Introduction to Marsilio Ficino's Philosophy (English translation): Intellectual Development: The Discovery of a Philosophical Gift. The Organic Worldview: Man as "Intellectual Hero." Psychology: The Soul as "the Midpoint of Everything." Epistemology: The Mind as "Infinite Power." Metaphysics: The Mind-Soul as "Intellect and Will." Aesthetics: The Soul as "Artist." Reception and Updated Bibliography (selection).

Ficino in Spanish literaries -- Ficino as authority in sixteenth-century Spanish letters -- Ficino at Hermes Trismegistus : the Corpus Hermeticum or Pimander -- Persistence and adaptations of Hermetic-Neoplatonic imagery -- Ficino as Plato -- Persistence of political-economic Platonism.

Platonism, Ficino to Foucault explores some key chapters in the history Platonic philosophy from the revival of Plato in the fifteenth century to the new reading of Platonic dialogues promoted by the so-called ‘Critique of Modernity’.

The philosopher and humanist Marsilio Ficino (1433-1499) has attracted scholarly attention as translator of Plato, the Corpus Hermeticum, Plotinus and other Neoplatonists, and for his complex synthesis of Platonism and Christianity. While most previous studies of Ficino's reception have focussed on Italy, France, England and Spain, this book presents a comprehensive study of his reception in Germany and neighbouring areas, examining how Northern writers between the fifteenth and eighteenth centuries remembered and reinvented Ficino's person and work. Focused (...) chapters examine the ways German authors adapted his theories of the Ancient Theology, melancholia, celestial influence and poetic inspiration, and used his writings in related fields such as alchemy and witchcraft. It also studies those who rejected Ficino's work, providing context for those who embraced his ideas. The most comprehensive bibliography of printed editions of Ficino's work since Kristeller forms the basis for a bibliometric analysis"--Back cover. (shrink)

This paper is a comparison of some of the central ontological claims on the nature of prime matter of the Renaissance Platonist Marsilio Ficino, and the nature of space of Frane Petrić, the sixteenth century Platonist from the town of Cres. In it I argue that there are two respects in which the natural philosophies of both Platonists resemble one another, especially when it comes to the ontological status of the most basic substrate of the material world. First, both (...) Ficino and Petrić argue for the basic existence of matter and space. Second, both philosophers attribute an “ontological priority” to matter and space over what are seen as the fleeting qualities of the material world. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Marsilio Ficino’s Critique of the Lucretian AlternativeJames G. SnyderIntroductionMarsilio Ficino is perhaps most widely remembered by historians of philosophy today as a fifteenth-century Platonist and Hermeticist who advocated the soul’s flight from the sordid world of matter and body. Ficino’s major contributions to philosophy include his Latin translations of Plato and Plotinus, as well as his voluminous and encyclopedic Platonic Theology, where he argues that the (...) immortal soul occupies a privileged midpoint between God and inchoate prime matter. It therefore comes as a surprise to learn that Ficino, for a time in his early twenties, was drawn to the Roman poet Lucretius, who believed that most people are plagued by the superstitions of religiously-minded fable mongers. During this time Ficino composed a short commentary on Lucretius’ didactic Epicurean poem, On the Nature of Things. In 1417 one of the last surviving manuscript copies of this poem was found in a German monastery by the humanist Poggio Bracciolini after several centuries of dormancy.1 Also, in an early treatise on pleasure, Ficino [End Page 165] argues that the Epicurean emphasis on pleasure as the removal of pain is superior to the crass and vulgar hedonism of Aristippus.2 In time, however, Ficino developed into the Platonist that historians of philosophy are more familiar with today. He turned his back on Lucretius, destroyed his commentary on him, and he became a rigid opponent of those philosophers who, as Plato describes them in his Sophist, “insist that only what offers tangible contact is, since they define being as the same as body.”3Despite the fact that Ficino ultimately rejected Lucretius, and in a letter to the poet Angelo Poliziano claimed to have “followed the divine Plato from my youth,” it appears that he was never able to successfully put the Epicurean poet completely out of his mind.4 The specter of Lucretius—that is, the specter of a potent and fully-articulated materialism and what it entails—casts a long shadow across the eighteen books of Ficino’s Platonic Theology. This work, which was printed in 1482 and remains his most extensive philosophical treatise, gives the impression that Ficino considered Lucretius a relevant and un-eliminated alternative to his own mature philosophical vision. The Lucretian alternative, as it will here be called, aspires to show that anything that exists is a composite of matter and void alone, and that there is no need to countenance the existence of some ghostly third constituent, such as soul, in order to explain adequately the phenomena of nature or consciousness.5 Ficino’s Platonic Theology argues for a profoundly different metaphysical picture of the nature of things. There Ficino wanted to demonstrate the essential immortality of the soul, and to further clarify the best way that it can, as he puts it, “cast off the bonds of our terrestrial chains” so that it may “fly unhindered to the ethereal abode.”6 However, in order for Ficino to accomplish this, he first had to show that the Lucretian alternative is not a living hypothesis, but a dead one. Refuting Lucretius, therefore, is central to the polemical aims and aspirations of this [End Page 166] work, and it is to this end that Ficino addresses several chapters to refuting the materialism of the “vulgar” and “impious” Epicurean poet and philosopher. The Lucretian alternative also explains in part why Ficino discusses, sometimes at great length, the nature of matter and body, especially in the early books of his Platonic Theology. The core argument that Ficino brings against the Lucretian alternative is that its materialist ontology is at best incomplete, and that something else—some ghostly incorporeal principle— is in fact necessary in order to adequately explain the nature of things.Both the Renaissance recovery of On the Nature of Things, and the subsequent role that it played in the advancement of early modern philosophy and science, are familiar to historians of philosophy today.7 Ficino’s fifteenth-century critique of Lucretius, however, is not. Nearly half a century ago Paul Oskar Kristeller noted that in the 1450s Ficino came under the influence of Lucretius, and he further speculated that “a trace... (shrink)

Cet article est une comparaison de certaines affirmations ontologiques sur la nature de la matière première chez le platonicien de la Renaissance Marsilio Ficino et sur la nature de l’espace chez Frane Petrić, platonicien du XVIème siècle issu de la ville de Cres. J’y soutiens que les philosophies naturelles des deux platoniciens se ressemblent à deux égards, notamment en ce qui concerne le statut ontologique du substrat le plus fondamental du monde matériel. D’abord, Ficino comme Petrić soutiennent l’existence (...) fondamentale de la matière et de l’espace. Deuxièmement, les deux philosophes attribuent la « priorité ontologique » à la matière et à l’espace sur ce qui est considéré comme qualités éphémères du monde materiel. (shrink)

Marsilio Ficino, fonti, testi, fortuna, convegno svoltosi à Firenze nell'ottobre del 1999, viene a chiudere la serie degli incontri internazionali coordinati dal Comitato Internazionale Marsilio Ficino e ora pubblicati a Londra e a Parigi. Il volume offre le versioni aggiornate delle conferenze pubbliche tenute all'Istituto Nazionale di Studi sul Rinascimento in quella occasione sull'opera ed il pensiero di Ficino, dal Quattrocento al Seicento. Il suo taglio prevalentemente filologico costituisce un imprescindibile complemento alle pubblicazioni del 1984-86, sempre in (...) onore del Ficino, di cui arrichisce le conclusioni con nuove prospettive di ricerca e nuove scoperte sul maggior filosofo del Quattrocento italiano. Un indice dei nomi agevola la consultazione del lettore, che troverà in questo libro uno strumento di ricerca fondamentale. (shrink)

This book makes the case for Marsilio Ficino, a Renaissance philosopher and priest, as a canonical thinker, and provides an introduction for a broad audience. Sophia Howlett examines him as part of the milieu of Renaissance Florence, part of a history of Platonic philosophy, and as a key figure in the ongoing crisis between classical revivalism and Christian belief. The author discusses Ficino's vision of a Platonic Christian universe with multiple worlds inhabited by angels, daemons and pagan gods, (...) as well as our own distinctive role within that universe - climbing the heights to talk with angels yet constantly confused by the evidence of our own senses. Ficino as the "new Socrates" suggests to us that by changing ourselves, we can change our world. (shrink)

Marsilio Ficino, Protegé Cosimos, Pieros und Lorenzos von Medici, gilt als Zentralgestalt des italienischen Renaissance-Platonismus. Mit den Übersetzungen der Dialoge Platons, der Schriften Plotins und des Corpus Hermeticum sowie durch eine theoretische Verknüpfung von antiker Philosophie mit christlicher Religion übte er einen unübersehbar grossen Einfluss auf die europäische Wissenschafts- und Geistesgeschichte aus. Im Zentrum seines Theorie-Gebäudes steht ein komplexes Konzept von Magie, dessen Konstruktion bis heute erforscht wird. Es hat dem Band den Titel gegeben, dessen Themen sich Ficinos intellektuellem (...) Horizont entsprechend jedoch in eine Vielzahl weiterer Aspekte ausdifferenzieren. Diese literarisch-künstlerischen, literaturwissenschaftlichen, wissenschaftshistorischen und philosophisch-theologischen Implikationen von Ficinos Schriften werden paradigmatisch und vergleichend behandelt. (shrink)

Ovaj članak je usporedba nekih od centralnih ontoloških stavova o naravi prve materije renesansnog platonista Marsilia Ficina te naravi prostora Frane Petrića, platonista 16. stoljeća iz grada Cresa. U njemu tvrdim da postoje dva aspekta u kojima prirodne filozofije oba platonista nalikuju jedna drugoj, naročito po pitanju ontološkog statusa najtemeljnijeg supstrata materijalnog svijeta. Kao prvo, i Ficino i Petrić se zalažu za temeljnu egzistenciju materije i prostora. Kao drugo, oba filozofa pridaju »ontološki prioritet« materiji i prostoru nad onim što (...) se smatra da su prolazne kvalitete materijalnog svijeta. (shrink)

Dieser Artikel ist ein Vergleich einiger der signifikanten ontologischen Behauptungen über die Natur der ersten Materie des renaissancistischen Platonikers Marsilio Ficino und über das Gepräge des Raums Frane Petrićs, eines aus der Stadt Cres stammenden Platonikers des 16. Jahrhunderts. Darin vertrete ich die Ansicht, es bestünden zwei Hinsichten, in denen die natürlichen Philosophien beider Platoniker einander ähnelten, speziell in puncto ontologischer Sachlage des grundlegendsten Substrats der materiellen Welt. Zuallererst treten sowohl Ficino wie auch Petrić für eine fundamentale Existenz (...) der Materie und des Raums ein. Zweitens messen die beiden Philosophen der Materie und dem Raum eine „ontologische Priorität“ zu über die als flüchtig erachteten Qualitäten der materiellen Welt. (shrink)

Plato’s Gorgias sets out to discuss the nature and aim of rhetoric. The dialogue was held in high esteem among late ancient Platonists and it resurfaced in Renaissance discussions about ethics. Olympiodorus produced an extensive commentary on the dialogue, emphasising its ethical content. In 1409, Leonardo Bruni provided the first complete Latin translation of the Gorgias with preface and annotations. Later in the Renaissance we find direct and indirect commentaries by George of Trebizond and Marsilio Ficino. I argue that (...) Ficino’s translation of, and commentary to, Plato’s Gorgias was a significant, but perhaps also unintended, contribution to the dissemination of ancient sophists in the Italian Renaissance. Ficino’s commentary to the Gorgias defends a legitimate and philosophical use of rhetoric, including the one we find in Plato’s own writings. Furthermore, Ficino treats the character Callicles – together with several other sophists in Plato’s dialogues – as an enemy of the Platonic-Pythagorean ethical ideal, maintaining that the sophists were wrong. Moreover, he treats ancient sophists as a fairly homogeneous group, unlike some of the ancient sources. (shrink)

This first complete study of Marsilio Ficino’s _Commentary on Plotinus_, published in 1492, will serve as the definitive analysis of Ficino’s late philosophy and also as an essential companion to Gersh’s edition-translation of the same work.

This volume consists of 21 essays on Marsilio Ficino (1433-99), the Florentine scholar-philosopher-magus-priest who was the architect of Renaissance Platonism.

Among the items in his legacy, the Florentine philosopher and humanist Marsilio Ficino (1433-1499) left an extensive collection of Latin letters, which illustrate his studies and how he viewed himself as a teacher and counselor of princes. This book provides an introduction to this letter collection, analyzing selected letters with reference to the roles adopted by the author and his literary strategies.

Did the Florentine philosopher Marsilio Ficino (1433-99) influence the art of his time? Art historians have been fiercely debating this question for decades. This book starts with Ficino's views on the imagination as a faculty of the soul, and shows how these ideas were part of a long philosophical tradition and inspired fresh insights. This approach, combined with little known historical material, offers a new understanding of whether, how and why Ficino's Platonic conceptions of the imagination may (...) have been received in the art of the Italian Renaissance. The discussion explores Ficino's possible influence on the work of Botticelli and Michelangelo, and examines the appropriation of Ficino's ideas by early modern art theorists. (shrink)

El pensamiento humanista y cristiano se da la mano en un hombre como Marsilio Ficino, que desde el furor religioso y platónico se acerca a a la religiosidad renacentista. Un espíritu que se ha distinguido, principalmente, por dos conceptos: paz y tolerancia.

In 1484, humanist philosopher and theologian Marsilio Ficino published the first complete Latin translation of Plato's extant works. Students of Plato now had access to the entire range of the dialogues, which revealed to Renaissance audiences the rich ancient landscape of myths, allegories, philosophical arguments, etymologies, fragments of poetry, other works of philosophy, aspects of ancient pagan religious practices, concepts of mathematics and natural philosophy, and the dialogic nature of the Platonic corpus's interlocutors. By and large, Renaissance readers in (...) the Latin West encountered Plato's text through Ficino's translations and interpretation. -/- In Plato's Persona, Denis J.-J. Robichaud provides the first synthetic study of Ficino's interpretation of the Platonic corpus. Robichaud analyzes Plato's works in their original Greek and in Ficino's Latin translations, as well as Ficino's non-Platonic writings and correspondence, in the process uncovering new aspects of Ficino's intellectual work habits. In his letters and works, Ficino self-consciously imitated a Platonic style of prose, in effect devising a persona for himself as a Platonic philosopher. Plato's dialogues are populated with a wealth of literary characters with whom Plato interacts and against whom Plato refines his own philosophies. Reading through Ficino's translations, Robichaud finds that the Renaissance philosopher seeks an understanding of Plato's persona(e) among all the dialogues' interlocutors. In effect, Ficino assumed the role of Plato's Latin spokesperson in the Renaissance. -/- Plato's Persona is grounded in an extensive study of scholarship in Renaissance humanism, classics, philosophy, and intellectual history, and contextualizes Ficino's intellectual achievements within the contemporary Christian orthodox view of Platonism. Ficino was an influential figure in the early Italian Renaissance: the key intermediary between Greek and Latin, and between manuscript and print, giving voice to Plato and access to the ancient frameworks needed to interpret his dialogues. (shrink)

A selection of writings by the fifteenth-century philosopher and magus Marsilio Ficino, on the subject of astrology and natural magic. The editor's introduction provides a substantial historical and philosophical context for this figure and explains Ficino's astrology in relation to his Christian Platonic convictions"--Provided by publisher.

Marsilio Ficino was not only the first translator and commentator of Plato's and Plotinus's Opera omnia. He also developed a fascinating and highly complex synthesis of Platonism, Christian doctrine, Renaissance magic, and medicine. Well beyond the sixteenth century, Ficino's texts were very influential. Over the past four decades, authors like Michael Allen, Brian Copenhaver, James Hankins, and Valery Rees have substantially increased our awareness of Ficino's intricate and substantial contributions to the Platonic tradition and...

_ Source: _Volume 54, Issue 1, pp 46 - 107 The present paper discusses the question of Marsilio Ficino’s lost translations of Proclus’ _Elements of Physics_ and _Elements of Theology_. It reviews all known evidence for Ficino’s work on the _Elements of Physics_ and _Elements of Theology_, examines new references and fragments of these texts in Ficino’s manuscripts, especially in his personal manuscript of Plotinus’ _Enneads_, and studies how they fit within the Florentine’s philosophical oeuvre. The present (...) case studies of manuscript evidence demonstrate how Proclus accompanied Ficino from his early ‘scholastic background’ through to his mastery of the Platonic tradition late in his career, especially, as is shown, in his study of Pseudo-Dionysius and Plotinus. Despite the fact that scholarship at times pits scholasticism and Renaissance Platonism against each other, in this sense Proclus—largely due to the _Elements_—bridges the two cultures. (shrink)

Paul Richard Blum Et nuper Plethon – Ficino's Praise of Georgios Gemistos ABSTRACT Most authors who refer to Marsilio Ficino's famous Prooemium to his translation of Plotinus, addressed to Lorenzo de'Medici, discuss the alleged foundation of the Platonic Academy in Florence, but rarely continue reading down the same page, where – for a second time – Georgios Gemistos Plethon is mentioned. The passage contains more than one surprising claim: 1. Pletho is a reliable interpreter of Aristotle. 2. Pletho (...) and Pico are the most recent Aristotelians, more precisely, they are the latest candle bearers of true Aristotelian tradition. 3. Pletho, alongside with the other authors mentioned, is religiously orthodox. In this paper I show that these statements are contrafactual, and discuss the reasons for Ficino's attempt at making Plethon and Pico his allies. Ficino suggests that Pico and Pletho are representatives of such "philosophic religion" that eventually might convert the Aristotelians to the same piety that unites Pico, Plethon, and the Platonizing interpreters of Aristotle. Pletho's agenda was to restore ancient pagan wisdom in order not to supplant Christianity. Ficino's device to counter corrupt Aristetelianism is to create a counter-tradition, that parallels Platonism, namely the pious reading of Aristotle. He employed the figure of young Pico as having urged him to translate Plotinus. Pico serves as a step stone between the Council of Florence, when in 1439 Cosimo encountered Pletho, and the new translation of Plotinus. The divine inspiration, instilled by Pletho and forwarded from Cosimo via Pico to Ficino christianizes the project, which would sound dubitable, if related only to Pletho. Thus Pico was to help saving Ficino's reputation as a religious philosopher. For this purpose, Ficino had to parallel Pletho with the unsuspected Pico, to the effect that Pletho becomes so to say christened. (shrink)

Although Leibniz characterised himself in the “New Essays” as a “Platonic” as opposed to a “Democritean” philosopher, his intellectual relationship with the most famous of the Renaissance Neoplatonists, Marsilio Ficino, has received little attention. Here we review what can be thus far established regarding Leibniz’s acquaintance with portions of Ficino’s Opera omnia of 1576. We compare Ficino’s disenchantment with the atomistic materialism of Lucretius, which he had favoured in his youth, and his turn to Platonism for inspiration, (...) with Leibniz’s own reported disenchantment with Gassendi’s Epicurean atomism and his invention of a vitalistic monadology that, despite Leibniz’s reservations regarding Ficinian magic, resembles Ficinian nature philosophy in number of striking respects. (shrink)

Eighteen essays re examine Ficino's life and work focusing on three essential aspects: his significance in his own times, his spreading influence throughout Europe and over subsequent centuries in many areas of thought and creativity, and his enduring relevance today. Translation of his major works from Latin enables a new generation to rediscover and share Ficino's vision of human potential.

Eighteen essays re examine Ficino's life and work focusing on three essential aspects: his significance in his own times, his spreading influence throughout Europe and over subsequent centuries in many areas of thought and creativity, and his enduring relevance today. Translation of his major works from Latin enables a new generation to rediscover and share Ficino's vision of human potential.

This contribution focuses on Ficino's letters and woks in which he defends the art of medicine and its value for the human beings.