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

Un fascicolo sullo stato dell'arte

Expand Messages
  • Cosmin I. Andron
    E uscito nel corso del 2003 un numero speciale della rivista Paradigmi (62) a cura di Mario Vegetti ³Il pensiero antico: problemi e prospettive² I
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 12, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      E' uscito nel corso del 2003 un numero speciale della rivista
      "Paradigmi"
      (62) a cura di Mario Vegetti

      ³Il pensiero antico: problemi e prospettive²

      I contributi raccolti in questo fascicolo presentano ad un pubblico non
      strettamente specialistico lo 'stato dell'arte' riguardo ai principali
      ambiti di ricerca negli studi di filosofia antica.

      Contiene:

      André LAKS
      Come si scrive la storia degli inizi? A proposito dei presocratici

      Mario VEGETTI
      ÐSolo Platone non c'erað

      Enrico BERTI
      Il dibattito odierno sulla cosiddetta Ðteologiað d'Aristotele

      Anna Maria IOPPOLO
      Lo stoicismo antico

      Emidio SPINELLI
      Scetticismi antichi a confronto

      Franco FERRARI
      Verso la costruzione del sistema: Il medioplatonismo

      Alessandro LINGUITI
      Gli studi neoplatonici nel '900: Caratteri generali, tendenze attuali

      Silvia FAZZO
      L'aristotelismo come tradizione esegetica


      Sommari:


      André LAKS
      Come si scrive la storia degli inizi? A proposito dei presocratici

      How is history-written from the beginning? In addition to being the
      title of
      the essay, the question (it is obvious from the sub-title that the
      author is
      referring to a particular history, the history of philosophy) clearly
      limits
      the methodological sphere of the inquiry contained in the three sections
      comprising the article. In the first section, the concept itself of
      "beginning" is discussed which, in the title, is taken as a historical
      category; however, this concept, no less than the alternative concept of
      "origins", actually runs the risk of being exposed to the influence of
      a-historical normativism. To defend the historicity of the concept of
      beginning, in the case of philosophy, is also to defend the historicity
      of
      the concepts of Pre-Socratics and a pre-Socratic School (respectively in
      the
      second and third sections). These concepts have the further disadvantage
      of
      being tied to retrospective interpretations made by the ancients and the
      moderns regarding the "beginning" of philosophy. Through the historical
      reconstruction of the origin and evolution of these terms, the author
      identifies their potentialities and limits from the historiographic
      viewpoint and compares them with other competitive, but equally
      problematic
      terms or models, such as the term "first philosophers" or the model that
      Diels calls "biographical-individual".

      Mario VEGETTI
      ÐSolo platone non c'erað

      Recent historiographic discussion has re-proposed the two great
      paradoxes of
      Platonic exegesis: the author's absence on the scene of the dialogue
      where
      philosophical research is played out, and the use of writing against its
      well-known condemnation uttered in the Phaedrus. The article sets forth
      and
      discusses critically the various attempts to solve these paradoxes: the
      evolutionary hypotheses, the oral-esoteric interpretation, the "ironic"
      hermeneutics, and, lastly-in view of the failures of these exegetic
      strategies-the radicalization of the "dialogue approach", which seems to
      lead to the impossibility of finding beyond the dramatic contexts of the
      dialogues a systematic design of the philosophy of Plato. While
      accepting
      the essential outcomes of this approach (autonomy of the dialogues, and,
      within them, the autonomy of the characters, the impossibility of
      identifying in Socrates or in other protagonists the author's privileged
      "spokesman"), the aim here is to explore the possibility of
      identifying-based on precise textual signs-relatively constant elements
      that
      can be attributed to Plato's own style of thinking and fundamental
      philosophical theorems: that is, a "third way" between the systematic
      and
      dogmatic Plato of tradition and the annulment of the author in the
      individual, problematic contexts, which would be an indication of an
      extreme
      "Socratic" Skepticism.

      Enrico BERTI
      Il dibattito odierno sulla cosiddetta Ðteologiað d'Aristotele

      The article makes a review of the recent studies on three problems all
      in
      some way connected to the so-called "theology" of Aristotle. These are
      the
      existence or absence in Aristotle's philosophy of a discipline that can
      be
      designated by this name; the position occupied in the corpus
      aristotelicum
      by the Book Lambda of his Metaphysics where this discipline is
      traditionally
      believed to be found; and, lastly, the kind of causality that Aristotle
      attributes to the immovable mover: i.e., whether or not this is only a
      question of final causality as the traditional interpretation holds, or
      efficient as well. The author maintains that it has to do with efficient
      causality.

      Anna Maria IOPPOLO
      Lo stoicismo antico

      This contribution proposes to-provide a framework for the principal
      historiographic interpretations of ancient Stoicism by outlining the
      chief
      critical tendencies from the nineteenth century until our days. In the
      study
      of the individual Stoics and the discussion with the rival schools,
      areas
      for research are also indicated that have still not been investigated
      and
      studied in depth.

      Emidio SPINELLI
      Scetticismi antichi a confronto

      Starting from a historiographic question already raised in the ancient
      era,
      i.e., the question regarding the difference between Academic and
      Pyrrhonist
      Skepticism, the salient aspects are reconstructed (with constant
      attention
      to the most recent exegetic texts and contributions) of the positions
      taken
      in this regard by the main protagonists of the above-mentioned ancient
      Skeptic traditions (especially, respectively: Arcesilaus, Carneades,
      Philo
      of Larissa, Pyrrho, Timon, Aenesidemus, Sextus Empiricus). In addition
      to
      some characteristic notes of these two schools of thought, their
      opposing
      attitudes are highlighted regarding presumed precursors of the Skeptic
      position, and, more generally, the way of considering and reconstructing
      the
      history of previous historical thought.

      Franco FERRARI
      Verso la costruzione del sistema: Il medioplatonismo

      Authors like Eudorus, Plutarch, Atticus, Alcinous, Apuleius and Numenius
      are
      considered representatives of what is called "Middle Platonism", a term
      usually used to designate the stage in the history of ancient Platonism
      that
      can be placed between the first century BC and the beginning of the
      third
      century AD. Beyond the differences in their historiographic approaches
      and
      theoretical results, these authors appear to be moved by the common
      intention to build a philosophy of a Platonic mold that can be
      considered
      propositional and "dogmatic". This implies a substantial break with the
      Academic Skepticism that monopolized the Platonic tradition during the
      two
      previous centuries. Based on the examination of two of the principal
      philosophical motifs of Middle Platonism, the hierarchization of reality
      and
      the concept of the wicked soul, the aim is to accent the role played by
      textual exegesis in building a systematic Platonism.

      Alessandro LINGUITI
      Gli studi neoplatonici nel '900: Caratteri generali, tendenze attuali

      The decisive impulse given to the scientific study of neo-Platonism in
      the
      first part of the twentieth century came principally from the works of
      E.
      Bréhier and E.R. Dodds. The precise philological editions of the sources
      thus supported and stimulated the efforts of the interpreters, even
      though
      for decades a certain divarication was maintained between theoretical
      and
      historical-critical formulations. The generalized spread of the
      historical-critical method (also attested to by the spread of the
      "commentary" genre) produced increasingly precise and comparable
      results;
      moreover, one of the subjects explored most by research is the relation
      of
      the neo-Platonists with the philosophical and religious tradition.

      Silvia FAZZO
      L'aristotelismo come tradizione esegetica

      As part of the archaeological trends in culture during the first
      centuries
      of the imperial age, Aristotelianism was codified and took definitive
      shape
      by the era of Alexander of Aphrodisias as an exegetic tradition tied to
      the
      "on-going" commentary of the master's texts. This tradition was
      stratified
      from one commentator to another through very strong, but mostly implicit
      elements of persistence. Individual action came to light principally in
      the
      cases of *aporia* or controvertible understanding; hence traditional
      historiography's difficulties in accounting for the contribution of the
      individual commentators, and, conversely, the interest of the most
      recent
      research perspectives. [A revised and augmented version of this text,
      translated by R.W. Sharples, ³Aristotelianism as a commentary
      tradition²,
      is forthcoming with the Proceedings of the 2002 Commentators Conference,
      "Philosophy, Science and Exegesis in Greek, Arabic and Latin
      Commentaries"
      papers in honour of R. Sorabji, edited by P. Adamson, Han Baltussen and
      Martin Stone, Supplement of the Bulletin of the Institute of Classical
      Studies]


      BUON 2004!

      Silvia Fazzo [s.fazzo@...]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.