greco-Roman world view into eschatology and epicureanism at that time, views that at the turn of the XIX and XX century were moderated by decadent (tu brakuje słowa w polskim abstrakcie) of the intellectuals of the Silver Age. In the article, on the basis of archives, careful reading and analysis of different contexts, the problematics of the history, theory of origin and functioning in the mythico-poetical space of this epoch was elaborated. The article shows the way in which Kułakowski reconstructs the ancient idea of human being based on the mythical attributivity, wherein human being functions integrally and exhaustively in both: the realistic world, and in the afterlife. This situation results from the specific corporality figure construed on the basis of the myth, corporality that has different levels and embraces the body, as well as the soul, and finally it allows this human soul to continue the existence in the afterlife.
PL
Julian A. Kułakowski (1855-1919), profesor rzymskiej retoryki, Cesarskiego Uniwersytetu Św. Włodzimierza, zrusyfikowany Polak, wystąpił w Kijowie z dwoma wykładami publicznymi: o Lukrecjuszu (1887) i Epikurze (1889). W 1899 roku opublikował książkę „Śmierć i nieśmiertelność w wyobrażeniach starożytnych Greków”. Rozpatrywane łącznie, teksty te są prawdopodobnie pierwszymi w rosyjskiej humanistyce historyczno-filozoficznymi poglądami dotyczącymi procesu włączenie form światopoglądu grecko-rzymskiego do ówczesnej eschatologii i epikureizmu, które na przełomie XIX-XX wieku zostały złagodzone dekadenckimi intelektualistów Srebrnego Wieku. W artykule na podstawie materiałów archiwalnych i uważnej lektury i ponownego odczytania kontekstów rozpatrzono problematykę historii i teorii ich powstawania oraz funkcjonowanie w mityczno- poetyckiej przestrzeni postgutenbergowskiej epoki. Artykuł ukazuje jak Kulakowski rekonstruuje antyczną wizję człowieka zbudowaną na atrybutywności mitycznej, w której człowiek integralnie i całościowo funkcjonuje zarówno w świecie i w rzeczywistości pozagrobowej. Wynika to ze specyficznej, ukonstytuowanej na micie, figury cielesności, która posiadając różne poziomy jakościowo obejmuje zarówno ciało jak i dusze, pozwalając duszy ludzkiej kontynuować istnienie „po śmierci”.
Vox Patrum
|
2016
|
vol. 65
631-651
EN
The original Latin catalogue of heresies, produced by Saint Philastrius of Brescia in the second half of IVth century, encompasses several observations re­garding the source of early Christian heterodox movements. These views are dis­persed and interwoven into the analysis of particular heresies, and as such do not constitute an integral and standalone teaching on the nature of unorthodoxy and its genesis. The present work attempts at enucleating this standpoint and summari­sing it in a comprehensive and complementary manner. Regarding the issue of the foundation of heresy, Philastrius proposed his own point of view based on the following threefold argumentation: the theological (Satan is the father of all the world’s heterodoxy – comprehended as a lapse form God’s truth), the moral (heresies rise due to one’s pride), and historical and cul­tural (errors in early Christian doctrine derive from the Judaic sects or else from the counterfactual views of the ancient Greek philosophers). Philastrius’ perspective refers back to an extensive and modestly younger work Panarion by Epiphanius of Salamis, in which the topic of Jewish-deriving deviations from the doctrine was treated even more at length. The Bishop of Brescia’s index has been the inspiration for the later catalogues of unorthodoxy by St. Augustine (narrow in the topic of Judaic origins of heretical movements and rather focused on influences from the ancient philosophical schools) and Isidore of Seville (intermingling both sources of early heretical movements – i.e. Judaic and Greek – withholding the determination which of them has in fact more influ­enced the uprising of heterodoxy and the doctrine itself).
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.