Get Studies in Ancient Greek Philosophy in Honor of Professor Anthony Preus 1st Edition D. M. Spitzer Free All Chapters
Get Studies in Ancient Greek Philosophy in Honor of Professor Anthony Preus 1st Edition D. M. Spitzer Free All Chapters
Get Studies in Ancient Greek Philosophy in Honor of Professor Anthony Preus 1st Edition D. M. Spitzer Free All Chapters
com
https://ebookmeta.com/product/studies-in-ancient-
greek-philosophy-in-honor-of-professor-anthony-
preus-1st-edition-d-m-spitzer/
OR CLICK BUTTON
DOWLOAD EBOOK
https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-question-of-eclecticism-
studies-in-later-greek-philosophy-j-m-dillon-editor/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/otherwise-than-the-binary-new-
feminist-readings-in-ancient-philosophy-and-culture-suny-ancient-
greek-philosophy-1st-edition-jessica-elbert-decker/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/when-the-earth-was-flat-studies-in-
ancient-greek-and-chinese-cosmology-springerlink-online-service/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/ancient-greek-myths-in-medieval-
armenian-literature-1st-edition-gohar-muradyan/
Oxford Studies Ancient Philosophy Volume 53 Victor
Caston
https://ebookmeta.com/product/oxford-studies-ancient-philosophy-
volume-53-victor-caston/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/a-life-in-cognition-studies-in-
cognitive-science-in-honor-of-csaba-pleh/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/philosophy-in-ancient-rome-a-loss-
of-wings-1st-edition-charles-vergeer/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/studies-in-philosophy-and-the-
history-of-philosophy-1st-edition-john-k-ryan/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/founding-feminisms-in-medieval-
studies-essays-in-honor-of-e-jane-burns-daniel-e-osullivan/
“This engaging set of papers on ancient thought, from the period of the Presocratics
through Plato, Aristotle, and Epicurus, comes at its topics from interesting and sur-
prising perspectives. Several chapters raise questions of particular interest: What is
philosophy? How did it arise? How has it reshaped human life?”
Ronald Polansky, Professor Emeritus of
Philosophy, Duquesne University
Spanning a wide range of texts, figures, and traditions from the ancient
Mediterranean world, this volume gathers far-reaching, interdisciplinary papers
on Greek philosophy from an international group of scholars.
The book’s 16 chapters address an array of topics and themes, extending from
the formation of philosophy from its first stirrings in archaic Greek as well as
Egyptian, Persian, Mesopotamian, and Indian sources, through central concepts
in ancient Greek philosophy and literatures of the classical period and into
the Hellenistic age. Studies in Ancient Greek Philosophy offers both in-depth,
rigorous, attentive investigations of canonical texts in Western philosophy,
such as Plato’s Phaedo, Gorgias, Republic, Phaedrus, Protagoras and the
Metaphysics, De Caelo, Nichomachean Ethics, On Generation and Corruption
of Aristotle’s corpus, as well as inquiries that reach back into the rich archives of
the Mediterranean Basin and forward into the traditions of classical philosophy
beyond the ancient world.
Studies in Ancient Greek Philosophy is of interest to students and scholars
working on different aspects of ancient Greek philosophy, as well as ancient
philosophy, more broadly.
Edited by D. M. Spitzer
First published 2023
by Routledge
4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2023 selection and editorial matter, D. M. Spitzer; individual chapters,
the contributors.
The right of D. M. Spitzer to be identified as the author of the editorial
material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted
in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or
utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now
known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in
any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing
from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or
registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation
without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN: 978-1-032-25711-2 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-1-032-25713-6 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-1-003-28465-9 (ebk)
DOI: 10.4324/b22846
Typeset in Times New Roman
by Deanta Global Publishing Services, Chennai, India
For Tony, in gratitude and appreciation for your wisdom
touched with genuine compassion as a teacher, mentor,
colleague—an inspiration
Index 275
Figures and Tables
Figures
3.1 23 May 2013: Two gnomons are set several yards apart in the
ground next to the base of a pyramid at Giza, one at the end of the
pyramid’s shadow 64
3.2 23 May 2018: Two gnomons are set several yards apart in the
ground next to the base of a pyramid, one at the end of the
pyramid’s shadow 65
3.3 Pyramid measurement when shadow = height. Similar right
triangles [isosceles right triangles] 65
3.4 Pyramid measurement when shadow ≠ height. Similar right
triangles [scalene right triangles] 67
3.5 Plan view of a possible reconstruction of Anaximander’s sundial
(left); side view of gnomon (right) 69
3.6 [Left] Sighting the rising sun on the winter solstice. [Right]
Sighting the setting sun on the winter solstice 69
3.7 Identifying summer and winter solstice, and the equinox, by the
local noon shadow marking on the sundial 70
3.8 Circles made using the radius distance of local noon shadows to
gnomon 70
3.9 [Left] From archaic Temple of Apollo at Didyma anathyrôsis
with round empolion. [Right] From Samos Dipteros II with
rectangular empolion 71
3.10 [Left] Sighting the rising sun on the summer solstice. [Right]
Sighting the setting sun on the summer solstice 72
3.11 [Left] Sighting the rising sun on the winter solstice. [Right]
Sighting the setting sun on the winter solstice 72
3.12 Possible reconstruction of Anaximander’s frame of the map of the
inhabited earth, using markers of rising and setting of the sun on
summer and winter solstice, and equinox 72
3.13 Anaximander might have calculated the exact time of the equinox
by bisecting the angle formed from sunrise on summer and winter
solstices 73
xii Figures and Tables
9.1 Helen participates in the Form Beauty 164
9.2 A particular fever participates in the Form Fever. The Form Fever
entails the Form Illness 166
9.3 A particular fever occupies Socrates’ body 167
Table
14.1 Equivalents of Πολιτεία in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics
According to Some Scholars (Latin as in Bonitz) b. = Bonitz; g.-j.
= Gauthier-Jolif; m. = Mulhern; o. = Ostwald; r. = Ross 231
Contributors
Great and many thanks to Tony Preus, who (as Gerard Naddaf writes in his chap-
ter) is always there when you need him. In the case of the preparation of this
volume, Tony has been available for various and sundry queries and requests
for assistance, including regarding some tedious minutiae in the preparation of
his bibliography and, most pleasurably, some exchanges about translating οὐσία
in a very specific context. Tony’s efforts to sustain without interruption the pro-
ceedings of the SAGP have been, to echo Voula Tsouna, essential, inviting, and
seamless.
To the several contributors who have been involved with this project since
before its inception—Betsy, Lew, John, J. J.—thank you for your generosity of
spirit and steadfast encouragement through the long and complicated progress
that has led, at last, to a volume honoring Tony.
Special thanks to Voula Tsouna for producing a foreword to the collection.
Thanks, too, to the many other scholars who had interest in, but insufficient
time for, involvement or for whom difficult circumstances created impediments
to contributing to this project.
To the team at Routledge, including the anonymous reviewers, editors Amy
Davis-Poynter, Marcia Adams, project manager Shanmugapriya Rajaram, and
others, I offer thanks for all the various helpful guidance and assistance from
proposal to print.
Special gratitude, too, I would like to extend to Cynthia Graeff for technical
work in producing images that appear in Chapter 3.
Finally, I would like to express warm gratitude to all the contributors of this
volume. The patience, enthusiasm, and unfailing support you have shown through
a somewhat lengthy process has made this project enjoyable, while your contri-
butions have made it a rich and truly excellent way to honor Tony Preus through
offering a collection of papers that advance the field he has done so very much to
develop and promote.
Abbreviations
Binghamton University
Bibliography
Warm thanks to Tony Preus for assistance in
the preparation of this bibliography.
Books
Single authored
2015. Historical Dictionary of Ancient Greek Philosophy. 2nd ed. Lanham: Rowman &
Littlefield.
2012. “Greek Philosophy.” In Oxford Bibliographies Online. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, Online. Last updated 24 November, 2020.
2007. Historical Dictionary of Ancient Greek Philosophy. Lanham: Scarecrow Press. (For
a time starting in 2010, the paperback edition of this book has been known as The A to
Z of Greek Philosophy).
1996. Notes on Greek Philosophy from Thales to Aristotle. Binghamton: Global
Publications, Institute of Global Cultural Studies (IGCS), Binghamton University,
SUNY. (2nd ed., 1999).
1981. Aristotle and Michael of Ephesus On the Movement and Progression of Animals.
Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag.
1975. Science and Philosophy in Aristotle’s Biological Works. Hildesheim: Georg Olms
Verlag.
Edited volumes
2001. Essays in Ancient Greek Philosophy, Volume VI: Before Plato. Albany: SUNY Press.
Articles
2020. “The Techne of Nutrition in Ancient Greek Philosophy.” Archai 29: 1–34.
2017. “Philosophy and Rhetoric in Western Greece: Focus on Empedocles and Gorgias.”
In Politics and Performance in Western Greece, edited by Heather L. Reid, Davide
Tanasi, and Susi Kimbell, 197–208. Sioux City: Parnassos Press.
2016. “The Philosophical Climate in Magna Graecia from the mid-6th to the mid-4th
BCE.” In Philosopher Kings and Tragic Heroes, edited by Heather L. Reid and Davide
Tanasi, 1–24. Sioux City: Parnassos Press.
2012. “Aristotle on Oligarchy: Theory and Observation.” Philosophical Inquiry 35, no. 3:
26–58.
2011. Introduction to the Transaction Edition of Alban Dewes Winspear, The Genesis of
Plato’s Thought: “The Genesis of Winspear’s Thought.” New Brunswick: Transaction
Publishers.
2010. “Aristotle.” In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece and Rome. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
2008. “Pre-Socratic Philosophy.” In The Humanities at Work: International Exchange
of Ideas in Aesthetics, Philosophy and Literature, edited by Yubraj Aryal, 248–69.
Kathmandu: Sunlight Publication.
2005. “Did the Ancient Greeks have a Concept of Human Rights?” International Journal
of Decision Ethics 1, no. 2: 43–64.
2005. “Citizenship and Participation in Government in Ancient Greek Political Thought.”
Skepsis 26, no. 1: 150–163.
2004. “Major Trends in Greek Philosophy in the United States, 1953–2003.” In Greek
Philosophy in the New Millenium: Essays in Honour of Thomas M. Robinson, edited by
Livio Rossetti, 75–88. Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag.
2002. “Plotinus and Biology.” In Neoplatonism and Nature: Studies in Plotinuis’ Enneads,
edited by Michael F. Wagner, 43–55. Albany: SUNY Press.
1999. “Hellenic Philosophy of Law: Conceptual Framework.” In Encyclopedia of
Philosophy of Law, edited by C. B. Gray, 353–356. New York: Garland.
1999. “Hellenic Philosophy of Law: Sources for the Earlier Period.” In Encyclopedia of
Philosophy of Law, edited by C. B. Gray, 356–360. New York: Garland.
1998. “Thoth and Apollo: Greek Myths of the Origin of Philosophy.” Methexis 11:
113–125.
1997. “Greek Philosophy in Egypt: From Solon to the Arab Conquest.” In Greeks &
Barbarians: Essays on the Interactions between Greeks and Non-Greeks in Antiquity
and the Consequences for Eurocentrism, edited by John E. Coleman and Clark A.
Walz, 155–174. Bethesda: CDL Press.
Anthony Preus xxiii
1997. “Hermetica: Egyptian Religious and Philosophical Texts.” In Encyclopedia of
Ancient Philosophy, edited by Donald J. Zeyl, Daniel Devereux, and Philipo Mitsis,
263–265. Westport: Greenwood Press.
1997. “Polemon of Athens.” In Zeyl, Devereux, and Mitsis, Encyclopedia of Ancient
Philosophy, 439.
1997. “Some Ancient Ecological Myths and Metaphors.” In The Greeks and the
Environment, edited by Laura Westra and T. M. Robinson, 11–18. Lanham: Roman &
Littlefield.
1997. “Sotion of Alexandria.” In Zeyl, Devereux, and Mitsis, Encyclopedia of Ancient
Philosophy, 524.
1997. “Wisdom Texts and Philosophy.” Tópicos 13, no. 1: 237–254.
1995. “The Priority of the Intelligible.” Review of Form and the Good in Plato’s Eleatic
Dialogues, by Kenneth Dorter. Apeiron 28, no. 3: 239–249.
1994. “Ο Αριστoτέλης για τη Δoυλεία: Πρoσφατες Ηρμηvειες.” Translated by D. Z.
Andriopolous (Δ. Ζ. Αvδριoπoυλoς). In Αριστoτέλης: Οvτoλoγια, Γvωσιoθεωρια,
ήθικη, πoλιτικη φιλoσoφια, αφιερωμα στov, John P. Anton, edited by Δ. Ζ. Αvδριoπoυ
λoς. Athens: Βιβλιoπoλειo της “εστιας”. (Translation of 1993b).
1993a. “Hermetica Bibliography.” Journal of Neoplatonic Studies II, no. 1: 151–155.
1993b. “Aristotle on Slavery: Recent Reactions.” Philosophical Inquiry 15, nos. 3–4: 33–47.
1992. Greek Philosophy: Egyptian Origins. Binghamton: IGCS. Binghamton University
Research Papers #3.
1992. Aristotle on Africa. Binghamton: IGCS. Binghamton University Research Papers #7.
1991. “Man and Cosmos in Aristotle: Metaphysics Lambda and the Biological Works.”
In Biologie Logique et Metaphysique, edited by Daniel Devereux and Pierre Pellegrin,
467–487. Paris: Editions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS).
1991. “Animal and Human Souls in the Peripatetic School.” Skepsis. Reprinted in
Philosophies of Being and Mind, edited by J. T. H. Martin, 125–149. Delmar: Caravan
Books, 1992.
1990. “Michael of Ephesus and the History of Zoology.” In The Classics in the Middle
Ages: Papers of the Twentieth Annual Conference of the Center for Medieval and
Early Renaissance Studies, edited by Aldo S. Bernardo and Saul Levin, 265–282.
Binghamton: Center for Medieval and Early Renaissance Studies.
1989. “AIDS: The Duty to Treat, A Philosopher’s Perspective.” The Mount Sinai Journal
of Medicine 56, no. 3: 254–258.
1988/9. “Aristotle and Respect for Persons.” University of Dayton Review 19, no. 3: 71–80.
Reprinted in Anton and Preus, Essays in Ancient Greek Philosophy, Vol. IV: Aristotle’s
Ethics 1991, 215–226.
1988. “Drugs and Psychic States in Theophrastus’ Historia Plantarum 9.8–20.” In
Theophrastean Studies: Rutgers Studies in Classical Humanities, vol. III, edited by
W. W. Fortenbaugh and R. W. Sharples, 76–99. New Brunswick: Transaction Books.
1986. “Aristotle on Healthy and Sick Souls.” The Monist 69, no. 3: 416–433.
1985. “Fidelity and Collaboration.” Translation Perspectives II: 87–94.
1984. “Respect for the Dead and Dying.” Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 9, no. 5:
409–415.
1983. “Biological Theory in Porphyry’s De abstinentia.” Ancient Philosophy 3, no. 2:
149–159.
1983. “Comments on Professor Kerferd’s Paper: Possible Stoic Models of Impulses.” In On
Stoic and Peripatetic Ethics, edited by W. W. Fortenbaugh, 99–106. New Brunswick:
Transaction Books.
xxiv Anthony Preus
1983. “Aristotle and Hippocratic Gynecology.” In Aristoteles als
Naturwissenschaftstheoretiker, edited by Johannes Irmscher and Georg Harig, 189–202.
Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
1982/3. “Socratic Psychotherapy.” University of Dayton Review 16, no. 1: 15–23.
1982. “Michael of Ephesus on Aristotle IA and MA.” World Congress on Aristotle,
Proceedings.
1981. “Ethics and Policy in the Human Services.” American Philosophical Association
Newsletter on Teaching Philosophy 2, no. 3: 6–7.
1981. “Intention and Impulse in Aristotle and the Stoics.” Apeiron 15, no. 1: 48–58.
1981. “Reply to Jacobs.” Nature and System 3, no. 2: 119–121.
1979. “Eidos as Norm in Aristotle’s Biology.” Nature and System I (1979): 79–101.
Reprinted in Anton and Preus, Essays in Ancient Greek Philosophy, Vol. II., 340–363.
1977. “Galen’s Criticism of Aristotle’s Conception Theory.” Journal of the History of
Biology 10, no. 1: 65–85.
1975. “Biomedical Techniques for Influencing Human Reproduction in the Fourth Century
BC.” Arethusa 8, no. 2: 237–263.
1975. “Geometric Method in Aristotle’s Progression of Animals.” Historical and
Philosophical Dimensions of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science. Fifth
International Congress of Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science, Proceedings
XII, edited by R. E. Butts and J. Hintikka, 45–46. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
1973. “Aristotle’s Three Theories of the Soul.” Proceedings of the Creighton Club: 16–31.
1970. “Science and Philosophy in Aristotle’s Generation of Animals.” Journal of the
History of Biology 3, no. 1:1–52.
1970. “The Continuous Analogy: Uses of Continuous Proportions in Plato and Aristotle.”
Agora 1, no. 2: 20–42.
1969/70. “The Continuous Analogy: Aristotle’s Cosmological Argument.” Proceedings of
the Creighton Club: 82–95.
1969. “Aristotle’s Natural Necessity.” Studi Internazionali di Filosofia I (1969): 91–100.
1969. “Aristotle’s ‘Nature uses…’.” Apeiron 3, no. 2: 20–33.
1968. “Aristotle’s Parts of Animals 2.16.659b13-19: Is it Authentic?” The Classical
Quarterly 18, no. 2: 170–178.
1968. “On Dreams 2, 459b24-460a33, and Aristotle’s Oψις.” Phronesis 13, no. 2: 176–182.
1964. “Aristotle on Biology as Philosophy.” Oneota Review 1, no. 2: 5–11.
Book reviews
2018. Plato Laws 1 and 2. Translated with and Introduction and Commentary, by Susan
Sauvé Meyer. Plato: The Internet Journal of the International Plato Society 18:
127–128.
2013. Pursuits of Wisdom, by John Cooper. Polis 30, no. 1: 129–132.
2012. Theophrastus, On First Principles, by Dmitri Gutas. The Classical Review 62, no.
1: 91–93.
2008. Aristotle on Definition, by Marguerite Deslauriers. History and Philosophy of Logic
29, no. 3: 302–305.
2005. The Female in Aristotle’s Biology, by Robert Mayhew. Journal of the History of
Philosophy (JHP) 43, no. 1: 109–110.
2004. Studies in Ancient Philosophy, vol. XV, edited by C.C.W. Taylor. International
Studies in Philosophy (ISP) 46, no. 1: 321–322.
2004. Ethics in Reproductive and Perinatal Medicine, by Carson Strong. ISP 46, no. 1:
311–314.
2004. Emotion and Peace of Mind, by Richard Sorabji. ISP 46, no. 1: 302–303.
2004. Order in Multiplicity: Homonymy in the Philosophy of Aristotle, by Christopher
Shields. ISP 46, no. 1: 297–299.
2002/2003. Aristotle on Life and Death, by R. A. H. King. Hermathena 173/174: 218–222.
2002. Theophrastus against the Presocratics and Plato: Peripatetic Dialectic in the De
Sensibus, by Han Baltussen. Religious Studies Review (RSR) 28, no. 2: 164.
2002. The Myth of Aristotle’s Development and the Betrayal of Metaphysics, by Walter
Wehrle. JHP 40, no. 4: 536–538.
2001. The Unity of Plato’s “Sophist”: Between the Sophist and the Philosopher, by Noburu
Notomi. RSR 27, no. 3: 288.
2001. Plato: Clitophon, edited by S. R. Slings. RSR 27, no. 2: 161–162.
2000. Hippocrates, by Jacques Jouanna. RSR 26, no. 3: 272.
1999. Studies in Greek Philosophy, Vols I & II, by Gregory Vlastos. ISP 31, no. 4: 138–140.
1999. Galen: On Antecedent Causes, by R. J. Hankinson. RSR 25, no. 2: 187.
1999. Asclepius: Collection and Interpretation of the Testimonies, by E.J. & L. Edelstein.
RSR 25, no. 1: 76.
1999. Aristotle’s Metaphysics Θ 1–3: On the Essence and Actuality of Force, Martin
Heidegger. Translated by Walter Brogan and Peter Warnek. ISP 31, no. 2:
141–143.
1999. Aristotle’s Theory of Material Substance: Heat and Pneuma, Form and Soul, by Gad
Freudenthal. ISP 31, no. 2: 134–136.
1998. Galen and Chrysippus on the Soul: Argument and Refutation in the De Placitis,
Books II-III, by Teun Tieleman. RSR 24, no. 4: 412.
1998. Aristotle and Neoplatonism in Late Antiquity: Interpretations of the De Anima, by
Henry J. Blumenthal. RSR 24, no. 2: 190–191.
1997. The Masters of Truth in Archaic Greece, by Marcel Detienne. RSR 23, no. 3: 291.
1997. Aristotle’s Philosophical Development: Problems and Prospects, by William Wians.
JHP 35, no. 3: 460–462.
1995. Ethics With Aristotle, by Sarah Broadie. RSR 21, no. 2: 135.
xxvi Anthony Preus
1995. Taking Life Seriously: A Study of the Argument of the “Nicomachean Ethics”, by
Francis Sparshott, and Aristotle on the Goals and Exactness of Ethics, by Georgios
Anagnostopoulos. JHP 33, no. 3: 511–514.
1994. Forms in Plato’s Philebus, by E. E. Benitez. ISP 26, no. 2: 104.
1993. Theophrastus, De Causis Plantarum Books III–IV, V–VI, edited and translated by
Benedict Einarson and George K. K. Link. Ancient Philosophy 13, no. 2: 448–450.
1992. The Anatomy of Neoplatonism, by A. C. Lloyd. The Journal of Neoplatonic Studies
1, no. 1: 141–145.
1991. Aristotle on the Human Good, by Richard Kraut. RSR 17, no. 3: 257–258.
1991. Faces of Medicine: A Philosophical Study, by Wim J. Van der Steen and P. J. Thung.
ISP 23, no. 1: 140.
1991. The Fabric of Character: Aristotle’s Theory of Virtue, by Nancy Sherman. ISP 23,
no. 3: 147–148.
1991. Aristotle’s Concept of the Universal, by George Brakas. ISP 23, no. 1: 101–102.
1991. Aristotle on Substance: The Paradox of Unity, by Mary Louise Gill. ISIS 82, no. 2:
362–363.
1991. Cosmic and Meta-Cosmic Theology in Aristotle’s Lost Dialogues, by Abraham P.
Bos. JHP 29, no. 4: 669–671.
1991. Les Choses memes. La pensee du reel chez Aristote, by Gilbert Dherbey-Romeyer.
Ancient Philosophy 11, no. 2: 444–445.
1990. Alfred of Sareshel’s Commentary on the Metheora of Aristotle, by James K. Otte.
ISIS 81: 759–760.
1990. Cosmic Problems: Essays on Greek and Roman Philosophy of Nature, by David
Furley. RSR 16, no. 4: 340.
1990. Simplicius On Aristotle’s Physics 6, translated by David Konstan. RSR 16, no. 2: 149.
1989. A New Aristotle Reader, edited by J. L. Ackrill. RSR 15, no. 3: 260.
1989. The Phaedo: A Platonic Labyrinth, by Ronna Burger. ISP 21, no. 1: 73.
1989. The Arguments ‘From the Sciences’ in Aristotle’s Peri Ideon, by Daniel H. Frank.
ISP 21, no. 1: 81–82.
1989. Just Health Care, by Norman Daniels. ISP 21, no. 3: 106.
1988. Aristotle and Logical Theory, by Jonathan Lear. ISP 20, no. 1: 93–94.
1987. Passage and Possibility: A Study of Aristotle’s Modal Concepts, and Nature,
Change, and Agency in Aristotle’s Physics: A Philosophical Study, by Sarah Waterlow
(Broadie). ISP 19, no. 3: 122–123.
1987. Science, Folklore and Ideology: Studies in the Life Sciences in Ancient Greece, by
G. E. R. Lloyd. ISP 19, no. 3: 96–97.
1987. Aristotle’s Theory of Moral Insight, by Troels Engbert-Pedersen. ISP 19, no. 3:
73–75.
1987. Health and Human Values, A Guide to Making Your Own Decisions, by Frank
Harron, John Burnside, and Tom Beauchamp; Biomedical-Ethical Issues, A Digest of
Law and Policy Development, by Frank Harron, John Burnside, and Tom Beauchamp;
Human Values and Health Care: Audio-Visual Resources, by Frank Harron, John
Burnside, and Tom Beauchamp. ISP 19, no. 1: 84–85.
1987. A History of Greek Philosophy, vol. vi, Aristotle an Encounter, by W. K. C. Guthrie.
ISP 19, no. 1: 80–82.
1986. The Modes of Scepticism: Ancient Texts and Modern Interpretations, by Julia Annas
& Jonathan Barnes. RSR 12, no. 1: 68.
1986. L’Avénement de la science physique, by Lambros Couloubaritsis. ISP 18, no. 1: 71.
Anthony Preus xxvii
1986. Aristotle on Mind and the Senses, edited by G. E. R. Lloyd and G. E. L. Owen. ISP
18, no. 1: 94–95.
1986. The Concept of First Philosophy and the Unity of the Metaphysics of Aristotle, by
Giovanni Reale, translated by J. R. Catan. ISP 18, no. 3: 78.
1985. Le triangle hippocratique dans le monde gréco-romain: Le malade, sa maladie et
son médecin, by Danielle Gourevitch. ISIS 76, no. 2: 266.
1985. The Presocratic Philosophers (2nd edition), by G. S. Kirk, J. E. Raven, and M.
Schofield. RSR 11, no. 4: 399.
1984. Zénon d’Elée, by Maurice Caveing. ISIS 75, no. 3: 607–608.
1984. Empedocles: The Extant Fragments, by M. R. Wright. RSR 10, no. 3: 287.
1983. Facets of Plato’s Philosophy, by W. H. Werkmeister. ISP 15, no. 3: 123–124.
1983. Necessity, Cause, and Blame, by Richard Sorabji. ISP 15, no. 1: 119–121.
1982. The Presocratic Philosophers, by Jonathan Barnes. ISP 14, no. 2: 89–90.
1982. Alexander of Aphrodisias, De Anima, translated by A. P. Fotinis. JHP 20, no. 4:
427–429.
1981. Die Naturphilosophie des Aristoteles, by G. A. Seeck. Archiv fűr Geschichte der
Philosophie 63, no. 1: 83–84.
1981. Selected Papers, by Harold Cherniss. ISP 12, no. 1: 88–89.
1981. “Thirty-Two Essays,” review of Hippocratica, Actes du Colloque hippocratique de
Paris (4–9 septembre 1978), edited by M. C. Grmek. Clio Medica 16, no. 2/3: 152–154.
1980. Mind and Madness in Ancient Greece: The Classical Roots of Modern Psychiatry,
by Bennett Simon. ISP 12, no. 2: 89–91.
1980. The Middle Platonists, 80 BC-AD 220, by John Dillon. ISP 12, no. 2: 92–94.
1980. Aristotle’s De Motu Animalium, by Martha Nussbaum. Journal of the History of
Biology 13: 351–356.
1979. Substance, Body and Soul: Aristotelian Investigations, by E. Hartman. ISP 11:
211–213.
1978. Le jugement d’existence chez Aristote, by Suzanne Mansion. JHP 16, no. 2: 255.
1978. The Origins of Stoic Cosmology, by David Hahm. ISP 10: 219–220.
1978. “Reason in Aristotle’s Ethics,” review of Reason and Human Good in Aristotle, by
J. M. Cooper and Bios Theoretikos, by T. B. Ericksen. ISP 10: 135–137.
1977. Aristotle and His School, by Felix Grayeff. ISP 9: 209–211.
1977. Aristotle on Emotion, by W. W. Fortenbaugh. ISP 9: 206–209.
1976. Aristotele Trattato sul Cosmo, by Giovanni Reale. JHP 14, no. 4: 478–480.
1976. Articles on Aristotle I: Science, edited by Jonathan Barnes, Malcolm Schofield, and
Richard Sorabji. ISP 8: 222.
1976. Intellectual Experiments of the Greek Enlightenment, by Friedrich Solmsen. ISP 8:
220–222.
1974. Aristotle, by John Ferguson and Aristote et l’analyse du savoir, by Hervè Barreau.
Studi Internazionali di Filosofia (Studi) 6: 213–216.
1974. Aristotle on Memory, by Richard Sorabji. Studi 6: 211–213. Review reprinted in
Filosoficky Casopis 45, no. 4 (1997): 686–687.
1974. Xenophon’s Socrates, by Leo Strauss. Studi 6: 211.
1974. The Verb ‘Be’ in Ancient Greek, by Charles Kahn. Studi 6: 208–211.
1973. Le premier humanisme byzantine, by Paul Lemerle. Studi 5: 245–247.
1973. The Older Sophists, edited by Rosamund Kent Sprague. Studi 5: 244–245.
1972. Essays in Ancient Greek Philosophy, edited by John P. Anton and George L. Kustas.
Studi 4: 179–180.
xxviii Anthony Preus
1972. D’Aristote à Bessarion, by Paul Moraux. Studi 4: 178–179.
1972. The Philosophy of Chrysippus, by J. B. Gould. Studi 4: 175–178.
1971. A History of Greek Philosophy, Vol. III, by W. K. C. Guthrie. Studi 3: 291–221.
1970. Physiological Theory and the Doctrine of the Mean in Plato and Aristotle, by
Theodore Tracy. Studi 2: 181–184.
1966. Selections from Early Greek Philosophy, 2nd edition, by M. C. Nahm. The American
Oxonian 52, no. 2: 94–95.
Miscellaneous
SAGP Newsletters, 1981–present.
2007, 1995, 1992, 1989. Guide to the Finger Lakes Trail in Delaware County and Ulster
County, NY. Distributed by the Finger Lakes Trail Conference.
2006, 1995, 1994, 1993. FLT End-To-End: A Guide for Backpackers. Distributed by the
Finger Lakes Trail Conference. (This guide continues with the work of Joe Dabes.)
2006, 1995, 1994, 1993. Guide to the Finger Lakes Trail in Cortland County, and to the
Onondaga Trail. Distributed by the Finger Lakes Trail Conference.
2006, 1995–91, 1988-86. Guide to the Finger Lakes Trail in Chenango County. Distributed
by the Finger Lakes Trail Conference.
1992, 1989, 1987. Guide to the Finger Lakes Trail, O’Dell Road to Chippewa Falls,
Cortland County NY, and to the Onondaga Trail, Cuyler to Fabius. Distributed by the
Finger Lakes Trail Conference.
1985. “A Science Presents a Dilemma.” Binghamton Press & Sun Bulletin, Saturday,
December 14, 9a.
1985. “Reply to the ‘Note from the Editor’ and the Letter to the APA by Jay Kantor.” APA
Philosophy and Medicine Newsletter 2.
1984. “One Man’s Poison, Another’s Nectar.” Binghamton Press, March 31, 1c, 8c.
1984. “Free Choice vs. Moral Duty.” Binghamton Press, February 11, 1c, 8c.
1983. Ethical Issues in the Human Services: Bibliography and Course Outlines (produced
locally and distributed widely to complete work on NEH Grant).
1983. “Philosophy for Life.” Binghamton Press, May 28, 1c, 8c.
1981. “Ethics and Policy in the Human Services.” American Philosophical Association
Newsletter on Teaching Philosophy 2, no. 3: 6–7.
1981. “Note on Binghamton Medical Ethics Activities.” APA Committee on Philosophy
and Medicine Newsletter 11.
1981. “With Liberty Goes Freedom to Choose.” Binghamton Press, November 21, 1c, 8c.
1979. “Report on Binghamton Bioethical Grand Rounds.” In Ethics Rounds in Hospitals.
Committee on Philosophy and Medicine, American Philosophical Association.
1972. “Report on the IVth International Congress for Logic, Methodology and Philosophy
of Science, Bucharest.” 1971. Studi 4.
1958. “And She Cried Out… In Anguish.” (Short Story) Luther Life: 16–20. Reprinted in
One, 1959.
Introduction
SAGP: Studies and Society
D. M. Spitzer
Diversity
Studies in Ancient Greek Philosophy collects the work of scholars at varied
moments in their careers, including a doctoral candidate, early, mid, and late
career as well as emeriti faculty, and scholars working independently of academic
institutions. The inclusion of contributors from South America, North America,
and Europe was facilitated in part by the networks cultivated by the SAGP and
specifically Professor Preus, the Society’s Secretary. The international roster illus-
trates the continual realization of the SAGP’s international presence and its strong
commitment “to promoting equality and diversity in the field of Ancient Greek
Philosophy” (Society for Ancient Greek Philosophy 2022), as well as the broad
admiration and appreciation for Professor Preus as a scholar, educator, and the
society’s secretary since 1980. At an earlier moment in the volume’s development
there was a considerably higher number of papers by women scholars, but due to
emerging circumstances and changes in organization some of the initial contribu-
tors withdrew or found that circumstances prevented their participation; of these,
DOI: 10.4324/b22846-1
2 D. M. Spitzer
several were women. As it stands, in addition to Voula Tsouna’s foreword the
book contains three chapters by women philosophers out of 16 total. Hopefully
this does not reflect a broader imbalance in the area of study. As a way towards
gender inclusivity through the volume, statements that are not direct quotations
or translations and that are meant to apply to human beings universally have been
rendered either in plural forms or with the use of they as a singular pronoun.
Diversity of approaches, styles, and topics forms an important characteristic of
this volume, and in this sense it participates in the mode of the Essays in Ancient
Greek Philosophy series produced from 1971 to 2001 by State University of New
York Press, first under the editorship of Professors John Anton and George L.
Kustas (volume I), then of Anton and Preus (volumes II–V), and finally of Preus
alone (volume VI). Compare, for instance, the ways Ashbaugh works closely
and solely with primary texts to Fierro’s deep involvement with the scholarship
on Phaedrus, or Trelawny-Cassity’s look to a range of texts from ancient Greek
literature and modern philosophy with Wheeler’s logical analysis of truth in
Aristotle’s Categories. These are just two comparisons that illustrate the range of
approaches brought together in one book to honor Professor Preus. The full extent
of this range might serve as a reminder of the diverse and expansive possibilities
available within the field of ancient Greek philosophy.
While the scope of the volume’s current 16 chapters is broad indeed, at one
point in its development Studies in Ancient Greek Philosophy: In Honor of
Professor Anthony Preus contained more than 20 proposed chapters, covering an
even wider and more variegated range within—and beyond—the field. The spread
of that moment in the volume’s coming-to-be included studies of Zarathustran/
Zoroastrian influence on ancient Greek thinking, but also on European philoso-
phers such as Leibniz and Nietzsche. Among other studies that do not appear in
the finalized volume but were present at an earlier moment, two more deserve
special mention: a study of Xenophon’s considerations of military virtue, and
a comparative inquiry drawing together into fruitful dialogue Parmenides and
twentieth-century philosopher of the Harlem Renaissance, Alain Locke, disclos-
ing connections between Locke’s “critical relativism” and Parmenidean ἀλήθεια.
For various reasons and circumstances these proposals and some others did not
materialize into papers for the collection; hopefully their authors will accept genu-
ine thanks for their interest in the project and appreciation for their circumstances.
Even in its current, slightly reduced form, the vast coverage of 16 chapters in a
single volume such as this one still has advantages, especially for students at the
advanced undergraduate and graduate levels, but also for working scholars who,
in encountering such richly manifold studies in one book might formulate fresh
insights and connections across and among the papers in the collection. While the-
matic volumes contribute importantly in focusing attention specifically on curated
questions and areas of interest, non-thematized volumes open opportunities for
readers to craft threads and shared interests through the multiple possibilities for
arranging the chapters and bringing them into dialogue.
Hopefully, through continually expanding research and teaching in the area(s)
of ancient Greek philosophy, and perhaps through continued lines of inquiry and
Introduction 3
curriculum development that follow and are inspired by Preus’ insight that Greek
philosophy is “for the most part, a cultural product of the eastern Mediterranean”
and the Near East with inextricable connections and influences in Asia and Africa
(Preus 1992, 14–15), the appeal of studying and specializing in the area of ancient
Greek philosophy will become even more inclusive and achieve still greater
diversity.
Interdisciplinarity
The SAGP’s goal to draw attention to, and support for, the interdisciplinary char-
acter of studies in ancient Greek philosophy overlaps with several broad inquiries
in this collection that not only highlight the interdisciplinarity of scholarship on
ancient Greek philosophy, but also widen the reach of that interdisciplinarity. In
“Discovering φύσις: Reductive Materialism, the Emergence of Reflexivity, and
the First Secular Theories of Everything,” for instance, Naddaf calls on recent
studies in evolutionary biology, neuroscience, and genetics, as well as historical
and cultural studies and primary sources ranging from epic and lyric poetries to
Plato, to address the question of philosophy’s beginnings in archaic Greece. The
whole gamut comes to bear on Naddaf’s conclusion that the being to emerge in
the Greek archaic period, which he terms Homo philosophicus, arises from a
dynamic circle of mutually enhancing and transformative cultural and genetic
developments that “changed the course of civilization in the West,” develop-
ments that he stresses are not exclusive to Greeks (33–34). Taking guidance
from Preus’ thoughts on widening the scope of inquiry into Greek philosophy,
Spitzer’s chapter investigates images of totality from Persian, Mesopotamian,
and Egyptian, as well as ancient Greek texts. Hahn’s study of the Milesian phi-
losophers Thales and Anaximander draws on a broad range of the resources in
classical studies, including archaeology, ancient mathematics and technologies,
history, to develop what he terms the “one-under-many” or modular thinking
paradigm that orients early Greek philosophy, a paradigm he links specifically
to the broader cultural developments in the sixth century BCE. Investigating the
implications and necessary procedures for Thales’ measurements of the pyra-
mids in Egypt and Anaximander’s use of a gnomon to map the inhabited earth,
Hahn finds that both activities bear witness “not only to their proportional think-
ing but also their microcosmic-macrocosmic reasoning,” both of which build on
their grasp of “an underlying unity that alters without changing” (73). Trelawny-
Cassity’s chapter moves through a range of authors including Homer, Sappho,
and Tyrtaios in its exploration of the ancient sense(s) of τὸ καλόν—which he
finds to name in an irreducibly double manner beautiful and noble. The inquiry
also turns to a twentieth-century interpretation of G. W. F. Hegel (1770–1831
CE) in order to disclose the relations joining desire, recognition, and τὸ καλόν
(89–92), resulting in the insight that a “twofold desire” for what is attractive and
for recognition “splits the καλόν” (93). In his study of Plato’s Gorgias, Moore
gathers from Thucydides, Aristophanes, Gorgias, and Lysias, to build out the
meaning of φιλοσοφία/philosophia in fifth-century BCE Athens as involving
4 D. M. Spitzer
“in-depth conversation and reflection about doing well in life, personally or
socially” (106), before returning to Plato’s formulation of the term in the Gorgias.
Even when attention is concentrated on a single text squarely within philosophy,
as in Fierro’s inquiry into the meanings and implications of Plato’s use of εἰκός
in Phaedrus, the text itself looks out beyond the disciplinary boundaries of phi-
losophy, even if intending to elucidate those boundaries more effectively. Fierro
follows those outward gestures in Phaedrus towards observations on legal dis-
course of the classical period, specifically those of the Attic orator Antiphon (ca.
480–411 BCE), in order to gain a view onto the ways in which Plato appropriates
the use of εἰκός to be an access to truth “in a Platonic sense, that is to say, to the
real essence of everything” (116).
The range of topics in this volume further exemplifies the interdiscipli-
narity within study of ancient Greek philosophy, what the SAGP’s statement
of aims refers to as the “interdisciplinary and intercultural dimensions” of the
field. Emphasizing political thinking, Cortissoz undertakes a reading of Plato’s
Republic that seeks a resolution of the problems raised by the city-soul analogy:
if the city is just on condition that each citizen is just, and if some citizens are
primarily guided by desires (ἐπιθυμητικόν) in such a way that prevents their being
just, then the city cannot be just (145–146). By attending to and building out a
distinction between types (εἴδη) and manners (ἤθη), Cortissoz discloses a unity
of virtues that involves “different δυνάμεις within the soul” (158). Examples con-
cerning gender discrimination in the closing section bring the ancient text into
proximity with contemporary social and political topics: since, as Cortissoz notes,
it is difficult “to appreciate subtle mechanisms of discrimination” in contemporary
contexts, the paper gestures beyond Plato, beyond the ancient world, and towards
the important work towards a more just society “at every level,” from education,
to cultural production, to law, and more (159). Also centering an inquiry on Plato,
Jelinek concentrates on Phaedo, developing an intervention on the metaphys-
ics of Forms and the question of causation. Rather than understanding causation
in terms of participation in a Form, Jelinek advances another interpretation that
invokes both Forms and particulars in a manner that “treats each as an irreducible
source of explanation” (171).
Within the vast sweep of Aristotle’s work, Pellegrin seeks to locate De Caelo
more adequately by asking whether, and in what way(s), that text constitutes
a work in the study of nature. Ranging through Aristotle’s works, including
Meteorologica, De Caelo, Posterior Analytics, Physics, and their reception by
Simplicius (sixth c. CE), the luminaries discussed in Simplicius’ commentary
(Alexander of Aphrodisias [second–third c. CE] and Iamblicus [third–fourth
c. CE]), Ibn Rushd (aka Averroës, twelfth c. CE), and Thomas Aquinas (thir-
teenth c. CE), the very breadth of the inquiry’s scope discloses a kind of in-
built interdisciplinarity already active in Aristotle’s philosophy. Distinguishing
early in the study between two modes of carrying out inquiries into φύσις (often
translated as nature,1 perhaps better as growth), which Pellegrin characterizes
as “formal and final, the other one material and mechanistic” while also articu-
lating a combined or hybrid more “necessary for a ‘complete’ physics” (180),
Introduction 5
Pellegrin shows how, in his considerations on motions, Aristotle sets up “a kind
of conceptual framework” that shifts the inquiry away “from mathematical
considerations to a physical analysis” (187), rendering De Caelo both a scien-
tific and a physical treatise. In “Aristotle’s Critique of the Proof of Indivisible
Magnitudes,” Miller focuses on the ἀπορία (he translates: puzzle) involving
infinite divisibility in Aristotle’s account and objection to atomism. By refer-
ence to the ancient commentary of Philoponus (sixth c. CE) and the introduc-
tion of a temporal aspect—simultaneity (ἅμα), Miller develops a distinction
between “divisible anywhere” and “divisible everywhere at the same time”
(197). With this distinction in play, Miller adduces aspects of Aristotle’s geom-
etry from Physics and On Coming-To-Be and Passing-Away (De Generatione
et Corruptione) and clears the way towards a resolution of the ἀπορία and the
insight that Aristotle discerned in the atomists thinking “a failure to understand
the nature of points and magnitudes” (200).
The overlap of biological works and metaphysics sets in motion two of the
volume’s studies on Aristotle, each one further illuminating the interdiscipli-
narity of ancient philosophy. Olshewsky moves from On Parts of Animals to
Generation of Animals, from De Anima to On the Motion of Animals and History
of Animals in order to elucidate Aristotle’s differentiation of male and female
contributions to reproduction. Tracing an increasingly nuanced path through these
works that runs from an apparent distinction based in male’s form and female’s
matter in reproduction into a difference of actual or potential form—since mat-
ter “is always relative to an actuality” (206), Olshewsky turns to Metaphysics
Iota and Aristotle’s types of contrariety only to find that the path was a circle:
the contributions of male and female seem to counter “the presumption of com-
mon species” (208). Yet Olshewsky notes that the progress along this path at
least shows Aristotle thinking in a “more fluid” way than the paradigm of male-
as-seed acting on female-as-(inert)-field, a “basis for the sexist attitudes of our
current culture” (209). The range and interrelatedness of Aristotle’s philosophy
emerges, too, in Darovskikh’s study of εἶδος in Metaphysics Z. With a specific
book of Metaphysics as a focal point, Darovskikh makes his way through various
biological works towards finding that εἶδος has multiple senses that call for both
intensive and extensive reading. Primarily, through an intensive, close reading
of the relevant chapters that coordinates εἶδος with other key terms οὐσία (often
translated substance)2 and τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι (often translated essence), Darovskikh
argues that εἶδος names both species and individual form, that “form as species
and individual forms are not two different concepts” (222). This insight builds on
Darovskikh’s extensive readings, notably Categories, Posterior Analytics, On the
Generation of Animals, Parts of Animals, that both assist in articulating various
senses of εἶδος and intervene on topics of scholarly dispute, such as whether an
entity (οὐσία) is identical with its form (εἶδος).
In addition to the interdisciplinarity enacted in the studies engaged with
Aristotle’s biology and metaphysics, Mulhern’s chapter, “Πολιτεία in Aristotle’s
Nicomachean Ethics,” closely charts the movements of the term πολιτεία in
Nichomachean Ethics. Mulhern develops a network of terms to translate the one
6 D. M. Spitzer
term, πολιτεία, more precisely, with a rootedness in the specific discursive con-
texts where it occurs. To build this network, the chapter turns to Homeric poetry,
Herodotos, as well as to Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s Politics and Physics,
various translations, and the scholarly literature, particularly on the subject of the
phrase κατὰ φύσιν in “the understood occurrence” of πολιτεία (233–236): ἀλλὰ
μία μόνον πανταχοῦ κατὰ φύσιν ἡ ἀριστή (Arist. Eth. Nic. 1135a5). Mulhern
finds that Aristotle’s surrounding vocabulary, whether “language of sharing,” of
“being habituated,” of “those who rule,” or “looking ahead to using the word in
its different historical senses” in Politics (239), guides readers into the most fitting
understanding of πολιτεία in each case. This latter—the interlacing of the term
through Nichomachean Ethics and Politics—shows again the disciplinary span
and interconnectivity of Aristotle’s philosophy.
Focused on Categories and De Interpretatione, Wheeler’s chapter investigates
questions concerning truth and falsehood: what is the relationship between λόγοι
and ἡ ἀλήθεια? Can all λόγοι be true, or only certain types? What forms “the cor-
relation between things in the world (πραγμάτα) and true and false λόγοι?” (243).
From close attention to a specific passage in Categories (14b14–23), Wheeler
finds that Aristotle considers true λόγοι those which are “single simple linguis-
tic and mental assertions” (253). This insight paves a way towards an articula-
tion of the relation between truth and “things in the world (πραγμάτα),” between
Aristotle’s thinking of assertoric truth in Categories to that in Metaphysics.
In closing, Wheeler also signals toward additional lines of inquiry that would
amplify “the mathematical underpinnings of the Categories” and the relations
between Categories and Metaphysics (256).
The final chapter, reaching into the Hellenistic period, extends the volume’s
historical scope and its topical coverage. Thorp’s study of Epicurus’ theology
evaluates the realist and idealist interpretations of Epicurean divinities. To
approach the theology, Thorp opens inquiries into Epicurus’ theory of truth,
which involves considerations on the atomist, materialist cosmology entwined
with Epicurus’ conceptions of truth. The distinction Thorp makes between pri-
mary and secondary truth, where primary truth has to do with a person’s percep-
tion of εἴδωλα (images) and does not admit of falsity, while secondary truth
involves a distorted perception of an εἴδωλον that does not represent “a true grasp
of the remote object” (261), and can be false concerning the relationship between
the εἴδωλον and the “remote object” that is its source, bears importantly on the
subsequent lines of inquiry. Working through a discussion of “three foundational
items in his epistemology: sensations (αἰσθήσεις), prolepses, and feelings (τὰ
πάθη)” (264), specifically πρόληψις (“kinds of clear generic images” [266]),
Thorp returns to the question of the divinities and their relation to truth, con-
cluding that “Epicurus can claim that the old gods are false, and the new gods—
understood as living blessedly calm lives disengaged from petty concerns—are
true” (270).
All told, a breadth of coverage in the volume’s chapters spans very ancient
texts, what might be called philosophy’s prehistory (Burkert 2008/2009)—what
Preus includes in the range of “wisdom literature” (1997, 239 with notes), through
Introduction 7
the classical period and its central figures, and into the Hellenistic period. The
approaches this volume gathers extend this range into Medieval and Modern
philosophy and, of course, by way of engagement with the scholarly literature and
linkages to topics of current interest, into the contemporary moment. These layers
of historical breadth produce a vast chronological period—from approximately
3000 BCE to the present day—that incorporates a rich array of interdisciplinarity.
Translation
Without translation work on ancient philosophies cannot be done.
In a narrow sense, to study and write in English or any modern language
on topics in ancient philosophy depends on translation(s), both in terms of the
presentation of ancient material—whether by direct translation, paraphrase, or
quotation from a published translation—and in terms of the manner of learn-
ing and developing skill in reading the ancient languages. If Thales traveled to
Egypt and learned philosophy there, as reported in the Pseudo-Plutarchian Placita
Philosophorum (Ps. Plut. Plac. 875e.3), translation will also have been implicated
in Greek philosophy’s own account of its inception.
More expansively, this relationship would encompass the histories of textual
transmission including not only interlingual translations and the circulation, res-
toration, and preservation of texts, but also their transportation and the hospitable
human relationships accompanying all of the former: the other side of exile, ref-
uge, the welcoming and sheltering assistance where philosophy might continue, as
in the case of Damascius’ (462–538 CE) eastward flight from Athens (cf. Spitzer
2020, xii–xiv)—or where it might begin. While Thales may have been born in
Miletos, other accounts suggest he traveled to the Ionian city, accompanying a
companion who had been exiled from Phoenicia (Diog. Laert. I.1.22). Journeying
and voyaging throughout the eastern Mediterranean during his self-imposed exile
(Hdt. I.29), Solon, for instance, meets with such hospitality in Sardis, in the house
of Croesus, who characterizes Solon’s voyaging as φιλοσοφέων (Hdt. I.30.2). On
another leg of that long journey of philosophy, Solon among Egyptians had “to
be prepared to understand and accept what he is taught, and the teacher has to be
prepared to communicate what he knows and understands,” according to Preus’
comments on the narrative in Plato’s Timaeus (1992, 12): readiness to receive on
all sides, along with a readiness to give, has some place in the ancient narratives of
philosophy. Moreover, concerning the account of the encounter in Critias, Sallis
has observed that, in creating an archive of whatever they had heard from the
inhabitants of Atlantis, “there is good reason to suspect that virtually everything
the Egyptian scribes wrote down would have been a translation, that the writ-
ings Solon was shown in Egypt were nothing but translation” (2002, 59)—which
in turn undergo translation by Solon (εἰς τὴν ἡμετέραν ἄγων φωνὴν, Pl. Criti.
113b1). As one of what Preus terms “more profound truth” available in non-literal
readings of myths, especially those concerning philosophy’s origins (1998, 113),
both narratives implicate translation for the progress of philosophy, whether in
the form of communication by way of interpreters (translators) or in the form of
Introduction 9
language learning and its associations with translation. Explicitly in the case of
Pythagoras among Egyptians, language learning, and so some form and meas-
ure of translation, comes forward as part of his philosophical education (Diog.
Laert. VIII.1.1–3). As the activities of the SAGP, and specifically of Professor
Preus, illuminate—and as Preus himself suggested in his reference to the house of
Polemarchus in his discussions with Tsouna for her foreword to this volume—this
companionable, welcoming, and sheltering openness towards others constitutes
an important dimension of philosophy. Here, too, in the relations of translation
and philosophy, society and studies turn on a circle of reciprocity.
Broader and narrower senses of translation entwine. Even within the narrow
sense of translation, philosophy depends on, but also makes philosophical head-
way through, translation. In Preus’ study of ancient nutrition, for instance, an
opening translation of a passage from Plato’s Gorgias sets up a question as to how
to make meaningful distinctions between ἐμπειρία and τέχνη specifically related
to ὀψοποιία. The work towards such distinctions initially unfolds as sounding
various translations of the latter term before moving beyond entries in a lexicon
or specific translators’ offerings and into passages from philosophic texts (Preus
2020, 2–3). Then, from Plato, Preus brings out the meanings of the other terms at
issue: ἐμπειρία as both “a practice derived by trial and error,” drawn from a pas-
sage in Plato’s Laws, as well as a combination of “sense experience and memory,”
based on Aristotle’s thinking in Metaphysics; τέχνη as “a disposition to apply true
reasoning to production,” which Preus builds by way of an “interpretive transla-
tion” of a passage in Nicomachean Ethics (2020, 3–4). The paper’s longer sec-
tions that explore nutrition in Empedocles, Anaxagoras, and the text On Regimen,
and then more thoroughly, the second book of the latter, depend on translations
from Greek to English to deliver to English readers the range of the various spe-
cies of animals and plants discussed in that text. By the study’s end, after articu-
lating types of knowledge that together form the τέχνη of nutrition in Regimen,
the empirical (namely, the effects of certain foods on those who consume them)
and philosophic (e.g. the elemental composition of foods), Preus returns to the
distinction between ἐμπειρία and τέχνη. Building on the work that has involved
translation in the earlier sections, Preus suggests that “the aim of the practice”
might differentiate most significantly the two terms, with ἐμπειρία guided princi-
pally by “enjoyment and pleasure, without care for the lasting effects” and τέχνη,
in contrast, chiefly oriented by “health and long-term physical well-being” (2020,
29). In this way the entangled threads of translation come to light, where the nar-
rower sense (presentation in English of texts written in ancient Greek) is bound
up with, and has an active part in, another sense of translation as a way towards
formulating meanings.
An initial and seemingly mundane sense in which translation plays a vital
role—the narrow sense of translation—can be found in Spitzer’s chapter. Ranging
over texts from diverse cultural and linguistic settings, Spitzer depends on trans-
lations of ancient Egyptian, Babylonian, Zarathustran, and Upanishadic texts in
order to develop the interpretations through which the “images of totality” can be
organized into “constellations” (40–41, 51). Yet even here, a richer sense
10 D. M. Spitzer
emerges in Spitzer’s treatment of Theano (sixth century BCE; 48–50): when she
is asked the meaning of Pythagoras’ insight that “all things emerge in accordance
with number,” her answer takes place as a kind of translation—what Jakobson
termed intralingual translation (2012, 127)—an interpretation that in differ-
ent expression brings out a previously unknown dimension of the source under
investigation.
Moore opens his chapter with an announcement that the transliteration
philosophia intends to mark a difference between the practice in classical Greece
and whatever contemporary determinations operate in the term philosophy
(96). In this case, Moore’s transliteration lets the Greek term approach English,
brings it into nearness, while also activating the distance between the terms:
philosophia and philosophy. This works to remind readers of their own inter-
pretative lenses and embedded extant ideas and opinions concerning the mean-
ing and activity of philosophy. Opening this zone where the study can attempt
to articulate an ancient view involves both a refusal to translate—a moment
of non-translation that nevertheless moves within the region of translation—
and a commitment to translate through a patient investigation of the sources.
Translating φιλοσοφία-philosophia, then, will not be a matter of finding the
right word, but of letting its sense(s) come to attention throughout the entire
work of the chapter.
Where Darovskikh’s chapter recognizes ambiguities or several senses of
Aristotle’s use of εἶδος that could be translated along a spectrum “from form or
shape to species, genus, kind” (220), translation differentiates for philosophic
purposes, opens and explores the intricate differentiations within the term εἶδος
itself. Pursuing the question of whether εἶδος registers a meaningful ambiguity as
both form and species, Darovskikh finds that εἶδος in Metaphysics can be thought
as the definable inner structure of an entity (οὐσία) and as a pliable, variable gen-
erality, a “species that is common to individuals but does not exist independently
of them” (226). Along the way readers are guided through a network of Aristotle’s
terminology in ways that show how translation makes—to paraphrase and repur-
pose Aristotle’s remark on the importance of habituation this way or that (Eth.
Nic. 1103b23–25)—not a little, but rather all the difference.
Thorp, beginning from the several meanings—κατάληψιν (perception), δόξαν
ὀρθὴν (right opinion), ἔννοιαν (conception), καθολικὴν νόησιν ἐναποκειμένην
(universal thought gathered and stored)—given by Diogenes Laertius in his dox-
ography (Diog. Laert. X.33), works towards a narrower and more rigorous sense
of πρόληψις in Epicurean epistemology (264–267). Even as he develops a view
that prolepseis plausibly indicate “a kind of clear generic images—concepts—
that claim strong epistemic reliability,” Thorp finds that this does not gain ground
in the theological line of inquiry he has undertaken (266–267). Nevertheless, here
too the task of translation forms the philosophic activity of this stage of Thorp’s
chapter (as it did, Thorp observes in passing, for Lucretius [266], and for Cicero,
who offered antipicationem as a translation [Cic. Nat. D. I.44]), enabling him both
to eliminate this epistemologically restricted sense of prolepsis from the investi-
gation and to situate the question instead within the region of metaphysics.
Introduction 11
Philosophy
Studies and society belong together. Philosophy and society belong together, as
the organizing schema of teacher-student for Diogenes Laertius’ doxography
highlights: Anaximander-Anaximenes, Anaximenes-Anaxagoras, Anaxagoras-
Archelaus, Archelaus-Socrates. Moore, in one of his investigations into the
development of the term φιλοσοφία, has raised the possibility that the terms phi-
losophy and philosopher themselves gained currency in fifth–fourth-century BCE
Athens through the social connections, however distant, between Socrates and
Anaxagoras. The latter was said to have been the first in Athens to have philoso-
phized and, Moore suggests, served as a kind of paradigm for the term φιλόσοφος
(philosopher) in the popular imagination and its implications “judged so danger-
ous as to merit a capital trial” (Moore 2016, 3§5). In this case, the practice is
elaborated by way of the sociality of education and the characterization of that
practice overflowing the grasp of its practitioners into a wider social and political
network. Both pathways implicate philosophy and society in their togetherness.
The ancient genre of dialogue similarly emphasizes the belonging-together of
philosophy and society both formally, in its crafting of multiple speakers engaged
in conversation, and socially insofar as reading took place as commonly a shared,
social activity into the classical period—as the scenes of reading in Plato such
as Parmenides, Theaetetus, and Phaedrus illustrate—and beyond: centuries after
Plato, not only does Augustine (354–430 CE) remark on Ambrose’s silent read-
ing as if unusual, his comments illustrate that reading aloud still bore a kind of
invitation, either for elucidation or disputation, to “a hearer interested and intent
on the matter” (Aug. Conf. VI.iii.3; trans. Chadwick 1991, 93). From the belong-
ing-together of philosophy and society Heraclitus of Ephesus (late-sixth century
BCE) calls on others to listen (ἀκού-) to λόγος:
Beneath the shadows of the lower Hudson we came upon Brutar and
his clustered cohorts. The devastation was slackening; the bricks
had done their work. Brutar was doubtless thinking of rejoining his
people up there under the little Westchester town. He saw our
shapes, and started north. We followed. Urging him on, but not
attacking.
Thone began, "Once we get them all together up there—all of them
together—" But he did not finish.
Our lines let them through. It was a crescent battle line now, open to
the south. But when Brutar swept in we closed it as before.
The scene here had changed somewhat since we left it. The lurid
red of the opposing thought-streams still held balanced between the
lines of the fighters. But in one place it was indented now far into
Brutar's territory—a red gash like a wound gaping amid his huddled
throng. And I noticed, too, that the dim purple haze hung now like an
aura close above the heads of our enemies.
I asked Thone about it. He said, "Those who are not fighters in there
are beginning to feel our thoughts. Perhaps even they begin to
suspect what awaits them. Soon the fighters also will know."
He spoke quietly, but on a note of calm certainty that in the end we
would triumph. From that same height we watched the scene.
Almost immovable, struggling ghosts—grey translucent shapes to
my vision as now I regarded them. Yet—I wondered—were not those
shapes of Brutar's people more solid than our own? A vague
shudder mingled with triumph unholy, swept over me. Was it fancy,
or was there indeed a change?
I could see Brutar, or at least a shape I assumed to be his, raised
upon a height in the center of his forces; his arms waving; his
soundless voice doubtless exhorting his fighters to greater effort.
The fog of purple haze swirled about him, tinting, but not obscuring,
for it seemed utterly transparent. Was it my fancy that Brutar's shape
was of changing aspect?
And then I was aware of an uneasiness growing in the mob huddled
there in the midst of the fighting. A stirring. A ripple of movement.
Spreading like the ripples of a pebble thrown into a pond; spreading
until abruptly the mob was surging, struggling to break the bonds of
its own protecting ring of fighters.
The fighters felt the press of the throng behind them. Their efforts
wavered. With diverted minds their thought-stream weakened. At
once the red tumult moved in upon them.
But Thone called his orders and a score of shapes relayed them
throughout our circular investing ring. I could not understand it. We
were not to press our advantage. Our fighters lessened visibly the
strength of their attack. And our antagonists in a moment recovered.
Thone said quietly, "No, Rob—if we were to force in there now and
overwhelm them, there would be many minds unhinged, but not
driven irrevocably away. They might return. It is my aim to destroy
them completely—mind and body—annihilation!"
Savage purpose, savagely expressed! But he added, "It is best—and
I think, more merciful."
CHAPTER XX
THE DESTRUCTION OF THE GHOSTS
There came presently a sudden change to this silent battle. For the
purely mental, abruptly was substituted a semblance of physical
struggle. The two mingled. In the Ego-world it would not have been
possible; but here in the Borderland, these bodies of half-material
substance abruptly found themselves capable of it. From physical
immobility there sprang movement. A panic at first; but Brutar
quelled it, organized it into a concerted rush. His mob, his fighters,
began pressing forward in a single direction. The Borderland slope
lay well beneath the ground level of the village overhead; but off to
the left there seemed an area in the outskirts of the town where the
slope and the ground of Earth reached a common level. And Brutar's
people were pressing that way.
They surged forward; were forced back—surging and rebounding as
one would press against a yielding but entangling net. Our lines, and
theirs, and the red tumult of conflict surged with them; bending, but
the whole scene holding its contour. And I saw that very slowly, with
each forward sweep and rebound they were gaining in their
direction.
I heard Thone beside me addressing Will. "They will never make it.
They will be too late." He seemed to realize something. "Those
people up there in the town, Will—they must escape! Abandon the
town! All of them escape—now before it's too late!"
Will said, "If we could only communicate with them. Do you suppose
we could?" And Bee eagerly put in, "Let's try. Let Rob and me try.
We will go up there to the level."
They explained it all to me then. Horrible, sinister, shuddering
outcome! Grewsome! Of course, the Earth-people in the town must
escape....
Bee and I together took ourselves up the Borderland slope to the
outskirts of the village where the slope was level with the ground. We
were now half a mile beyond this spectral town which was thronged
with ghostly vehicles and ghostly people staring in wonderment
down at the battle scene.
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms
of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.F.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.