HERMODORUS OF SYRACUSE AND SEXTUS EMPIRICUS’ ‘PYTHAGOREANS’ ON CATEGORIES AND PRINCIPLES

R. Granieri
{"title":"HERMODORUS OF SYRACUSE AND SEXTUS EMPIRICUS’ ‘PYTHAGOREANS’ ON CATEGORIES AND PRINCIPLES","authors":"R. Granieri","doi":"10.1017/s0009838823000423","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Hermodorus of Syracuse, a Sicilian disciple of Plato, is reported by Simplicius to have set out a classification of beings, which is of a piece with an argument for principle monism (in Ph. 247.30–248.18 > F 5 IP2; 256.28–257.4 = F 6 IP2). A similar classification appears in Sextus Empiricus’ Aduersus mathematicos X (262–75), where it is officially ascribed to some ‘Pythagoreans’ (Πυθαγορικοί) or ‘children of the Pythagoreans’ (Πυθαγορικῶν παῖδες), but seems ultimately based on Early Academic material. Virtually all commentators have read these classifications conjointly. More radically, both have been taken to record Plato's oral teaching and to give essentially the same categorial scheme, which is regarded as the most developed instance of a so-called ‘Academic doctrine of the categories’. This article re-examines these texts and provides an alternative reading. Section 1 focusses on Hermodorus and defends three theses: (1) there was never such a thing as an ‘Academic doctrine of the categories’; (2) Hermodorus does not seem to recount what Plato said, but to propose an integrated interpretation and defence of aspects of his thought; (3) Hermodorus’ pronouncements about principles are incompatible with other testimonies on Plato's unwritten teaching, notably Aristotle's. Section 2 moves to Sextus and defends a fourth thesis: (4) despite their similarities, the classifications of Hermodorus and Sextus’ Pyrhagoreans are considerably different, though perhaps originated from the same debate.","PeriodicalId":22560,"journal":{"name":"The Classical Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Classical Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0009838823000423","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Hermodorus of Syracuse, a Sicilian disciple of Plato, is reported by Simplicius to have set out a classification of beings, which is of a piece with an argument for principle monism (in Ph. 247.30–248.18 > F 5 IP2; 256.28–257.4 = F 6 IP2). A similar classification appears in Sextus Empiricus’ Aduersus mathematicos X (262–75), where it is officially ascribed to some ‘Pythagoreans’ (Πυθαγορικοί) or ‘children of the Pythagoreans’ (Πυθαγορικῶν παῖδες), but seems ultimately based on Early Academic material. Virtually all commentators have read these classifications conjointly. More radically, both have been taken to record Plato's oral teaching and to give essentially the same categorial scheme, which is regarded as the most developed instance of a so-called ‘Academic doctrine of the categories’. This article re-examines these texts and provides an alternative reading. Section 1 focusses on Hermodorus and defends three theses: (1) there was never such a thing as an ‘Academic doctrine of the categories’; (2) Hermodorus does not seem to recount what Plato said, but to propose an integrated interpretation and defence of aspects of his thought; (3) Hermodorus’ pronouncements about principles are incompatible with other testimonies on Plato's unwritten teaching, notably Aristotle's. Section 2 moves to Sextus and defends a fourth thesis: (4) despite their similarities, the classifications of Hermodorus and Sextus’ Pyrhagoreans are considerably different, though perhaps originated from the same debate.
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
叙拉库扎的赫拉莫多罗斯和塞克斯图斯·恩皮里库斯关于范畴和原则的“毕达哥拉斯学派”
叙拉库扎的赫莫多罗斯是柏拉图的西西里门徒,辛普利修斯认为他提出了一种生物分类,这与一元论的原则论点是一致的(Ph. 247.30-248.18 > F 5 IP2;256.28-257.4 = f 6 ip2)。类似的分类出现在塞克斯图斯·恩里克乌斯的《Aduersus mathematicos X》(262-75)中,其中官方将其归因于一些“毕达哥拉斯学派”(Πυθαγορικοί)或“毕达哥拉斯学派的孩子”(Πυθαγορικ ν ν πα ν δες),但似乎最终基于早期学术材料。几乎所有的评论员都把这些分类结合起来读过。更激进的是,两者都被用来记录柏拉图的口头教学,并给出本质上相同的范畴方案,这被认为是所谓的“学院派范畴学说”的最发达的例子。本文重新审视了这些文本,并提供了另一种阅读方式。第一节着重于Hermodorus,并为三个论点辩护:(1)从来没有“范畴的学术学说”这样的东西;(2)赫莫多罗斯似乎并没有叙述柏拉图所说的话,而是对他的思想的各个方面提出一种综合的解释和辩护;(3) Hermodorus关于原则的声明与柏拉图不成文教导的其他证词不相容,特别是亚里士多德的证词。第二节转到塞克斯都,并为第四个论点辩护:(4)尽管有相似之处,赫尔莫多罗斯和塞克斯都的pyrhagoians的分类有很大的不同,尽管可能起源于相同的辩论。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
PHILOSOPHY IN DIO CHRYSOSTOM, ON ANACHÔRÊSIS (ORATION 20) THE MATHEMATICAL EXAMPLE OF GNOMONS IN ARISTOTLE, PHYSICS 3.4, 203a10–16 HELOTS AT THERMOPYLAE: THE GREEK DEAD AT HERODOTUS 8.25 A SERVILE RIDDLE FROM POMPEII? (CIL 4.1877) JULIUS CAESAR AND THE LARCH: BURNING QUESTIONS AT VITRUVIUS’ DE ARCHITECTVRA 2.9.15–16 – ERRATUM
×
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