Featuring chapters by leading international scholars in Ancient Philosophy, the is a comprehensive one volume reference to guide to Socrates' thought.

This chapter contains sections titled: The Servant of Apollo The Daimonion Other Varieties of Religious Experience.

“Eric Voegelin's Philosophy of Myth” is an introduction to the eminent political philosopher's theory of the nature and function of myth in pre-modern cultures, particularly in ancient Greece and Mesopotamia. For Voegelin archaic myths and symbols provide grounds or foundations for a broad range of phenomena, from individual objects and events to the entire cosmos. They convey a sense of wholeness and interconnectedness through a type of analogical thinking. The concepts of ‘compactness’ and ‘differentiation’ are essential components in his overall (...) theory. The former designates the unity of the symbol and the symbolized, the latter their separation into immanent and transcendent poles in the reflections of Greek philosophers and of Jewish and Christian thinkers. Both compact and differentiated accounts employ the symbols of the Beginning and Beyond, viz. the originating source of all things and their transcendent goal. Voegelin's treatment of the mythical and philosophical styles of truth is not limited to the distant past. Throughout history individual myths or symbols lose their transformative power, but, he asserts, they are regenerated or replaced by new ones discovered by great souls who have experiential access to the underlying realities. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:544 BOOK REVIEWS vide critical editions of the contributions by Richard Rufus and·-even more important-Richard Fishacre to the theology of Oxford and the continent Bayerishe Akademie der Wissenschaften Munich, West Germany RICH.ARD SCHENK, O.P. The Logic of Being: Historical Studies. Edited by SIMO KNUUTTIL.A and J.A.AKKO HINTIKK.A. Synthese Historical Library, 28. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1985. Pp. xvi + 300 pp. $54.00 (cloth). Unlike many examples of the genre, this (...) collection of articles on the concept of being from Parmenides to Frege should and will be profitably consulted by philosophers of various stripes. Whether read piecemeal or straight through, these investigations carry on an open-ended dialogue in which historians of philosophy, philosophers of logic, and semanticists can participate equally. The editors are to be commended for presenting eleven articles (about an equal number of previously published and new studies) that are generally complementary to one another. What makes the collection so useful and interesting·, however much one disagrees with the thesis, is its concentrated focus on the difficulties of attributing to philosophers from Plato to Kant the Frege-Russell view that verbs for being are multiply ambiguous. It will perhaps be useful 'to begin with the concluding essay,· L. Haaparanta 's study " On Frege's Concept of Being," where the ambiguity thesis is discussed in greatest detail. She presents Frege's well-known articulation of the meanings of the verb ' to be ' as follows : (1) the is of identity (2) the is of predication (3) the is of existence, expressed by means either (i) of the existential quantifier and the symbol for identity or (ii) of the existential quantifier and the symbol for predication (4) the is of class-inclusion or generic implication Two points are worth noting. First, most of the contributors explore the ambiguity with reference to the is of identity, predication, and existence. Sceond, while ithe verb has several different meanings for Frege, most of the other philosophers discussed distinguish, at most, different uses. Many of the arguments against applying Frege's ambiguity thesis to earlier philosophers depend on this distinction between meaning and use; I will assess its cogency in specific contexts as they arise. BOOK REVIEWS 545 In Frege's analysis the crucial distinction is between the first-order copulative is and existence, a second-order concept. Since in Frege's view existence is a property of a first-order concept, it must lack all content. Haaparanta sums up the position well: "We presuppose the existence of objects; we do not say that they exist. For Frege, every predication carries with itself the claim of existence" (277). Influenced by Kant's argument that u existence is not predicate of a thing itself," Frege is willing to regard it as a proper concept, but not a first-order concept. This superordination of existence sounds reminiscent of Aristotle 's focus on predication and identity at the expense of existence (here it is better to speak of subordination, as the studies of Dancy and Hintikka on Aristotle indicate), but Frege's sharp distinction between concepts and objects is much closer to the Kantian position that we cannot know the essence of things in themselves. Thus, existence is a conceptual property though applicable to the instantiation of an object's properties; and identity statements, since they concern objects in themselves, are beyond the ken of reason. Certainly, Frege's thesis is " epistemologically motivated", as Haaparanta observes, but one is tempted to adopt a stronger conclusion: that the shift from an Aristotelian, or even Thomistic, ontology to Kantian epistemology contributes greatly to the emergence of the ambiguity thesis and renders it inapplicable to ancient and medieval metaphysics, even if, as Hintikka argues ("Kant on Existence and Predication"), Kant does not clearly distinguish different meanings of is·. The first four articles present a multi-faceted assault on the contemporary penchant for reading the Frege-Russell ambiguity thesis into the Greek philosophers. C. H. Kahn's ''Retrospect on the Verb ' To Be' and the Concept of Being " is a useful precis of his indispensable work on the Greek verb for being. His particular concern is to further the "campaign against the uncritically ' existential ' interpretation... (shrink)

It is difficult to imagine a major philosopher more in need of introduction than Plotinus, nor one whose thought is so deeply resistant to summary treatment. O'Meara succeeds by awakening the beginner's interest in his subject and reminding the specialist why it is so fascinating. First we are familiarized with the details of Plotinus's life, the diverse influences upon him, stylistic features of his writings, and remarks on his philosophical method. One hundred pages are devoted to exploring Plotinus's philosophical views, (...) beginning with his complex account of soul's relation to body and the intelligible world's relation to the sensible. O'Meara carefully articulates Plotinus's immaterialism, his comprehensive scheme of hierarchical ontological dependence, and the dense dialectical context within which he seeks to solve difficulties in Plato's positions by responding to Aristotelian and Stoic objections. Chapter 4 tackles Plotinus's very difficult views on knowledge. He severely devalues knowledge of the external world, arguing that it is only a deficient form of self-knowledge. True knowledge pertains to the divine intellect, which is self-reflexive and identical with its "objects." O'Meara rightly wonders whether Plotinus's epistemological stance amounts to a retreat and indeed whether he eliminates knowledge altogether, at least in the contemporary sense. But if--from the Plotinian perspective--pure thought is nonpropositional, it is puzzling why O'Meara believes it is not intuitive, not "a form of knowing that is an alternative... to science and logic" ; in his view, it is the "goal" of the latter. It might, however, be the goal of scientific knowledge precisely by being an alternative to it. (shrink)

This volume contains substantially revised versions of eleven papers delivered at the Fifth Symposium Hellenisticum in France in 1989. Approaches vary from the philosophical to the historical-philological, and the scholarship is consistently excellent. The three French contributors offer exhaustive historical studies. Best of this lot is André Laks's brilliant effort to disentangle threads of the Cyrenaic tradition in Diogenes Laertius 2.8696. He argues that the later Cyrenaic Anniceris is not an innovator as has been argued recently, but that, despite his (...) emphasis on psychic pleasures, Anniceris upholds the traditional line on the primacy of somatic pleasure. The point at issue, really, is whether considering altruistic feelings like friendship and gratitude as pleasures amounts to innovating. J. -L. Labarrière traces the debates between Stoics and Academics concerning animal faculties, especially phantasia. Carlos Levy looks at how the term doxa was wielded as a polemical weapon by early Stoics, the New Academy, and Middle Platonists. Next come three fine papers on Epicurus. Gisela Striker relieves our perplexity at Epicurus's conception of complete pleasure as the absence of pain, illuminating the Epicurean distinction between "kinetic" and "static" pleasures in Cicero's De Finibus. Epicurus identifies happiness with the greatest pleasure, or complete pleasure, which is complete absence of pain--not the accumulation of particular pleasures. Epicurus's views on free agency, surviving in the fragments of book 3 of On Nature, lead Julia Annas to conclude that rationality is associated with flexibility of response and ability to learn, and that rational capacity may very well develop in ways that are not fixed by our atomic constitutions. One might quarrel with her observation that this simple commonsense view is attractive. Finally, David Furley points out that Democritus doubted the senses' ability to reveal truth, while Epicurus claimed that "all perceptions are true." Yet both atomists deny that sensible qualities exist at the level of primary elements. The explanation? Epicureans accept perceptible qualities as properties of external objects, not merely "affections" of the senses; for Democritus aisthem;ta have no reality independent of us. (shrink)

This scintillating collection gathers twelve important papers by Jacques Brunschwig. Dating from 1977 to 1990, all but one have appeared only in French and two are previously unpublished. No justification is required for making these exciting, influential papers available to a wider audience. In each paper Brunschwig focuses on a key problem, a puzzle, or a text that is recalcitrant to interpretation, employing marvelous erudition in classical philology, encyclopedic knowledge of Hellenistic philosophy, and subtle familiarity with contemporary philosophy.

The book is divided into four parts. Part 1 surveys biographical information and the complex philological and doxographical evidence that affect questions about authenticity. Part 2 provides an excellent overview of Philolaus's philosophy that is notable both for its clarity and mastery of the scholarly literature. The heart of the book comes in Part 3, which comprises the genuine fragments and testimonia with elaborate philological and philosophical commentary. The genuine texts are divided into seven groups: Basic Principles, Epistemology, Cosmogony, Astronomy, (...) Embryology and Medicine, Soul and Psychic Faculties, Miscellaneous. Huffman helpfully encapsulates the contemporary Greek philosophical theories on offer in each area of thought. Part 4 includes the Spurious and Doubtful Fragments and Testimonia, an important category given Huffman's rejection of fragments considered genuine by others. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:740 BOOK REVIEWS Middle Platonism and Neoplatonism: The Latin Tradition. By STEPHEN GERSH, Publications in Medieval Studies, No. 23, edited by Ralph Mcinerny. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1986. Vol. I: Pp. xx+ 413. Vol. II: Pp. xviii+ 500. $75 (cloth). In his new book Stephen Gersh pursues an ambitious and worthy goal: to provide an encyclopedic survey, from Cicero to Boethius, of the Platonists who (...) wrote in Latin and wern the primary sources for the diffusion of Platonic doctrine in the Christian Middle Ages. Those interested in the subject will be delighted to learn that this study, despite its massive scale, is actually an introduction to a large project -the hiSJtory of the mediev1al Platonic tradition, especially in the eighth, ninth and eleventh centuries. These volumes (in conjunction with the succeeding volumes) will be of great interest both to medievalists and to historians of philosophy in late antiquity. The introduction addresses several important historical questions, the most important of which is the relationship between Plato and later Platonism. Like may historians of late antique and medieval philosophy Gersh sees the Middle Platonists and Neoplatonists as much more faithful followers of Plato.than most scholars of ancient philosophy would concede. His argument for the rapprochement of Plato and later Platonists follows the tradition of eminent scholars like Festugiere and de Vogel; in the end he rejects, justifiably I think, a rigid distinction hetween Platonic doctrine on the one hand and the uncritical, syncretistic Platonism of the Neoplatonists on the other in favor of the view that later Platonists made explicit doctrine out of the implicit statements and casual remarks of Plato. My only complaint is with Gersh's procedure: anyone unfamiliar with the stormy debates on the issue of Neoplatonic fidelity to Plato will finish his discussion with little awareness of the serious problems of interpretation that will perhaps always remain. Another question raised is: Which thinkers should be discussed? Though he clearly recognizes the significant role played by patristic writers in transmitting Platonic doctrine to the Middle Ages, Gersh chooses to limit the study to pagan sources or those, like Boethius, who write in the pagan philosophical tradivion. The strategy is certainly valid, given the great dependence of the Fathers on the indirect tradition, but more extensive consideration of their _widely varying attitudes towards the assimilation of Platonism into Christian philosophy would have ·been desirable. Significant difficulties are sidestepped when Christian writers are classified under the rubrics of ' Christian Middle BOOK REVIEWS 741 Platonic' and 'Christian Neoplatonic '. Under the latter Gersh includes Augustine despite the fact that in many respects-e.g. on the ineffability of the First Principle, rigorous application of negative theology, and the status of the intelligible world-Augustine's views are much closer to Middle Platonism than to Neoplatonism. This is often true of the Greek Fathers as well, despite their closer familiarity with Plotinian texts. A more precise demarcation of the lines of influence is required here. The study is divided into chapters devoted to exposition of the views of the major Latin writers who served as sources for medieval writers (approximate length of chapters fa noted in parentheses ) : Cicero (100), Seneca (40), Gellius (15), Apuleius (15), the Latin Asclepius (60), Calcidius (70), Macrobius (105), Martianus Capella (50), Boethius (70), several excursuses on minor authors, and an appendix on Varro (30). The size and quality of several chapters make them among the most important studies in English of their subjects, especially in the cases of Cicero, Apuleius, Calcidius, Macrobius, and the Latin Asclepius. Each section is arranged roughly in the same manner: an introductory footnote (often running to several pages) which provides in exhaustive detail the bibliography on an author's influence in the Middle Ages; an account of the author's dates, works, and influences on him; and finally an exposition of central doctrines, the heart of each chapter. To organize this extensive doxographical tour Gersh explains how each writer treats the same metaphysical themes: the relation of macrocosm to microcosm and of transcendence to immanence ; the nature of the first and second principles; the theory of forms; and the nature of the soul. If one wishes to ascertain the... (shrink)

With this volume all of the late Gregory Vlastos's papers on the philosophy of Socrates have appeared in their final form. As promised in the introduction to Socrates, Ironist and Moral Philosopher, this volume contains revised versions of four previously published essays and additional material. Readers of Vlastos's Platonic Studies and SIMP are aware of the elaborate genealogies of these works. These books, which lack cohesion and unity, are collections of independent articles: each is a closely focused study of a (...) central problem that undergoes several stages of development--lecture, journal article, response to criticisms of an article, and so forth. The present collection is taken from the same mold. In relation to SIMP this volume represents less a sequel than a prequel. The three major papers presented here in revised form--"The Socratic Elenchus," "Socrates' Disavowal of Knowledge," and "The Historical Socrates and Athenian Democracy"--were published earlier than all but one of the eight chapters of SIMP. Vlastos's original article on the elenchus was a classic like his great article on the Third Man Argument in the Parmenides : both spawned scholarly cottage-industries, and both have been superseded in important respects. Burnyeat notes in his editorial preface that this essay is the most revised, which appears to be true. However, Vlastos has not adequately responded to critics of his central claim that the elenchus can be used constructively to discover and confirm moral truths. The important nonconstructivist interpretation of Hugh Benson is not even mentioned. And the searching critiques by his fellow constructivists Richard Kraut and the team of Thomas Brickhouse and Nicholas Smith are addressed in rather piecemeal fashion. Nevertheless, it is useful to have the paper available in book form even with these minimal revisions. (shrink)

This is an old-fashioned and refreshing study that focuses on literary style, rhetoric, irony, and imagery, which Rutherford rightly thinks complement philosophical analysis of Plato. Rutherford draws connections between the dialogues and other genres and styles of writing rather than between Plato and other philosophers. We are invited to pick up these texts, as if for the first time: "the Platonic dialogue is too familiar, too central to the classical tradition, for us to realise how remarkable it must have seemed (...) at first". (shrink)