5343Re: Neoplatonism & Religion
- Apr 5 12:26 PM--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Goya" <goya@...> wrote:
>Been trying to find the time to respond to this point, Mike. The review I did of a collection of Charrue's essays touches on a couple of ones included there that concern themselves in part with just this subject is in the latest IJPT. For now I would say there is little hope in my opinion of extracting much of Ammonios' at all, despite Theiler's effort, beyond two main points, the importance to him of the agreement of Plato and Aristotle (which comes from Hierocles actually), and one point on the nature of the soul.
> Thanks to Professor Schott for some stimulating remarks.
> For my part, I've been working for a couple of years now on the debate
> between Pagans and Christians over the creation or eternity of the world.
> There are differences, obviously, but I've also found that when the
> Christian Philoponus, for instance, argues against the eternity fo the
> world, he seems to make use of some doctrines of Porphyry, the arch-enemy
> of Christianity, and it's been argued that Porphyry is also behind the
> Christian idea of the Trinity.
> I wonder what List-members think of Willy Theiler's argument that Origen
> was a student of Ammonios Saccas, that Ammonios' system can be
> reconstructed from the parallels between Origen and Hierocles, and that
> where Porphyry parts company with Plotinus on doctrinal questions, he is
> returning to the views of Ammonius?
> Best, Mike
But interestingly enough, the subject of that latter point has come up again for me personally just last week, reading Andrew Smith's most useful chapter on Porphyry in the new Cambridge History, regarding Nemesius' use of Porphry perhaps on the substance of the soul, which may in fact go back to Ammonius, and which Charrue discusses in that same essay. I just need to review the details on all of this, and look at Theiler again, before I say anything else!
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>