Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Siorvanes and Lloyd

Expand Messages
  • vaeringjar
    A followup to my whining earlier about no general survey of later Neoplatonism. I did find some very helpful discussions about the later complications added to
    Message 1 of 1 , Jun 30, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      A followup to my whining earlier about no general survey of later
      Neoplatonism. I did find some very helpful discussions about the
      later complications added to the structure of Plotinus' second
      hypostasis, the level of Nous, in Siorvanes book on Proclus and also
      A.C. Lloyd's section on the later Neoplatonists in the <Cambridge
      History of Later Greek Philosophy>, the latter of which was
      particularly helpful in emphasizing the importance of how Iamblichus
      viewed particibility, which I hadn't fully grasped until I read
      Lloyd's discussion there.

      An ongoing problem, I guess for everyone, however, is determining
      exactly where changes can be credited either by inference, or
      whatever direct evidence we are lucky enough to have, to Iamblichus
      himself and not to Syrianus or later Neoplatonists.

      I also am curious now after all this particular reading about the
      differences in the view of the first hypothesis of the Parmenides -
      Proclus' and Syrianus' interpretation of how Iamblichus saw it. I
      have to research this much more, but I am wondering if perhaps they
      didn't actually misinterpret him, when he spoke of it as including
      the gods, so that his view is actually not so exceptional maybe, and
      if perhaps Iamblichus' conception of his first principle as
      absolutely removed and ineffable doesn't also come into play here
      with his interpretation of the first hypothesis. More perhaps on this
      later.

      Dennis Clark
      Issaquah
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.