Alexander of Aphrodisias was a Peripatetic philosopher and the most celebrated of the Ancient Alexander’s dedication of On Fate to Septimius Severus and Caracalla, in gratitude for his position at Athens, indicates a date between and. Alexander of Aphrodisias’ Ethical Problems R. W. Sharples (Tr.): Alexander of Aphrodisias, Ethical Problems. (Ancient Commentators on Aristotle.) Pp. Alexander of Aphrodisias on Fate: Text, Translation, and Commentary. Alexander (ed.) Alexander of Aphrodisias in Ancient Greek and Roman Philosophy.
|Published (Last):||24 January 2011|
|PDF File Size:||5.40 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||13.64 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Well then, they say that this universe, which is one and contains in itself all that exists, and is organised by a Nature which is alive, rational and intelligent, possesses the organisation of the things that are, which is eternal and progresses according to a certain sequence and order; the things which come to be first are causes for those after them, and in this way all things are bound together with one another. See Sosigenes the Peripatetic.
Alexander of Aphrodisias’ Ethical Problems R.
Alexander of Lycopolis – – Brill. De anima II MantissaAlessandria: Routledge, — Sharples, R.
Sign in Create an account. Themes frorm the Work of Richard SorabjiOxford: As his analyses show, Alexander was not an original logician with innovative ideas of his own, as was his contemporary, Galen. Since Porphyry lived considerably later than Alwxander ca. Alexander also presents, albeit in a dialectical fashion intended to lead to the defeat of the Stoic tenets, the arguments used by the Stoics in their defense of contingency, chance, and human responsibility.
Alexander of Aphrodisias – Wikipedia
The Sea Battle and the Master Argument: This appears to be not very different from the Stoic Chrysippus ‘ idea that one can assent or dissent to an action.
But then he adds a justification to explain why Aristotle acknowledges neither of the two causes in his report on Plato 59,28—60,2: Text, Translation, and Commentary.
Scholars nowadays continue to make use of his commentaries, not only for historical reasons but also because his suggestions are often worth considering in their own right.
Sarah Broadie – – The Journal of Ethics 5 1: Alexander says those alexanver make this argument are childish or joking, and do not know what they are talking about.
He does not always get Aristotle right and sometimes blunders in his exegesis. Or is it possible to preserve [the thesis] that nothing comes to be without a cause, even though matters are as we state?
From the Publisher via CrossRef no proxy journals. Whether his polemics against contemporary versions of Stoic aphrodisiias were part of a personal exchange or rather a bookish exercise is unclear. Sharples3 indicates, these three books address problems in natural philosophy in the broadest sense.
Alexander of Aphrodisias
Fate itself, Nature, and the reason according to which the whole aphrodiisias organised, they assert to be God; it is present in all that is and comes to be, and in this way employs the individual nature of every thing for the organisation of the whole.
On the Cosmospage 4. For aalexander is not the case that, if all things that come to be have causes, therefore all things must necessarily have causes. For it does not follow of necessity that, just aphrodisiss Sophroniscus exists, he must therefore be a father and the cause of some one of those after him. De Gruyter,II. W,Alexander of Aphrodisias: If there was not, Alexander clearly filled a significant gap. Academic Tools How to cite this entry.
If however Socrates is to exist, of necessity Sophroniscus is the cause of his coming-to-be. On Aristotle Metaphysics A59, 1—9: University Press of America. The resit will consists of one examination, a paper. On the Cosmospage 6.