The centrepiece of Cicero's De re publica is a discussion of justice. This discussion, which evokes the theme of the Platonic dialogue after which it was named, consists of a set of three speeches. It begins with a speech opposing justice, placed in the mouth of L. Furius Philus and alleged by him to be modelled on the second of a pair of speeches for and against justice delivered in Rome in 155 B.C. by the Greek Academic philosopher (...) class='Hi'>Carneades. Philus' speech lays the dialectical foundation for the two subsequent speeches, a defence of justice as the prerequisite for government by C. Laelius, and an explanation of its role in various forms of government by Scipio Aemilianus. (shrink)

The best-known fact about the interaction of the Republican Roman poet Gaius Lucilius (c.180–103/102b.c.e.), the inventor of the genre of Roman verse satire, with the doctrine of Scepticism is probably a statement of Cicero: that Clitomachus the Academician dedicated a treatise to the poet (Cic.Luc. 102). Diogenes Laertius makes much of that writer's, Clitomachus’, industry (τὸ φιλόπονον, 4.67), with the comment: ‘to such lengths did his diligence (ἐπιμελείας) go that he composed more than four hundred treatises’. This phraseology surely reminds (...) those interested in Lucilius’ influence on later Latin poetry of Horace's disparaging comment,in hora saepe ducentos, | ut magnum, uersus dictabat(‘as a bravura display, he would often dictate two hundred verses in an hour’,Sat.1.4.9–10); moreover, Horace shortly afterwards calls his predecessorgarrulus atque piger scribendi ferre laborem(‘talkative and too lazy to bear the work of writing’, 1.4.12). Yet, a sceptical view of Horace's critique might have to think of Lucilius as hard-working, like his putative friend the Academic philosopher, Clitomachus. (shrink)

Contents \t\t\t\t\t \tTRANSLATOR'S INTRODUCTION \t\t1 \t \tNOTE ON THE TRANSLATION \t\t39 \t OBSERVATIONS ON THE FEELING OF THE BEAUTIFUL AND SUBLIME \t\t\t\t\t \tSECTION ONE: \t\t\t\t \t\tOf the Distinct Objects of the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime \t\t45 \tSECTION TWO: \t\t\t\t \t\tOf the Attributes of the Beautiful and Sublime.

Ancient sceptics, unlike their modern counterparts, claim to live their scepticism. Nowadays scepticism, whether epistemological, moral, or of any other variety, is seen as a purely theoretical position, with no direct bearing on the actual living of one’s life; this is because philosophical theories and everyday attitudes are taken to be in some way “insulated” from one another. Serious questions may be raised about the character of this alleged “insulation,” but these are not my present concern; the fact is that (...) no such split between “the philosophical” and “the ordinary” was entertained in the ancient world. It follows that the viability of scepticism as a way of life is a crucial issue for ancient sceptics. It is no accident that one of the most enduring objections to ancient scepticism is to the effect that the sceptical attitude—that is, the posture of universal suspension of judgement—is incompatible with any kind of normal human action; this was known in antiquity as the charge of apraxia, “inaction.” The sceptics for their part, were just as persistent in arguing that suspension of judgement had no such damaging consequences. In as much as the assessment of actual or imaginable types of human life is the province of ethics, I take this debate between ancient sceptics and their detractors to be, in a broad sense, an ethical debate. (shrink)

Dans son article de 1985, « Une morale est-elle compatible avec le scepticisme? », Jules Vuillemin brosse un portrait du philosophe néo-académicien Carnéade en sceptique utilitariste. L’article s’attache à analyser cette lecture en confrontant l’interprétation de Jules Vuillemin avec les sources que nous avons de Carnéade. Il montre que malgré l’anachronisme assumé de son approche, cette interprétation permet de faire apparaître la particularité du scepticisme de Carnéade, notamment la nature rationnelle de la règle d’action selon le probable, grâce à une (...) comparaison avec les théories de la décision. (shrink)

An ancient argument attributed to the philosopher Carneades is presented that raises critical questions about the concept of an all-virtuous Divine being. The argument is based on the premises that virtue involves overcoming pains and dangers, and that only a being that can suffer or be destroyed is one for whom there are pains and dangers. The conclusion is that an all-virtuous Divine (perfect) being cannot exist. After presenting this argument, reconstructed from sources in Sextus Empiricus and Cicero, (...) this paper goes on to model it as a deductively valid sequence of reasoning. The paper also discusses whet her the premises are true. Questions about the possibility and value of proving and disproving the existence of God by logical reasoning are raised, as well as ethical questions about how the cardinal ethical virtues should be defined. (shrink)

Greek Philosophers of the Hellenistic Age examines an important but frequently neglected group of philosophers writing after Aristotle between the third and first centuries B.C. The work of a distinguished intellectual historian, this book is based on an erudite reading of a vast number of primary sources: the Greek and Latin writings of the philosophers, and the fragments, paraphrases, and testimonies from their lost works. Kristeller explores the thought of Epicurus; Zenon and Cleanthes, the founder of the Stoic school and (...) his successor; Pyrrhon and Arcesilaus, the founder of Skepticism and the philosopher who introduced it into the Platonic Academy; and Chrysippus, the third head of the Stoic school and its most important representative. Other figures include Carneades and Philo of Larissa, the second and third representatives of Skepticism in the Platonic Academy, respectively; Panaetius, the first leader of Middle Stoicism; and Antiochus of Ascalon, the head of the Academy, who led it back from Skepticism and prepared Middle Platonism, which paved the way for Neoplatonism. Originally presented as a series of lectures before the Scuola Normale Superiore in Pisa, Italy, Greek Philosophers of the Hellenistic Age assesses a group of philosophers who exerted an enormous influence upon pagan and Christian writers of late antiquity - including Cicero and St. Augustine - and on many medieval and early modern philosophers, theologians, and other thinkers. (shrink)

Face à la tendance ordinaire de l'homme à l'égoïsme, à la recherche d'intérêts personnels et aux confits variés où la raison du plus fort est la meilleure, il faut des pensées fortes qui montrent la voie d'une humanité retrouvée. La pensée d'Emmanuel Lévinas en est une. Des commentateurs en parlent en termes d'une nouvelle sagesse d'amour au profit d'une altérité vivifiée. Cette pensée décrit en effet ce qui doit normalement meubler toute approche relationnelle : la responsabilité du Moi pour autrui. (...) Rencontré dans la médiation de son visage, ce dernier exige cette responsabilité à travers l'ordre dont il est porteur : "Tu ne tueras". Autrement dit, "Aime" et "Prends soin de celui qui est devant toi". Quand chaque Moi s'évertue à honorer cet ordre, il se constitue ipso facto gardien, messie ou bienfaiteur de son frère. C'est en agissant ainsi que le monde se tracera des sillons pour l'émergence d'une civilisation d'amour. Lésinas en est convaincu. Mais la question qui se pose dans cette étude est de savoir si sa pensée contient vraiment des ingrédients rassurants pour la fondation d'une morale d'interpersonnalité qui assure vraiment la vie des personnes et des peuples. (shrink)

Le grand philosophe français Lucien Jerphagnon est décédé le 16 septembre 2011. Spécialiste de la pensé antique, disciple de Vladimir Jankélévitch, il avait su rendre son savoir populaire. Jean d’Ormesson l’a défini ainsi : «Un savant qui sait unir un style rapide et séduisant à l’érudition la plus rigoureuse.» Trois ans après sa mort, sa veuve lui adresse une série de lettres en forme de souvenirs. Emplies d’émotion, elles composent, par cette multiplicité de regards amoureux et nostalgiques, un véritable hommage. (...) Au-delà des réflexions sur la mort, le deuil, la solitude ou l’absence, cette soixantaine de courts chapitres, portés par un style sensible, constituent un portrait simple et touchant de celui qui fut aussi un homme remarquable. (shrink)

The work of the French Lithuanian Jewish philosopher, Emmanuel Levinas, describes a perceptive rethinking of the possibility of concrete acts of goodness in the world, a rethinking never more necessary than now, in the wake of the cruel realities of the twentieth century—ten million dead in the First World War, forty million dead in the Second World War, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, the Soviet gulags, the grand slaughter of Mao’s “Great Leap Forward,” the pointless and gory Vietnam War, the Cambodian self-genocide (...) and many an attempted extermination from the face of the earth of entire nations of indigenous peoples. The list of horrors goes on and on—daily holocausts that do not distinguish between the civilian and the soldier, the guilty and the innocent, those deserving of life and those less deserving. (shrink)