Proclus on the Forms as Paradigms in "Plato’s Parmenides: the Neoplatonic Response to Aristotle and Alexander of Aphrodisias’ Criticisms"
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.1981-9471.v16i1p115-163Keywords:
Proclus, Paradigm, Parmenides, PlatoAbstract
This paper sets out to analyze Proclus’ exegesis of Socrates’ suggestion in Parmenides 132d1-3 that Forms stand fixed as patterns (παραδείγματα), as it were, in the nature, with the other things being images and likenesses of them. Proclus’ analysis of the notion of being pattern reveals the impact of the Aristotelian conception of the form as paradigm on his views, as we can infer from Alexander of Aphrodisias’ and Simplicius’ explanation of the paradigmatic character of the Aristotelian form. Whereas Aristotle and Alexander of Aphrodisias refute the efficient causality of the Platonic Forms and support that μέθεξις is just a metaphor, Syrianus, Proclus and Asclepius defend the Platonic theory, and specifically Proclus, who brings to the fore the multilateral role of the Forms as patterns with regard to the secondary things of this realm.[1]
[1] An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Symposium Platonicum XII: Plato’s Parmenides, organized by the International Plato Society, Paris, 15-19 July 2019.
Downloads
References
Primary sources
Alexander Aphrodisiensis, In Aristotelis Metaphysica commentaria, ed. M. Hayduck. Berlin: Reimer, 1881 (CAG I 1).
Alexander of Aphrodisias, On Aristotle’s Metaphysics I, translated by W.E. Dooley, S.J. Cornell University Press, 1989.
Aristotle, Metaphysics, translated by W.D. Ross. Oxford: Clarendon Press 1908.
Asclepii, In Aristotelis Metaphysicorum libros A-Z commentaria, ed. M. Hayduck. Berlin: Reimer, 1888 (CAG VI 2).
Church, F.J. (transl.), 1951, Plato’s Phaedo, With an Introduction by F.H. Anderson. New York: The Liberal Arts Press.
Cornford, F.M., 1997 (1935), Plato’s Cosmology: The Timaeus of Plato, Translated with a running commentary. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company.
Dillon, J., Alcinous, The Handbook of Platonism, Translated with an Introduction and Commentary. Oxford: Clarendon Press 1993.
Dodds, E.R., 1963, Proclus: The Elements of Theology, A revised text with Translation, Introduction and Commentary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Heinze, R., Xenocrates, Darstellung der Lehre und Sammlung der Fragmente. Leipzig: B.G. Teubner 1892.
Lang, H.S. and Macro, A.D., Proclus, On the Eternity of the World (De Aeternitate Mundi), Greek Text with Introduction, Translation, and Commentary. Argument I translated from the Arabic by John McGinnis. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press 2001.
Luna, C. et Segonds, A.-P. (edd. /transl.), Proclus, Commentaire sur le Parménide de Platon, Tome IV, 1re partie: Livre IV/ Tome IV, 2e partie: Notes complémentaires et index du Livre IV, Collection des Universités de France, Serie Grecque. Paris: Les Belles Lettres 2013.
Morrow, G.R. and Dillon, J.M. (transl.), Proclus, Commentary on Plato’s Parmenides, With Introduction and Notes by J.M. Dillon. Princeton: Princeton University Press 1987.
Plato. Timaeus. Critias. Cleitophon. Menexenus. Epistles. Translated by R. G. Bury. Loeb Classical Library 234. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1929.
Plato. Platonis Opera, ed. John Burnet. Oxford University Press, 1903.
Philoponi Ioannis, In Aristotelis Physicorum libros tres priores commentaria, ed. H. Vitelli. Berlin: Reimer, 1887 (CAG XVI).
Philoponus Ioannes, De Aeternitate Mundi contra Proclum, ed. H. Rabe. Lipsiae: in aedibus B.G. Teubneri 1899.
Philoponus, Against Proclus: On the Eternity of the World 1-5, translated by M. Share. Bloomsbury 2004.
Philoponus, On Aristotle Physics 1. 1-3, translated by C. Osborne. London: Duckworth 2006.
Proclus, Procli Diadochi in Platonis rem publicam commentarii, 2 vol, ed. W. Kroll. Leipzig: Teubner 1899-1901.
Proclus Diadochus, In Platonis Timaeum Commentaria, ed. E. Diehl. Lipsiae: in aedibus B.G. Teubneri 1903.
Proclus Diadochus, Procli Diadochi in Platonis Cratylum commentaria, ed. G. Pasquali. Lipsiae: Teubner 1908.
Proclus, De arte hieratica [=De sacrificio et magia], ed. J. Bidez, CMAG VI, Brussels 1928, 148-151.
Proclus, Procli in Platonis Parmenidem Commentaria, ed. C. Steel, Tomus II, Libros IV-V continens (OCT), Recognoverunt C. Steel, A. Gribomont, P. D’ Hoine. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2008.
Runia, D.T. and Share, M. (edd., transl.), Proclus: Commentary on Plato’s Timaeus, Volume II. Book 2: Proclus on the Causes of the Cosmos and its Creation, Translated with an Introduction and Notes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2008.
Simplicii, In Aristotelis Physicorum libros quattuor priores commentaria, ed. H. Diels. Berlin: Reimer, 1882 (CAG IX).
Simplicii, In Aristotelis Categorias commentarium, ed. C. Kalbfleisch. Berlin: Reimer, 1907 (CAG VIII).
Simplicius, On Aristotle Physics 2, translated by B. Fleet. London: Duckworth 1997.
Simplicius, On Aristotle Categories 9-15, translated by R. Gaskin. London, New York: Bloomsbury 2014.
Syrianus, In Metaphysica commentaria, ed. W. Kroll. Berlin: Reimer, 1902 (CAG VI 1).
Syrianus, On Aristotle’s Metaphysics 13-14, translated by J. Dillon & D. O’ Meara. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press 2006.
Williams, C.J.F., Aristotle’s De Generatione et Corruptione, Translated with Notes. Oxford: Clarendon Press 1982.
Secondary Literature
Allen, R.E. (1959), “Forms and Standards”, The Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 9, No. 35: 164-167.
Annas, J. (1982), “Aristotle on Inefficient Causes”, The Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 129: 311-326.
Bailey, D.T.J. (2014), “Platonic Causes Revisited”, Journal of the History of Philosophy, Vol. 52, No. 1: 15-32.
Berg, R. M. van den (2000), “Towards the Paternal Harbour. Proclean Theurgy and the Contemplation of the Forms”, in Segonds, A. Ph., Steel. C. (eds.), Proclus et la Théologie Platonicienne. Actes du Colloque International de Louvain, Leuven-Paris, 425-443.
Berti, E. (2000), “Unmoved mover(s) as efficient cause(s) in Metaphysics Λ6”, in Frede, M., Charles D. (eds.), Aristotle’s Metaphysics Lambda, Symposium Aristotelicum, 181-206. Oxford.
Bloom, A. (1968), The Republic of Plato, Translated with notes and an interpretive essay. Basic Books.
Brisson, L., Pradeau J.-F. (1998), Le vocabulaire de Platon, Collection “Vocabulaire de…” dirigée par J.P. Zarader. Paris: Ellipses.
Brisson, L. (19983 [1974]), Le Même et l’ Autre dans la Structure Ontologique du Timée de Platon, Un commentaire systématique du Timée de Platon, International Plato Studies, Vol. 2. Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag.
Broadie, S. (2011), “The metaphysics of the paradigm”, in Nature and Divinity in Plato’s Timaeus, 60-83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bluck, R.S. (1957), “ὑποθέσεις in the PHAEDO and Platonic Dialectic”, Phronesis 2 (1): 21-31.
Burge, E.L. (1971), “The Ideas as Aitiai in the Phaedo”, Phronesis 16 (1): 1-13.
Byrne, C. (1989), “Forms and Causes in Plato’s Phaedo”, Dionysius 13: 3-15.
Cherniss, H. (1944), Aristotle’s Criticism of Plato and the Academy, Vol. I. New York: Russell & Russell.
Demos, R. (1939), The Philosophy of Plato. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
D’ Hoine, P. (2017), “Platonic Forms and the Triad of Being, Life, and Intellect”, in D’ Hoine, P. and Martijn, M. (edd.), All from One. A Guide to Proclus, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 98-121.
Fine, G. (2003), “Forms as Causes”, in Plato on Knowledge and Forms, Selected Essays, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 350-396.
Gerson, L.P. (2011), “Proclus and the Third Man”, Études platoniciennes, 8, Dossier: Les Formes platoniciennes dans l’ Antiquité tardive, 105-118.
Gerson, L.P. (2019), “Why the Intelligibles are not Outside the Intellect”, in Finamore, J.F., and Nejeschleba, T., Platonism and its Legacy, Selected Papers from the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the International Society for Neoplatonic Studies, Lydney: The Prometheus Trust, 1-11.
Goldschmidt, V. (1947), Le Paradigme dans la Dialectique platonicienne. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Grabowski III, F.A. (2008), Plato, Metaphysics and the Forms, Continuum Studies in Ancient Philosophy. New York: Continuum.
Ierodiakonou, K. (2006), “The Greek concept of Sympatheia and its Byzantine Appropriation in Michael Psellos”, in Magdalino, P., Mavroudi, M. (eds), The Occult Sciences in Byzantium, Geneva: La Pomme d’ or, 97-117.
Leyden von, W. (1964), “Time, Number, and Eternity in Plato and Aristotle”, The Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 14, No. 54, 35-52.
Lewy, H. (1956), Chaldean Oracles and Theurgy: Mysticism, Magic and Platonism in the Later Roman Empire. Le Caire: Institut Français d’ archéologie orientale.
Macé, A. (2012), “La naissance de la nature en Grèce ancienne”, in Haber, S. et Macé, A. (éds.), Anciens et Modernes par-delà Nature et Société, Presses Universitaires de Franche-Comté, 47-84.
Mannsperger, D. (1969), Physis bei Platon. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co.
Mohr, R.D. (1985), The Platonic Cosmology, Philosophia Antiqua, Vol. 42. Leiden: Brill.
Mouzala, M.G. (2016), “Aristotle’s Criticism of the Platonic Forms as Causes in De Generatione et Corruptione II. 9. A Reading based on Philoponus’ Exegesis”, Peitho/Examina Antiqua 1 (7): 123-147.
Mouzala, M.G. (2019), “Simplicius on the Principal Meaning of Physis in Aristotle’s Physics II. 1-3”, Analogia, Vol. 7: Byzantine Aristotle, 43-82.
Notomi, N. (1999), The Unity of Plato’s Sophist, Between the Sophist and the Philosopher. Cambridge University Press.
Peters, F.E. (1967), Greek Philosophical Terms: A Historical Lexicon. New York: New York University Press.
Pohlenz, M. (1949), Die Stoa: Geschichte einer geistigen Bewegung, 2 Vols. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Preus, A. (2015), Historical Dictionary of Ancient Greek Philosophy. Rowman & Littlefield (originally published: 2007).
Reinhardt, C. (1926), Kosmos und Sympathie. Munich: Beck.
Ross, W.D. (1951), Plato’s Theory of Ideas. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Sayre, K. (1970), “Falsehood, Forms and Participation in the Sophist”, Noûs, Vol. 4, No. 1: 81-91.
Sedley, D. (1998), “Platonic Causes”, Phronesis 43, No. 2: 114-132.
Shipton, K.M.W. (1979), “A good second-best: Phaedo 99b ff.”, Phronesis 24 (1): 33-53.
Siorvanes, L. (1996), Proclus: Neo-platonic Philosophy and Science. Edinburgh University Press.
Sorabji, R. (2007), “Time, Place and Extracosmic Space: Peripatetics in the First Century BC and a Stoic Opponent”, Bulletin of The Institute of Classical Studies, Supplement, No. 94, Greek & Roman Philosophy 100 BC-200 AD: Volume II (2007), 563-574.
Steckerl, F. (1942), “On the Problem: Artefact and Idea”, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 3: 288-298.
Tate, J. (1950), “Review: Structure and Paradigm in Plato” (Reviewed Works: Les dialogues de Platon: Structure et Méthode Dialectique and Le Paradigme dans la Dialectique platonicienne, by V. Goldschmidt), The Classical Review, Vol. 64, No. 1, 20-22.
Taylor, C.C.W. (1969), “Forms as Causes in the Phaedo”, Mind, Vol. 78, No. 309: 45-59.
Tzamalikos, P. (2016), Anaxagoras, Origen, and Neoplatonism. The Legacy of Anaxagoras to Classical and Late Antiquity. Two Volumes. De Gruyter.
Vlastos. G. (1973), Platonic Studies. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Wildfeuer, A.G. and Wirth C. (2011), “The Ideas of ῾Active᾿ and ῾Passive᾿ Participation. Some Philosophical Remarks on the History and the Presence of the Notion ῾Participation᾿”, in Adwan, S., Wildfeuer, A.G. (eds), Participation and Reconciliation: Preconditions of Justice, Schriften der Katholischen Hochschule Nordrhein-Westfalen, Vol. 16, Opladen & Farmington Hills, MI: Verlag Barbara Budrich, 17-26.
Witt, R.E. (1971), Albinus and the History of Middle Platonism. Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Melina Mouzala
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC By 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
