The name Tritogeneia likely means ‘born of the Third’, this Third one being the supreme god, the Most High. Poseidon (at least Poseidon Helikonios) was once such a god. He was the lord of the water that descended from heaven and a deity closely associated with the celestial pole. His trident is the symbol that indicates his celestial nature, and this symbol developed from a previous one – a raised hand with three fingers. This number of fingers signified the similarity with the dwellers of the sky – the birds, with their three toes in front.
Observing the history of reception of Origen’s intellectual heritage by Russian theologians and philosophers of the past few centuries, some key moments and figures are discernible. Those figures are Grigory Skovoroda (1722–1794), Vladimir Solovyov (1853–1900), Sergei Bulgakov (1871–1944), Nicolay Berdyaev (1874–1948) and George Florovsky (1893–1979). Those authors' significance for our outline is determined by (1) their key role in the evolution of Russian theological and philosophical thought and – at the same time – (2) by the fact that those authors’ own intellectual evolution and/or (3) their ideas’ reception by their contemporaries proceeded in close connection withthe problem of Origen. So the process of reception of Origen’s intellectual heritage in Russia was substantially conditioned by the controversies raging around the key representatives of the so-called “Russian religious philosophy.”
The paper provides a historical background for the “reversal” concept of truth. In Attic drama, Plato found a way to approach the problem of conflict between the good and justice. By overcoming deficiencies of tragic representations, Plato came to understand human reality as a complex plot, prone to a complete change. His philosophical solution consisted of two steps: the birth of a proper narrative of the good and the verification of this narrative by a corresponding common narrative of justice. This verification is the basis for the reversal concept of truth, traces of which are operative also in Descartes and Heidegger.
In this paper, I try to demonstrate how critical empiricism and philosophical reasoning intertwine with each other and affected the development of medicine. It is a case study considering the problems of generation and semen in the writings of Aristotle and Galen via relationship between such concepts as matter, form, movement, change, causes and some others. The main question addressed in the paper is the reason of Galen’s return to Hippocratic paradigm of two-semina (male and female). I argue that the reason is two-fold: 1) Different philosophical reasoning and erroneous understanding of some aspects of Aristotle’s embryological model by Galen. 2) Empirical discoveries, which proved to be wrong. I demonstrate that Galen’s understanding of form/matter relationship, and his view on matter as an underling principle conditioned his understanding of the notion of physical change, that allowed him to speak about conception only as quantitative mixture between equal substrata. Finally, I show that Galen’s view on teleology and his limited understanding of formal/final vs efficient causes and their relationship forced him to claim the inadequacy of Aristotle’s biology and necessitated Galen to introduce emendations in definitions of seminal faculties of genders and reproductive fluids.
The doctrine of consubstantiality from Basil of Caesarea's "Against Eunomius", written as a reaction to the Apology of Eunomius originated a controversy over universals in the second half of the fourth century. This doctrine implies understanding of consubstantiality in the "horizontal" sense as commonness between the Persons of the Trinity, the same way as species are common to the constituent individuals. Using the fragments of Eunomius' reply to the conception of Basil in Apology for Apology, preserved in Gregory of Nyssa, I demonstrate that in his attempt to refute the applicability of the notion of consubstantiality to God the Father and the Son, Eunomius elaborated his own doctrine of commonness: the higher we go up the hierarchy of beings, the lesser the horizontal commonness in the nature of individual beings we see.
The article reconstructs philosophical context of polemics on the status of commonness in the Arian controversy. I suggest that this doctrine of Eunomius according to which the higher we go up the hierarchy of beings, the lesser the horizontal commonness in the nature of individual beings we see, may have been closely related to the Middle- and Neoplatonic interpretation of Aristotle's Categories which implied that categories and especially the category of the second substance (corresponding to species and genera) could be applied only to the corporeal realm. Keeping it in mind, I demonstrate connection between the argumentation of Eunomius and the philosophical teaching of Iamblichus. I point out the opposite accounts on status of the universal between Eunomius and Gregory of Nyssa, who created treatise "Against Eunomius" refuting Eunomius's "Apology for Apology". Two strategies of the hierarchy of beings can be identified in Gregory's "Against Eunomius". I think that each of them is connected with the Tree of Porphyry. One of these strategies is opposite to the doctrine of Eunomius, since for Gregory the most common is placed at the summit of the hierarchy, and measure of commonness decreases when we go down the hierarchy. I suggest that it was a specific doctrine of Eunomius on the universal which triggered a philosophical reaction manifested in the doctrine of Gregory of Nyssa on the hierarchy of beings.
The paper explores the key assertion of Aristotelian “Politics” that a state is formed primarily for the good life. Aristotle’s views on the essence, purpose and the best constitution of a state are analyzed in comparison with Socrates’ and Plato’s doctrine of an ideal state. The author investigates an Aristotelian interrelation between people’s understandings of happiness and their choice of a form of government and approval of a state policy. It is demonstrated that the Aristotelian idea of a state designed for the good life entered the Western political philosophy paradigm and has exerted a determining influence on the formation of a common good notion and the concept of a welfare state. The paper concludes that the choice between “the Aristotelian state” and “the Platonic state” is not only stipulated by historical and cultural reasons, but is at the same time existential for each nation.
This article attempts to reconsider the customary assessment of the performances attributed to one of the last Early Pythagoreans, Eurytus of Tarentum. His practice of «defining» a thing with the number of pebbles needed to draw its silhouette is usually regarded as a naïve or unworthy version of the number philosophy of his teacher, Philolaus of Croton. Our approach focuses on the concept of the limit, or the boundary (ὅρος), used by Aristotle to explain Eurytus' practice, which we analyse in the context of Aristotle's testimonies distinguishing Early Pythagoreanism from its interpretations in the Early Academy. We strive to show that the idea underlying Eurytus' performances deserves more appreciation in the context of Presocratic Philosophy, and to lay a basis for an alternative approach to the interpretation of this practice.
An article of the famous historian of Ancient philosophy is translated into Russian for the participants of educational project ΤΕΧΝΗ. Theoretical foundations of Arts, sciences and technology in the Greco-Roman World" (Novosibirsk, Russia). Original publication: Plotinus and the Gnostics on the Generation of Matter, Neoplatonism and Early Christian Thought, Essays in honour of A. H. Armstrong, eds. H. J. Blumenthal, R. A. Markus. London: Variorum publications, 1981, pp. 108-123.
В статье анализируются аргументы нормативизма об историко-философской реконструкции идеи возмездия в античной философии как прообраза принципа причинности. На основе идей, представленных Кельзеном в книге Общество и природа, раскрываются особенности мифологического, религиозного и философского обоснования идеи воздаяния за грехи и нарушения позитивных правил в древнем обществе. Автор приходит к выводу, что методологически важная для построения чистого учения о праве идея возмездия в дальнейшем преобразуется в принцип вменения, характерный для социальных и гуманитарных наук, внутри которых Кельзен отрицает действие принципа причинности.
This article is dedicated to conception of legitimacy of politic power in medieval Castile and later, in early modern Spanish Empire, reflected in the "Siete Partidas" of Alphonse the Sage, king of Castile and Leon (1252-1284) and in its gloss composed by Gr. Lopez - court lawyer and counsellor of the emperor Charles I (Charles V in a case of Holy Roman Empire). Jurists of XIII-th century construing the well-known legal maxim "Rex est imperator in regno suo" (Decretals "Per venerabilem", 1205, by Pope Innocent III) insisted on the supremacy of royal power not only in relation to imperial but also to papal power. Thereby a king, according to jurists of Alphonse the Wise, was represented as supreme sovereign of his kingdom either in secular and spiritual affairs. In the XVI-th century the court lawyer of a Spanish emperor, Gregorio Lopez, emphasized the supremacy of imperial power in the secular affairs and papal - in the spiritual. Yet he marked the possibility for the emperor to be deposed by the Roman people, who gave him his power and, by means of the renovated social contract, could recall it.
Corpus Platonicum is one of our primary evidence on the history of Greek magic in the classical period and with other sources it gives the knowledge on those who practiced magic-working (magoi, goetes, pharmakeis and epodoi). Plato is well known for his critics of magicians in the Republic and the Laws yet picturing Socrates as a magician and enchanter in other dialogues. I will address this apparent inconsistency by examining pharmakon (drug) and epode (incantation) as two magical terms that we know already from pre-platonic texts, while in the dialogues Plato uses them for depicting a variety of Socratic philosophical practices: in the Charmides Socrates presented as a follower of Thracian medical-magical practitioner, in the Theaetetus he appears as a midwife of the souls, in the Phaedo as a prophet and a servant of Apollo and in the Republic as a lover of poetry who places his own incantation in opposition to poetry’s mimetic charm. As it follows, the magic of Socrates is a counter-magic to the bewitchment and jugglery of a sophistry and mimetic poetry. By enchanting pharmakon with epode Socrates neutralizes the risk of pharmakon being dangerous drug: a model for a method that Socrates is famed for yet expressed in the words of magic.
The paper deals with problem of the Athenian Myth on aotochthony.
In a paper author consider the political views of Plato in context of normativism based on collection of papers of Hans Kelsen especcially "Platonic Justice"
Using the various sources, including narrative, normative and documental, the author describes in this article the process of genesis of concept of “misdemeanor” (yerro) in the Castilian language. In the reign of Alphonse the Sage (1252 – 1284) this word were used by court lawyers for signifying any crime without making difference. Basing on the information of bilingual texts (Etymologiae of Isidor of Sevilla, Fuero Juzgo etc.) author affirms that primordially the yerro were an ethic concept and only starting from the Alphonse’s reform of language acquired religious and juridical connotations.
A discussion on the origins and nature of Gnosticism, conducted in the framework of the interdisciplinary seminar “Teaching Classics. Fundamental Values in the Changing World” in August 2007. In the second century A.D. the Mediterranean world underwent a profound change in ethical attitude towards the kosmos and human society, and the change is especially well reflected in one of the most controversial intellectual movement of the Late Antiquity, the so-called Gnostic tradition. Although attempts to draw a coherent picture of Gnosis which have been undertaken so far have yielded no satisfactory result, the basic patterns of thought, commonly
labeled as ‘Gnostic’, are reasonably well known. Taken in the broadest sense of the word, Gnosticism is a specific world attitude. In the framework of Judeo-Christian world-view the Gnostics contemplated the world affairs from a global prospective, put them in the context of world history and developed a specific form of eschatology. The discussion opens with a paper by Eugene Afonasin. The author undertakes to interpret selected historical evidence, which can throw the light upon the development of this quite diverse and controversial tradition, including a passage
from the Stromateis of Clement of Alexandria (Strom. III 29, 1–2 St), which, surprisingly enough, was not previously treated in this context. The round table continues with a presentation by Alexey Kamenskikh on the Evangelium Veritatis and a general discussion.
In a paper author consider the essence of normativist interpretation of philosophical and legal ideas of Aristotle based on collection of papers of Hans Kelsen
The article concerns the problems of “categorical interpretation” of matrimonial images of the Old Testament by Philo of Alexandria. The author proposes that Philo perceived female images as objectivated aspects of corresponding types of mind (represented by male images), draws parallels between this concept and the dialectic of emanation in Platonism, and proposes some analogies with Gnostic teaching about syzygies.
This paper aims at analyzing the differences in views on human freedom as seen in Socrates’ argument with the sophist Callicles and his own pupil Aristippus. These differences reflect sociocultural issues that emerged amid the crisis of the classical polis, and called for rethinking an antinomy between freedom and slavery, typical of antiquity. While Socrates emerges victorious in both discussions, his understanding of freedom is not devoid of contradictions, stipulated by an attempt to combine freedom of a thinking person with the traditional unity of a civic community. At the same time, this debate brings to light a new dimension of human freedom, that allows a human being to stay true to oneself even in a poorest social environment, namely one’s spiritual freedom.
The article is aimed to confute the belief held about the nature of the world view of Marcus Aurelius as pessimistic. The analysis of “Meditations” demonstrates that the text represents a dialogue between a stoic sage and an ordinary man, Marcus Aurelius being in the guise of both. The article proves that the guidance of the philosopher king is positive in its nature, calling one to fulfill manfully their duties aimed at the welfare of the World and Rome while manifesting love to people and showing no fear of failure, suffering or death. The article concludes the necessity of comprehensive analysis of the epoch, activities and “Meditations” of the Roman emperor in connection with the existential phenomenological analysis of his personality.