The Resistance to Stoic Blending

Vanessa de Harven
{"title":"The Resistance to Stoic Blending","authors":"Vanessa de Harven","doi":"10.1515/rhiz-2018-0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper rehabilitates the Stoic conception of blending from the ground up, by freeing the Stoic conception of body from three interpretive presuppositions. First, the twin hylomorphic presuppositions that where there is body there is matter, and that where there is reason or quality there is an incorporeal. Then, the atomistic presupposition that body is absolutely full and rigid, and the attendant notion that resistance (antitupia) must be ricochet. I argue that once we clear away these presuppositions about body, the foundations of Stoic corporealism fall into place. Body is fundamental (not hylomorphic). The two fundamental principles (archai) are bodies: divine active reason (logos) and passive matter (hulē); and these two bodies are two, not matter and form all over again, nor actual and potential, but agent and patient. The independence of the two archai is no threat to the unity of the cosmos, however, because the Stoic theory of body allows for the complete coextension of the archai. The hylomorphic thinker rightly asks, what relation could be tighter than that of the wax and its shape? The Stoic replies: a causal relation, the interaction of agent and patient completely coextended in a through and through blend.","PeriodicalId":40571,"journal":{"name":"Rhizomata-A Journal for Ancient Philosophy and Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"1 - 23"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rhizomata-A Journal for Ancient Philosophy and Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/rhiz-2018-0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract This paper rehabilitates the Stoic conception of blending from the ground up, by freeing the Stoic conception of body from three interpretive presuppositions. First, the twin hylomorphic presuppositions that where there is body there is matter, and that where there is reason or quality there is an incorporeal. Then, the atomistic presupposition that body is absolutely full and rigid, and the attendant notion that resistance (antitupia) must be ricochet. I argue that once we clear away these presuppositions about body, the foundations of Stoic corporealism fall into place. Body is fundamental (not hylomorphic). The two fundamental principles (archai) are bodies: divine active reason (logos) and passive matter (hulē); and these two bodies are two, not matter and form all over again, nor actual and potential, but agent and patient. The independence of the two archai is no threat to the unity of the cosmos, however, because the Stoic theory of body allows for the complete coextension of the archai. The hylomorphic thinker rightly asks, what relation could be tighter than that of the wax and its shape? The Stoic replies: a causal relation, the interaction of agent and patient completely coextended in a through and through blend.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对斯多葛调和的抵制
摘要本文通过将斯多葛的身体概念从三个解释前提中解放出来,从根本上恢复了斯多葛的混合概念。首先,双形态的前提是,有肉体的地方就有物质,有理性或质的地方就有非物质。其次是原子论的前提,即物体是绝对充实和刚硬的,以及由此而来的阻力(反突)必然是弹跳的概念。我认为,一旦我们清除了这些关于身体的预设,斯多葛派肉体主义的基础就建立起来了。身体是基本的(不是形体的)。两个基本原则(archai)是身体:神圣的主动原因(logos)和被动物质(hulu);这两个物体是两个,不是物质和形式的复归,也不是现实的和潜在的,而是施者和受者。然而,这两个古的独立并不会威胁到宇宙的统一性,因为斯多葛学派的身体理论允许古的完全共同扩展。词形思想家正确地问道,还有什么关系能比蜡和它的形状更紧密呢?斯多葛派的回答是:一种因果关系,药物和病人之间的相互作用在一种彻底的融合中完全共同扩展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊最新文献
Between Poetry, Philosophy and Medicine: Body, Soul and Dreams in Pindar, Heraclitus and the Hippocratic On Regimen. Heraclitus on the Question of a Common Measure From Zeno ad infinitum: Iterative Reasonings in Early Greek Philosophy Reconsidering the Essential Nature and Indestructibility of the Soul in the Affinity Argument of the Phaedo Aristotle as an Astronomer? Sosigenes’ Account of Metaphysics Λ.8
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1