"Aristotle's On Interpretation, the centrepiece of his logic, examines the relationship between conflicting pairs of statements. The first eight chapters, analysed in this volume, explain what statements are, starting from their basic components - the words - and working up to the character of opposed affirmations and negations." "Ammonius, who in his capacity as Professor at Alexandria from around A.D. 470 taught almost all the great sixth-century commentators, left just this one commentary in his own name, although his lectures (...) on other works of Aristotle have been written up by his pupils, who included Philoponus and Asclepius. His ideas on Aristotle's On Interpretation were derived partly from his own teacher, Proclus, and partly from the great lost commentary of Porphyry. The two most important extant commentaries on On Interpretation, of which this is one, both draw on Porphyry's work, which can be to some extent reconstructed from them."--BOOK JACKET.Title Summary field provided by Blackwell North America, Inc. All Rights Reserved. (shrink)

Commentaries on Aristotle's writings have been produced since the 2nd century AD. This edition contains Greek commentaries on his work from the 3rd to the 8th centuries AD by, among others, Alexander of Aphrodiensias, Themistios, Joh. Philoponus, Simplicius in Greek.

Commentaries on Aristotle's writings have been produced since the 2nd century AD. This edition contains Greek commentaries on his work from the 3rd to the 8th centuries AD by, among others, Alexander of Aphrodiensias, Themistios, Joh. Philoponus, Simplicius in Greek.

Chapter 9 of Aristotle's 'On Interpretation' deals with determinism, and here the two influential commentaries of Ammonius and Boethius have been published together.

Ever since Aristotle's famous argument about the sea-battle tomorrow, there has been intensive and controversial discussion among philosophers whether the truth of statements about the future leads to determinism. Ther e is controversy about Aristotle's own solution to the problem, as well as the views of classical and medieval commentators on Aristotle. Seel's book attempts to answer this question for the Neoplatonist Ammonius (5th-6th century AD). In so doing, he also opens up new insights into Neoplatonic thought.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the source of Plutarch's inspiration for the impressive discourse which he presents from the lips of Ammonius in the De E apud Delphos, and in particular for the following much-quoted passage.

L’exégèse de l’Isagoge de Porphyre par Ammonius et, partant, son interprétation des célèbres lignes 1.9-12 sont les premières chronologiquement à nous avoir été préservées. Bien que l’essence de cette interprétation, la soi-disant doctrine des trois états de l’universel, soit aujourd’hui bien connue, la section du commentaire dans laquelle elle apparaît n’a jusqu’ici jamais été entièrement traduite. L’article qui suit présente une traduction complète du commentaire d’Ammonius sur l’Isagoge 1.9-12, précédée d’une brève introduction.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the source of Plutarch's inspiration for the impressive discourse which he presents from the lips of Ammonius in the De E apud Delphos, and in particular for the following much-quoted passage.

According to Philoponus, the activity of drawing syllogisms is a dynamic operation. Following the classical idea that actions are specified by their objects and habitual powers by their actions, Philoponus concludes that only a dynamic power can elicit the act of syllogizing. This power is identified with discursive reasoning (dianoia). Imagination, on the contrary, is a static power, that cannot elicit that particular motion of drawing a syllogistic inference. The issue, however, is not entirely uncontroversial, because Ammonius maintains that (...) sophistical syllogisms can only be formed by imagination, since they involve “empty concepts” as terms and only imagination can form such concepts. In this paper I will reconstruct Philoponus’ and Ammonius’ theories about the “activity” of syllogizing, and I shall explain how Philoponus can deal with sophistical syllogisms in a consistent way. (shrink)

Seit dem 2. nachchristlichen Jahrhundert werden die Schriften von Aristoteles kommentiert. Diese Ausgabe enthält griechische Kommentare zu seinem Werk vom 3. bis 8. Jahrhundert n. Chr., u. a. von Alexander von Aphrodiensias, Themistios, Joh. Philoponus, Simplicius in griechischer Sprache.

L’article se propose de vérifier le caractère néoplatonicien de la métaphysique d’Ammonius, fils d’Hermias, dans le dialogue intitulé Ammonius de Zacharie de Mytilène. Jusqu’à présent la recherche a cru pouvoir conclure de ce texte que la pensée d’Ammonius se rapprochait à certains égards du christianisme. Plusieurs éléments dans l’ Ammonius prouvent pourtant sans équivoque que le chef d’école alexandrin est resté fidèle au néoplatonisme païen, et notamment à la distinction proclusienne entre l’éternité divine et la perpétuité (...) du monde. (shrink)

ABSTRACT: This paper collects the evidence in Ammonius' surviving works for elements of a propositional logic, coming to the conclusion that Ammonius had a theory of hypothetical syllogisms in the tradition of Aristotle and the Peripatetics, with Platonic elements mixed in, and using some Stoic elements, but not a propositional logic in the narrower sense as we find it in Stoic logic.

We have two neoplatonic commentaries on the crucial chapter in Aristotle's De Interpretatione on fatalism.

Damascius of Damascus, last ‘Platonic successor’ in Athens, is rarely compared to one of his masters, namely Ammonius, the philosopher of Alexandria. When scholars do compare the two Neoplatonist philosophers, they usually focus on the negative picture of Ammonius, which is drawn by Damascius in his Philosophical History. In this paper, I argue that Damascius admired Ammonius’ intellectual endeavours and espoused a basic feature of the philosophical exegesis of his master, namely his concordism regarding the philosophies of (...) Plato and Aristotle, as is evident in Damascius’ surviving work on Plato and his (fragmentarily preserved) treatise On Time. Damascius’ downgrading of Ammonius came about rather as a disappointment, which is however by no means fully justified. (shrink)