Aristotle, De Motu Animalium

The purpose of this work is to offer some instrumental annotations for the philosophical study of MA which is based on the recent critical edition of Oliver Primavesi (2020, hereinafter Prim.) faithfully translated by Benjamin Morison. The edition has been previously published in Primavesi (2018), with translation and commentary by Klaus Corcilius. The notes with details that I list below are not intended to review this extraordinary critical text of Prim., nor the remarkable work that includes it. On the contrary, I take for granted the general knowledge of its structure and contents to focus on some specific considerations about the formidable and complex closed recension that Prim offers. I think that they can at least facilitate part of the work of those who are interested in the thus renewed Greek text of Aristotle. My notes are organized into four general thematic groups related to the use of the apparatuses, the presence of the Attic language in the text, the modifications and improvements in the apparatus of the latest edition contrasted with that of 2018, and the detection of few blemishes present in both.

Oliver Primavesi has made an enormous contribution to the study of Empedo-cles, since he co-edited the editio princeps of the Strasbourg papyrus that contains substantial fragments of the Physica (Martin and Primavesi 1999). In the present slim volume he courageously revisits some of his central ideas about it in the light of subsequent research, including the discovery of new information on the duration of Empedocles' cycles (Rashed 2001). He includes new details about the history of the papyrus, which came from a funerary pectoral attached to its mummy by a collar rather than from a crown (5-9), an analysis of the philoso-pher's overall argument in book 1, a discussion of central problems, notably his use of first persons plural (47-57), and a revised text and translation with many new supplements and changes (64-79). To understand the significance of this book, the philosophical reader will need to grasp some no doubt tedious details of papyrological reconstruction. These are, however, vital to assessing the reliability of any particular theory about this text. The papyrus consisted of 52 fragments, which its editors skilfully assembled into six larger pieces or 'ensembles' (denoted by letters in bold face), leaving only five small scraps. However, they did not succeed in linking these separate ensembles. The beginning of the first and largest, a, corresponds to DK B17 as quoted by Simplicius, and contains the sign Γ marking line 300. This part of the text contains a general description of Empedocles' four elements, two forces (Love and Strife), and cosmic cycle. Another ensemble, d, appeared to describe the terrible fate of the soul of a person who eats meat. The editors assigned it to a later book of the Physica, even though its script and format are identical to those of the other pieces. They did so for two reasons: first, because its content seemed so disparate, and second because they believed that a series of fragments that Simplicius quotes in sequence (DK B17, 21, 23, 26), the first of which corresponds to ensemble a, must have come in between the two. To this reader of the editio princeps it seemed an uneconomical and therefore an unlikely hypothesis that fragments of two different rolls in the same hand and format were incorporated into the pectoral from which all the pieces derive; nor did it appear a necessary assumption that they were widely separated within the same roll. Hence I tested the reverse hypothesis, i.e., that all the pieces derive from the same portion of a single roll, by positing that they all came from the smallest possible length within it. The paper model that I made, combined with observations of the papyrus' physical state when I examined it in Strasbourg together with its editors, enabled me to show that (i) ensemble c (= B20, which

Perspectiva Filosófica, 2022

A proposta deste trabalho é pensar o estatuto das múltiplas formas de vida no legado de Empédocles de Acragas, segundo a hipótese de que o apreço poético-filosófico que ele demonstra pelas espécies em vários grupos de versos, vincula-se ao princípio amoroso de articulação da vida, Afrodite, expressão mundana de Philotes. Dado que a abordagem empedocliana dos seres vivos é ambivalente, por um lado tendendo à melancolia, o objeto em estudo se define na seleção e análise de contextos nos quais predominam signos benéficos da deusa ao redor dos seres organizados em seus habitat. Indiretamente, emerge que protótipos de temas contemporâneos de biologia, ecologia e ética são, de fato, preocupações ancestrais.

Perspectiva Filosófica, 2022

This paper aims to think the status of the multiple forms of life in the legacy of Empedocles of Akragas, according to the hypothesis that his poetic-philosophical appreciation for the species in several verses is linked to loving principle of life articulation, Aphodites, wordly expression of Philotes. Since the Empedoclean approach of living beings is ambivalent, being prone to a certain melancholy, the subject of this study is defined by a seleccion and analysis of contexts in which the benefic signs of the goddess around the organized beings in their habitat predominate. Indirectly, it emerges that prototypes of current themes in biology, ecology and ethics have ancestral roots.

Peitho. Examina Antiqua

R. Loredana Cardullo (a cura di), Il libro Alpha della Metafisica di Aristotele tra storiografia e teoria, Catania 2009, pp. 294.R. Loredana Cardullo, A sclepio di Tralle. Commentario al libro Alpha Meizon (A) della Metafisica di Aristotele. Intoduzione, testo greco, traduzione e note di commento, Acireale-Roma 2012, pp. 512.Paris 2012, pp. 164.

Ancient Philosophy, 2010

Philosophie Antique, 13, 2013

Rédigés en français ou en anglais, ou occasionnellement en allemand, espagnol ou italien, les articles proposés (70 000 signes au maximum) doivent être inédits dans la langue choisie, et être accompagnés dans tous les cas d'un bref résumé en français et en anglais. Leur présentation doit être conforme aux règles typographiques en usage dans la langue où ils sont rédigés. Ils doivent être adressés à la revue, sur disquette (ou par courrier électronique) accompagnée d'un tirage papier. Les manuscrits qui auront retenu l'attention seront soumis à un comité de lecture indépendant. Qu'ils soient acceptés ou refusés, les manuscrits ne sont pas rendus. Adresser les manuscrits, les livres pour comptes rendus et le courrier concernant la rédaction à : ou Philosophie antique P r o b l è m e s , R e n a i s s a n c e s , U s a g e s Philosophie antique, n°13 (2013), 83-115 LES PEINTRES D'EMPÉDOCLE (DK 31 B23) ENJEUX ET PORTÉE D'UNE ANALOGIE PRÉPLATONICIENNE * Leopoldo IRIBARREN Centre de recherches sur la pensée antique, CNRS, Paris RÉSUMÉ. Cet article est consacré au fragment B23 d'Empédocle, où l'auteur met

Maska, 2017

The aim of this article is to analyse the problem of reincarnation in Empedocles' poetry, especially in the fragment B115. The fragment explains the reason why the daimones undergo reincarnation and how it proceeds. I focus on the problem if reincarnation concerns every being or only some individuals of divine nature. I also try to answer the question what might be the character of the murder described in B115, presenting three possible interpretations. According to the first one, the bloodshed took place in the golden age, due to the second one-the crime was an allegory of the dismemberment of the Sphairos, and according to the third one-it was the murder committed by a divine being on a being from the mortal world. I analyse also how the adoption of these interpretations may influence the reading of other Empedocles' fragments, especially those concerning vegetarianism.

Viktoria Bachmann/ Raul Heimann (Hrsg.) Grenzen des Menschseins – Sterblichkeit und Unsterblichkeit im frühgriechischen Denken. Wiesbaden: Springer VS , 2019

Für den Druck eingereichtes Ms. In der gedruckten Fassung fehlt Abschnitt 5. Der für die Selbstbeschreibung der conditio humana im frühen und klassischen Griechentum charakteristische Kontrast von sterblicher und unsterblicher Natur ist dadurch verkürzt. 1. Einleitung: Stichwörter zu den Kontexten des Fragments 2. "Natur" und "Forschung" (historia + physis = historia peri physeôs ?) 3. "Sterbliche Natur" (thnêtê physis) 4. "Nichtalternd und todlos": Was Menschen nicht sind 5. "Sterbliches im Sinn" 5.1. Die Vernunft des Odysseus 5.2. Solons Paradoxon und die göttliche Missgunst 5.3. "Ansehnlich sterben": Die suizidale Logik des sophokleischen Aias 5.4. "Mein Teil des Lebens" (biou moira): Ein vorzeitiger Tod – und ein früher Tod, der nicht vorzeitig gewesen sein soll 6. Vorübergehende Todlosigkeit: Empedokles und Aristoteles 6.1. Grundstoffe und flüchtige Verbindungen: Vor- und nachparmenideische Kosmologien 6.2. Elemente bei Empedokles: Abwechselnd "sterblich" und "todlos" 6.3. "Unsterbliches im Sinn": Die Vernunft Platons – bei Aristoteles