Gerard Naddaf
York University, Philosophy, Emeritus
Anthropogony and Politogony in Anaximander of Miletus is my contribution to a co-authored book with Robert Hahn and Dirk Couprie (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2003, 9-69). In this monograph, I endeavour to demonstrate the... more
Anthropogony and Politogony in Anaximander of Miletus is my contribution to a co-authored book with Robert Hahn and Dirk Couprie (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2003, 9-69).
In this monograph, I endeavour to demonstrate the hypothesis that the primary aim of Anaximander’s book, the first philosophical prose treatise, is to explain (or investigate) from a rational/naturalistic perspective the history of the present order of things (natural and social) from its origins to the author’s own time. I maintain that this is also the aim of cosmogonical myths in general. They are traditional explanations of how the world order (natural and social) originated for the social group. I argue that Anaximander is attempting to accomplish the same end. Anaximander’s cosmogonical and cosmological perspectives were developed in several previous studies (and subsequent publications since then). Here I attempt to put Anaximander’s anthropogonical and politogonical features into perspective. To illustrate Anaximander’s new revolutionary approach, I begin with a synopsis of the major Greek mythical approaches to the origin of humanity. I then show that for Anaximander living beings emerge from a sort of primeval moisture or slime activated by the heat of the sun after the initial formation of the universe. I argue that the doxographical evidence suggests that Anaximander defended a doctrine of the transformation of species, and that climatic conditions were behind the numerous changes or modifications in animals. In conjunction, I argue that Anaximander recognized a connection between his hypothesis of a drying earth and his zoogonical theories. Moreover, I show that Anaximander surmised for valid reasons that humans did not undergo a transformation completely similar to that of other animal species. I contend that Anaximander’s account was so audacious that it was not really surpassed until Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck proposed in 1809 the first coherent theory of the evolution of species.
Before reconstructing and examining Anaximander’s own account of the development of society, I summarize how this notion was perceived before the advent of speculative thought. I then provide a historical analysis of the primary causes that gave rise to the polis or city-state. The importance of the polis resides in the fact that without it, Western philosophy and science, and thus the new rational/naturalistic approach, may not have seen the light of day. I pay particularly close attention to the polis of Miletus. Although tradition situates the birth of philosophy in Miletus, scholars have too often ignored its history or have limited it to a few cursory remarks. A close analysis of the history of Miletos reveals some important and interesting facts regarding the birth of philosophy. I show that the long period of extreme social unrest mentioned by Herodotus and others and situated during Anaximander’s period is unfounded in light of other events. I also analyze the close military and economic ties that existed between Miletus and Egypt from the middle of the seventh century BCE to the time of Anaximander. In conjunction, I trace the Greek belief that Egypt was both the oldest civilization and the cradle of civilization to the time of Anaximander. I argue that it may have originated with Anaximander himself. Anaximander was no armchair philosopher. He formulated his theory through investigation and discovery and traveled extensively, notably to Egypt via Naucratis. In this regard, I attempt to show that Egypt, or more precisely, the Nile Delta, was in certain respects, for Anaximander, the center of the universe, for both humanity and civilization originated here. I believe there is a good deal of circumstantial evidence for this, and I attempt to put this evidence into perspective, notably in my reconstruction of Anaximander’s famous map of the Oikoumenê or inhabited world which, in the final analysis, was constructed to show how and why civilization originated and propagated from Egypt. I argue that some of the evidence corroborates Martin Bernal’s claims regarding the relation between Greece and Egypt, albeit for different reasons. It’s all part of what one author has called “the Egyptian mirage in ancient Greece.”
In this monograph, I endeavour to demonstrate the hypothesis that the primary aim of Anaximander’s book, the first philosophical prose treatise, is to explain (or investigate) from a rational/naturalistic perspective the history of the present order of things (natural and social) from its origins to the author’s own time. I maintain that this is also the aim of cosmogonical myths in general. They are traditional explanations of how the world order (natural and social) originated for the social group. I argue that Anaximander is attempting to accomplish the same end. Anaximander’s cosmogonical and cosmological perspectives were developed in several previous studies (and subsequent publications since then). Here I attempt to put Anaximander’s anthropogonical and politogonical features into perspective. To illustrate Anaximander’s new revolutionary approach, I begin with a synopsis of the major Greek mythical approaches to the origin of humanity. I then show that for Anaximander living beings emerge from a sort of primeval moisture or slime activated by the heat of the sun after the initial formation of the universe. I argue that the doxographical evidence suggests that Anaximander defended a doctrine of the transformation of species, and that climatic conditions were behind the numerous changes or modifications in animals. In conjunction, I argue that Anaximander recognized a connection between his hypothesis of a drying earth and his zoogonical theories. Moreover, I show that Anaximander surmised for valid reasons that humans did not undergo a transformation completely similar to that of other animal species. I contend that Anaximander’s account was so audacious that it was not really surpassed until Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck proposed in 1809 the first coherent theory of the evolution of species.
Before reconstructing and examining Anaximander’s own account of the development of society, I summarize how this notion was perceived before the advent of speculative thought. I then provide a historical analysis of the primary causes that gave rise to the polis or city-state. The importance of the polis resides in the fact that without it, Western philosophy and science, and thus the new rational/naturalistic approach, may not have seen the light of day. I pay particularly close attention to the polis of Miletus. Although tradition situates the birth of philosophy in Miletus, scholars have too often ignored its history or have limited it to a few cursory remarks. A close analysis of the history of Miletos reveals some important and interesting facts regarding the birth of philosophy. I show that the long period of extreme social unrest mentioned by Herodotus and others and situated during Anaximander’s period is unfounded in light of other events. I also analyze the close military and economic ties that existed between Miletus and Egypt from the middle of the seventh century BCE to the time of Anaximander. In conjunction, I trace the Greek belief that Egypt was both the oldest civilization and the cradle of civilization to the time of Anaximander. I argue that it may have originated with Anaximander himself. Anaximander was no armchair philosopher. He formulated his theory through investigation and discovery and traveled extensively, notably to Egypt via Naucratis. In this regard, I attempt to show that Egypt, or more precisely, the Nile Delta, was in certain respects, for Anaximander, the center of the universe, for both humanity and civilization originated here. I believe there is a good deal of circumstantial evidence for this, and I attempt to put this evidence into perspective, notably in my reconstruction of Anaximander’s famous map of the Oikoumenê or inhabited world which, in the final analysis, was constructed to show how and why civilization originated and propagated from Egypt. I argue that some of the evidence corroborates Martin Bernal’s claims regarding the relation between Greece and Egypt, albeit for different reasons. It’s all part of what one author has called “the Egyptian mirage in ancient Greece.”
Research Interests:
This paper is the penultimate version of my contribution to Studies in Ancient Greek Philosophy in Honor of Professor Anthony Preus (ed. David Spitzer), London: Routledge, 2023, 18-36. I argue that “natural teleology” as Nagel... more
This paper is the penultimate version of my contribution to Studies in Ancient Greek Philosophy in Honor of Professor Anthony Preus (ed. David Spitzer), London: Routledge, 2023, 18-36. I argue that “natural teleology” as Nagel understands it has a historical precedent in what is called the discovery or invention of nature or physis which is at the foundation of early Greek philosophy and science. It then led some thinkers to affirm reductive materialism, which in turn generated a reaction in the form of theism as a philosophical position, a theism grounded in arguments for the existence of God/gods. The aim of this paper is to introduce philosophers and scientists to the different parties in the original dispute and to their terms of reference. I also discuss in context the emergence of a new form of thinking, if not a new kind of Homo sapiens: the advent of Homo philosophicus, and the self-conscious reflexivity this being presupposes, and without which Greek philosophy and science may not have seen the light of day.
Research Interests: Cognitive Psychology, Evolutionary Psychology, Human Evolution, Philosophy of Mind, Homer, and 11 morePlato, Social and Cultural Anthropology, Culture, The Self, Ancient Philosophy, Ancient myth and religion, Ancient Greek Philosophy, Thomas Nagel, Physis, Ancient Greek Science and Philosophy, and Consciousness and Creativity
Research Interests:
Mucho se ha escrito sobre la célebre transición del muthos al logos, o del mito a la razón. Sin embargo, el tratamiento que se le ha dado al asunto de cómo respondieron los defensores del mito es más bien escaso. Ellos respondieron con... more
Mucho se ha escrito sobre la célebre transición del muthos al logos, o del mito a la razón. Sin embargo, el tratamiento que se le ha dado al asunto de cómo respondieron los defensores del mito es más bien escaso. Ellos respondieron con mutho-logia; es decir, con un logos sobre el mito. Esta aproximación racional invocaba el mismo logos con el que generalmente se asocia la filosofía. De hecho, la philosophía y la muthología están tan estrechamente relacionadas por momentos que hasta el período de la Ilustración suele ser difícil distinguirlas entre sí. Esto se debe al encanto del mito o, más precisamente, a la interpretación alegórica del mito. En este ensayo pretendo esclarecer el origen y el desarrollo de este poco notado, aunque notable, evento en la historia de la filosofía.
Research Interests:
El origen y significado de la “inspiración poética” ha sido siempre objeto de considerable controversia. Lo que los críticos no preguntan muy a menudo es: ¿cuáles son las palabras o frases que los textos poéticos tempranos, previos al... more
El origen y significado de la “inspiración poética” ha sido siempre objeto de considerable controversia. Lo que los críticos no preguntan muy a menudo es: ¿cuáles son las palabras o frases que los textos poéticos tempranos, previos al Período Clásico, usaron para expresar el genio poético o mousikē que nosotros asociamos con la inspiración en la poesía griega temprana? En este ensayo examino, en primer lugar y principalmente, tanto la terminología empleada por Homero y Hesíodo para expresar la experiencia poética, como el rol del aoidoso cantor/poeta en sus descripciones respectivas. Sostengo no solo que se confunden en Homero y Hesíodo las nociones físicas y figurativas de “inspiración”, es decir, que no son diferenciadas por los poetas de manera consciente, sino que la poesía misma debe haber sido vista por Homero y Hesíodo como un don divino –de acuerdo a la voluntad de los dioses–. También sostengo que diversas etimologías y contextos sugieren fuertemente que un tipo de mania o ...
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
espanolEn este articulo, examino la religion de los primeros filosofos griegos y la contribucion de Socrates al debate. Sostengo que todos los primeros filosofos griegos expresaron tendencias teleologicas similares a las que encontramos... more
espanolEn este articulo, examino la religion de los primeros filosofos griegos y la contribucion de Socrates al debate. Sostengo que todos los primeros filosofos griegos expresaron tendencias teleologicas similares a las que encontramos en los dialogos posteriores de Platon y, por lo tanto, tuvieron una perspectiva religiosa cosmica similar, incluida una comprension compartida del objetivo ultimo de las practicas religiosas, como cantar himnos y rezar. El Nous o la mente, que tambien se manifiesta en el orden de la naturaleza, es el arbitro final para todos. En conjunto, lo que todas estas ontologias tienen en comun es la conviccion de que las semillas de la conciencia humana, la cognicion y el valor son inherentes al principio originario. Tienen una teoria de todo lo que parece similar a lo que Thomas Nagel llama “teleologia natural”, pero sin el ateismo. Empiezo poniendo en perspectiva el descubrimiento griego de la naturaleza (phusis), y luego recurro a los primeros filosofos y e...
Research Interests:
In this paper, I examine some of the historical references in the famous “autobiographical” passage in the Phaedo (96a-99d), in which Socrates’ describes his enthusiasm for natural philosophy when he was young. Although much ink has been... more
In this paper, I examine some of the historical references in the famous “autobiographical” passage in the Phaedo (96a-99d), in which Socrates’ describes his enthusiasm for natural philosophy when he was young. Although much ink has been spilled about the passage, not enough attention has been given to the time frame that may be covered by the term neos or “young” in the expression “when I was young” (neos ôn, 96a6). Depending on the timeframe neos may be thought to cover — and there are at least two different age ranges — scholars’ may have incorrectly identified some of the historical figures (e.g., Diogenes of Apollonia) Socrates appears to be alluding to. Moreover, clarifying the meaning of neos may also contribute to the dating of the work and periods of activity of Anaxagoras. Finally, I argue that the evidence suggests that Socrates may never have lost interest in natural philosophy. In sum, there is much more that we can glean from this passage than generally assumed. This paper, which was condensed for this talk and contribution, is part of a much longer project on the “historical” Socrates. These are the works cited in the paper, the published version of which has an integrated bibliography at the end of the volume. John Burnet, Plato: Euthyphro, Apology of Socrates, Crito, ed. with notes, Oxford: Clarendon Paperbacks, 1924/1977. Danial Graham, “Socrates on Samos,” Classical Quarterly 58 (2008): 308–13. R. Hackforth, Plato’s Phaedo, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1955. Pierre Hadot, “The Figure of Socrates,” in Philosophy as a Way of Life,” edited and with an Introduction by Arnold I. Davidson, London: Blackwell Publishing, 1995/2015. Thomas Hubbard, “Peer Homosexuality,” in A Companion to Greek and Roman Sexualities, ed. Thomas K. Hubbard, London: Wiley Blackwell, 128-49. Charles Kahn, Plato and the Socratic Dialogue: The Philosophic Use of a Literary Form, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Andrew Lear, “Ancient Pederasty: An Introduction,” in A Companion to Greek and Roman Sexualities, ed. Thomas K. Hubbard, London: Wiley Blackwell, 2014, 102-27. Andrew Lear, “Was pederasty problematized”? in Sex in Antiquity: Exploring Gender and Sexuality in the Ancient World, ed. Mark Masterson, Nancy Sorkin Rabinowitz and James Robson, London: Routledge, 2015, 115-36. Gerard Naddaf, The Greek Concept of Nature, Albany: State University of New York Press, 2005. Gerard Naddaf, “The young ‘historical’ Socrates in the Apology and Symposium,” in Selected Papers from the Tenth Symposium Platonicum: The Symposium, ed. Mauro Tulli and Gabriele Cornelli, Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag, 2015, 448-53. Christopher Rowe, Plato. Phaedo, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. David Sedley, Creationism and its Critics in Antiquity, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2007.
Research Interests:
Cette these a pour but de montrer que la preuve que donne platon de l'existence de dieu au livre x des lois, est l'aboutissement d'une reflexion menee pendant plusieurs generations sur l'origine et l'evolution du... more
Cette these a pour but de montrer que la preuve que donne platon de l'existence de dieu au livre x des lois, est l'aboutissement d'une reflexion menee pendant plusieurs generations sur l'origine et l'evolution du concept grec de physis (nature), auquel fait reference le titre : peri physeos (sur la nature) des ouvrages des philosophes grecs avant socrate. C'est une lecture approfondie des lois x de platon qui est a la base de ce travail, travail qui a cependant pour source l'elucidation du vocable physis. Une analyse linguistique de ce mot montre que son sens fondamental et etymologique est celui de " croissance ". En tant que nom d'action en -sis physis englobe 3 choses : l'origine, le processus et le resultat, c'esta-dire l'ensemble du processus de croissance d'une chose de sa naissance a sa maturite. Or, les presocratiques dans leurs recherches peri physeos veulent definir non pas la physis d'une chose en particulier, mais la physis de toutes choses en general. D'ailleurs, platon, au livre x des lois, laisse entendre que ce processus n'implique pas uniquement l'origine et l'evolution de l'univers, mais egalement celles de l'homme et de la societe dans laquelle il vit. Une telle historia cependant ne commence pas avec les presocratiques, mais avec l'homme archaique. Dans ses mythes de creation qui passent par les trois memes etapes (cosmogonie, anthropogonie, poliogonie), l'homme archaique cherche a s'assurer que le present etat de choses restera tel qu'il est. Aussi avons-nous retrace l'origine et le developpement de ce schema ternaire de l'homme archaique a platon. Ce faisant, nous avons tente de montrer comment on est passe d'un recit mythique a un recit speculatif; comment ce dernier a contribue a saper les fondements de la polis grecque; comment la preuve de l'existence de dieu aux lois x est a la fois la pierre angulaire de l'ensemble des lois et celle du peri physeos de platon (timee, critias, hermocrates = lois iii, et de fait, l'apogee de tous les recits de type peri physeos.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Naddaf Gérard. Commentaire du livre X des Lois de PLaton . In: École pratique des hautes études, Section des sciences religieuses. Annuaire. Tome 89, 1980-1981. 1980. pp. 601-603
Research Interests:
It is generally considered that the civilization of ancient Greece with its characteristic art and thought is linked with us in ways that other societies are not. Through its cultural ascendancy over Rome, ancient Greece is seen as the... more
It is generally considered that the civilization of ancient Greece with its characteristic art and thought is linked with us in ways that other societies are not. Through its cultural ascendancy over Rome, ancient Greece is seen as the foundation of European/Western civili-zation. ...
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Hesiod forerunner of Greek cosmogonies of the evolutionary type As long as the renewal ritual peculiar to all creation myths persisted, it was impossible to escape from a mythical and circular time which implied an eternal recurrence of... more
Hesiod forerunner of Greek cosmogonies of the evolutionary type As long as the renewal ritual peculiar to all creation myths persisted, it was impossible to escape from a mythical and circular time which implied an eternal recurrence of the same events. In comparing Hesiod's "Theogony ...
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
IN THE HISTORY OF LITERATURE, few stories have received as much atten-tion as the astonishing story of Atlantis. Books on the subject run well into the thousands.1 Since Plato explicitly tells us the Atlantis story is "true,"2... more
IN THE HISTORY OF LITERATURE, few stories have received as much atten-tion as the astonishing story of Atlantis. Books on the subject run well into the thousands.1 Since Plato explicitly tells us the Atlantis story is "true,"2 the "general reader" assumes it to be so. On the other hand, ...
Research Interests:
Abstract: In the Laws Plato argues that no one who believes in the gods would voluntarily commit a crime. Plato's view on the nature of the gods is radically different from the traditional Greek view which portrays the gods as human... more
Abstract: In the Laws Plato argues that no one who believes in the gods would voluntarily commit a crime. Plato's view on the nature of the gods is radically different from the traditional Greek view which portrays the gods as human beings writ large. He advanced the opinion that ...
Abstract This paper is the penultimate version of my contribution to a forthcoming Festschrift in honor of Anthony Preus (edited by D.M. Spitzer and under contract, Routledge). It is a much-revised version of an invited talk for the XII... more
Abstract
This paper is the penultimate version of my contribution to a forthcoming Festschrift in honor of Anthony Preus (edited by D.M. Spitzer and under contract, Routledge). It is a much-revised version of an invited talk for the XII International Ontology Conference on Physics and Ontology in San Sebastian, Spain, October 2-6, 2018). I argue that “natural teleology” as Nagel understands it has a historical precedent in what is called the discovery or invention of nature or physis which is at the foundation of early Greek philosophy and science. It then led some thinkers to affirm reductive materialism, which in turn generated a reaction in the form of theism as a philosophical position, a theism grounded in arguments for the existence of God/gods. The aim of this paper is to introduce the philosophers and scientists to the different parties in the original dispute and to their terms of reference. I also discuss in context the emergence of a new form of thinking, if not a new kind of Homo sapiens: the advent of Homo philosophicus, and the self-conscious reflexivity this being presupposes, and without which Greek philosophy and science may not have seen the light of day.
This paper is the penultimate version of my contribution to a forthcoming Festschrift in honor of Anthony Preus (edited by D.M. Spitzer and under contract, Routledge). It is a much-revised version of an invited talk for the XII International Ontology Conference on Physics and Ontology in San Sebastian, Spain, October 2-6, 2018). I argue that “natural teleology” as Nagel understands it has a historical precedent in what is called the discovery or invention of nature or physis which is at the foundation of early Greek philosophy and science. It then led some thinkers to affirm reductive materialism, which in turn generated a reaction in the form of theism as a philosophical position, a theism grounded in arguments for the existence of God/gods. The aim of this paper is to introduce the philosophers and scientists to the different parties in the original dispute and to their terms of reference. I also discuss in context the emergence of a new form of thinking, if not a new kind of Homo sapiens: the advent of Homo philosophicus, and the self-conscious reflexivity this being presupposes, and without which Greek philosophy and science may not have seen the light of day.
Research Interests:
This essay is my review article of Robert Hahn’s highly original book on the architectural origins of Greek philosophy, which is aptly named: Anaximander and the Architects: The Contributions of Egyptian and Greek Architectural... more
This essay is my review article of Robert Hahn’s highly original book on the architectural origins of Greek philosophy, which is aptly named: Anaximander and the Architects: The Contributions of Egyptian and Greek Architectural Technologies to the Origins of Greek Philosophy. I provide an overview of each of the five chapters of Hahn’s novel thesis with a special emphasis on its insights, and I also offer a critique with a special focus on the history of Miletus prior to and during the time of Anaximander and Thales. I endeavor to show how the social and political events influenced Anaximander’s famous cosmological model and the origins of philosophy tout court. Nonetheless, I think that Anaximander and the Architects and Hahn’s subsequent books on the origins of Western philosophy and science (including Archaeology and the Origins of Philosophy (2010) and The Metaphysics of the Pythagorean Theorem (2017)) are among the most innovative works to date on a phenomenon that arguably changed forever the direction of human thought. A topic, I might add, that few in the field of the history of philosophy and science, let alone anthropology and human evolution, actually seem to have given much thought to.
Research Interests:
In this paper, I examine the religion of the early Greek philosophers, and Socrates contribution to the debate. I argue that all of the early Greek philosophers expressed teleological tendencies similar to what we find in Plato's later... more
In this paper, I examine the religion of the early Greek philosophers, and Socrates contribution to the debate. I argue that all of the early Greek philosophers expressed teleological tendencies similar to what we find in Plato's later dialogues, and they would thus have a similar cosmic religious outlook, including a shared understanding of the ultimate point of religious practices such as singing hymns and praying. Nous or mind, which is also manifest in the order of nature, is the final arbiter for all. In conjunction, what all these ontologies have in common is the conviction the seeds of human consciousness, cognition, and value were inherent in the originative principle. They have a theory of everything that seems akin to what Thomas Nagel calls "natural teleology," but without the atheism. I begin by putting the Greek discovery of nature (phusis) into perspective, and then turn to the first philosophers and examine the correlation between phusis, theos, psuchê, and nous in their respective works. I'll discuss in this context Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes, Xenophanes, Heraclitus, Parmenides, Alcmaeon, Empedocles, and Anaxagoras. These are, for the most part, the natural philosophers to whom Socrates refers in the famous "autobiographical" passage in the Phaedo (96a-99d) when he describes the enthusiasm for natural philosophy (peri phuseôs historia) he had when he was young (neos ôn, 96a6). I examine this passage in some detail and argue that there is an element of bad faith on the part of Socrates because he is ignoring the conscious or unconscious teleological tendencies in the philosophers' respective accounts, of which he must have been aware. Then, after looking at the accusations against Socrates in Plato's Apology, I turn to the portrait of Socrates in Aristophanes' Clouds where he is characterized as a meteorosophistês (360) and examine in this context the culture of the period. I also examine Socrates teleological tendencies in Xenophon's Memorabilia, and compare them both with the early Greek philosophers and with Plato's teleological tendencies in the Timaeus. I argue that Plato is closer to the early Greek philosophers than to Socrates, even though his teleology is more providential. Finally, I discuss the connection between peri phuseôs narrations and religious practices such as hymns and sacrifices, and argue that here too Plato is a closer match with the religious tendencies of early Greek philosophers.
https://www.apeironestudiosdefilosofia.com/numero-11
https://www.apeironestudiosdefilosofia.com/numero-11
Research Interests:
Plato’s attitude toward the poets and poetry has always been a flashpoint of debate, controversy and notoriety, but most scholars have failed to see their central role in the ideal cities of the Republic and the Laws, that is, Callipolis... more
Plato’s attitude toward the poets and poetry has always been a flashpoint of debate, controversy and notoriety, but most scholars have failed to see their central role in the ideal cities of the Republic and the Laws, that is, Callipolis and Magnesia. In this paper, I argue that in neither dialogue does Plato “exile” the poets, but, instead, believes they must, like all citizens, exercise the expertise proper to their profession, allowing them the right to become full-fledged participants in the productive class. Moreover, attention to certain details reveals that Plato harnesses both positive and negative factors in poetry to bring his ideal cities closer to a practical realization. The status of the poet and his craft in this context has rarely to my knowledge been addressed.
Research Interests:
In this paper, I want to focus on the notion of psuchê or soul and the myths of the afterlife from Homer to Plato. It is likely that for the Greeks in general their first idea of psuchê and what happens to it after death was the Homeric... more
In this paper, I want to focus on the notion of psuchê or soul and the myths of the afterlife from Homer to Plato. It is likely that for the Greeks in general their first idea of psuchê and what happens to it after death was the Homeric one. And because of the natural role of mimêsis in poetic performance, this notion would become all the more engrained in the “minds” of the vast majority of Greeks. But the history of soul and the afterlife is more intriguing and complex than simply being a series of footnotes to Homer. A number of other competing notions of the soul and the afterlife began to emerge shortly after the Homeric poems/songs appeared. These too are steeped in myth and ritual and the “song” culture too. And then we have the Milesians, or first philosophers. There is a dramatic shift here again. With this group, soul appears as a universal moving principle, which will later become in Plato a key to his whole enterprise.
Plato never ceases to grapple with the notion of psuchê, and he never ceases to innovate on what he understands by this idea. Nonetheless, for Plato at every stage of his thinking, soul can only be represented by eschatological or cosmological myths. It is inaccessible to explanation. This is ironic when we consider that psuchê is the subject and common principle of his physics, his epistemology, and his psychology/anthropology. And even when soul becomes the cornerstone of the hypothesis of a distinction between the sensible and the intelligible with soul understood as a reality intermediary between the two others, this occurs in the context of a cosmological myth. It is still an unverifiable account.
My main focus in Plato will be on his notions of soul (individual and universal) and post-mortem retribution in the Apology, Gorgias, Phaedo, Republic, Phaedrus, Timaeus and Laws. I want to show that Plato’s final thoughts on the soul and the afterlife are a giant leap from earlier positions, and indeed from those of his predecessors. They come across as a kind of “new age” eschatology. Plato was the apostle of reincarnation, and it is interesting to see how this idea, which he borrowed from others, evolved over his dialogues. In addition, he is also the apostle of free will—an idea absent from the works of his predecessors. I also do not want to lose sight of the role of Plato as a poet and the role of poetic performance throughout this odyssey. There is, as I see it, a kind of perplexing culmination in the Laws. While providing us with a “scientific” eschatology, Plato nonetheless sees himself as a legislator-poet who wants to transform the entire lawcode into the ultimate poetic performance. There is, moreover, a constant struggle between his insistence on free will, on the one hand, and his insistence on using irrational persuasion, on the other, to motivate human souls to fulfill the world’s teleological purpose.
For the table of contents, introduction and bibliography corresponding to this volume, see:
http://www.academicprintingandpublishing.com/docs/Reflections%20on%20Plato%27s%20Poetics_Front_Intro._Biblio._Indices.pdf
There is an unabridged Chinese edition of this essay in Plato’s Poetics (edited by Keping Wang), Beijing: University of Beijing Press, 2016, 145-199.
Plato never ceases to grapple with the notion of psuchê, and he never ceases to innovate on what he understands by this idea. Nonetheless, for Plato at every stage of his thinking, soul can only be represented by eschatological or cosmological myths. It is inaccessible to explanation. This is ironic when we consider that psuchê is the subject and common principle of his physics, his epistemology, and his psychology/anthropology. And even when soul becomes the cornerstone of the hypothesis of a distinction between the sensible and the intelligible with soul understood as a reality intermediary between the two others, this occurs in the context of a cosmological myth. It is still an unverifiable account.
My main focus in Plato will be on his notions of soul (individual and universal) and post-mortem retribution in the Apology, Gorgias, Phaedo, Republic, Phaedrus, Timaeus and Laws. I want to show that Plato’s final thoughts on the soul and the afterlife are a giant leap from earlier positions, and indeed from those of his predecessors. They come across as a kind of “new age” eschatology. Plato was the apostle of reincarnation, and it is interesting to see how this idea, which he borrowed from others, evolved over his dialogues. In addition, he is also the apostle of free will—an idea absent from the works of his predecessors. I also do not want to lose sight of the role of Plato as a poet and the role of poetic performance throughout this odyssey. There is, as I see it, a kind of perplexing culmination in the Laws. While providing us with a “scientific” eschatology, Plato nonetheless sees himself as a legislator-poet who wants to transform the entire lawcode into the ultimate poetic performance. There is, moreover, a constant struggle between his insistence on free will, on the one hand, and his insistence on using irrational persuasion, on the other, to motivate human souls to fulfill the world’s teleological purpose.
For the table of contents, introduction and bibliography corresponding to this volume, see:
http://www.academicprintingandpublishing.com/docs/Reflections%20on%20Plato%27s%20Poetics_Front_Intro._Biblio._Indices.pdf
There is an unabridged Chinese edition of this essay in Plato’s Poetics (edited by Keping Wang), Beijing: University of Beijing Press, 2016, 145-199.
Research Interests:
According to the doxographical tradition, Anaximander of Miletus, the first Hellenic thinker traditionally counted as a philosopher to write a prose book, held that the earth remains at rest at the center of the universe and that its form... more
According to the doxographical tradition, Anaximander of Miletus, the first Hellenic thinker traditionally counted as a philosopher to write a prose book, held that the earth remains at rest at the center of the universe and that its form is cylindrical and that its depth is a third of its width, that is, its diameter is three times its height. He imagined the heavenly bodies as rings of fire somewhat like chariot wheels, encased in aêr or mist except for the aperture through which the fire emerges. He postulated three of these rings: one for the sun, one for the moon, and one for the fixed stars. As for their relative distance to the earth, Anaximander placed the sun furthest of all, then the moon, and finally the fixed stars. The texts are clear on this point and are not contested by anyone. However, as soon as one turns to the actual sizes and distances of the three rings, one enters into the realm of conjecture because of the lacunae in our testimonia. My aim in this paper is to try to resolve the controversy and confusion surrounding the measurements associated with Anaximander’s cosmological model, and to offer some visual representations of the results. This paper is a revised version of my analysis of the measurements found in the first part of my article “On the Origin of Anaximander’s Cosmological Model,” Journal of the History of Ideas (59) 1998, 1-28.
Research Interests:
Although we have only one extant fragment from the sixth-century BC Milesian philosopher, Anaximander of Miletus, a number of doxographies enable us to reconstruct his ideas concerning the origin and evolution of the present order of... more
Although we have only one extant fragment from the sixth-century BC Milesian philosopher, Anaximander of Miletus, a number of doxographies enable us to reconstruct his ideas concerning the origin and evolution of the present order of things, that is, what may be called a historia (or investigation) of the peri phuseos type. What is distinctly important about the Milesian’s historia is that being the first rational account of this type to have come down to us, it helps us understand what is involved in a movement from the mythopoetic to a speculative account. One of the most interesting facets of Anaximander’s system is his cosmological model, which places an immobile earth at the center of a celestial sphere. The reason given is that, the earth being equidistant from all the points of the celestial circumference, there is no reason for it to move up rather than down, or left rather than right. In sum, the Milesian’s reasoning behind the position of the earth appears to be mathematical. It is therefore not surprising that this is often considered Anaximander’s greatest achievement; for it liberated the mind from the idea that the earth needed a material support. This is not the only role the earth played in his cosmology. The earth is also the most important element in determining the sizes and distances of the other celestial bodies; that is, their sizes and distances are analogous to the dimensions of the earth. This may be deduced from a certain number of doxographies which tell us that the Milesian conceived the shape of the earth as that of a column drum three times as broad as it is high and that the distances of the stars, of the moon, and of the sun (or the respective rings) from the center of the earth are in a ratio of 1:2:3. It appears that Anaximander realized his universe according to a mathematical plan following the series 3. This hypothesis, first formulated by Paul Tannery in the late nineteenth century, has in spite of its conjectural nature, been adopted by the vast majority of commentators. However, they are far from agreeing about the origin of the numbers and consequently about the origin of the cosmological model. There are, in the main, four hypotheses: (1) they are the result of a sacred inspiration; (2) they are the result of an astronomical inspiration; (3) they are the result of an architectural inspiration; (4) they are the result of a political inspiration. I argue that the numbers which translate the sizes and distances of the heavenly bodies in relation to the earth correspond in some way or other to the three social groups of which the polis of Anaximander’s time was composed: the aristocracy, the (new) middle class and the peasantry (or poor). Anaximander’s cosmological model reflects what he saw as the only possible way of ridding the polis of the political dissention of his time: isonomia. Thus, each of the three social groups would correspond to one of the three celestial rings whose numbers translate the same relation of equality, symmetry, and reciprocity (1:2:3) in relation to the centre of the universe, as the three social groups in relation to the agora. Consequently, since Anaximander, like Plato, is advocating a socio-political model which has yet to be realized, he may be considered as the first known utopian.
Twenty years after publishing this article, I’m still convinced Anaximander’s cosmological model has a socio-political dimension whatever the Milesian’s talent as an astronomer. I’ll be posting shortly a couple of subsequently published articles on Anaximander’s measurements, and on the social and political history of the period to reinforce my case in the JHI article. I have not been able to correct the typos in the original article.
Twenty years after publishing this article, I’m still convinced Anaximander’s cosmological model has a socio-political dimension whatever the Milesian’s talent as an astronomer. I’ll be posting shortly a couple of subsequently published articles on Anaximander’s measurements, and on the social and political history of the period to reinforce my case in the JHI article. I have not been able to correct the typos in the original article.
Research Interests:
No one doubts the important influence of Homer and Hesiod on the traditional education of the Greeks. As Herodotus notes, they were behind the systemization of religious and social values common to all Greeks (Histories 2.153). While... more
No one doubts the important influence of Homer and Hesiod on the traditional education of the Greeks. As Herodotus notes, they were behind the systemization of religious and social values common to all Greeks (Histories 2.153). While Hesiod’s two poems, the Theogony and Works and Days, may not have had the same cultural effect as Homer’s two literary masterpieces, the Iliad and the Odyssey, they were quite obviously significant. Indeed, if Herodotus is correct, then virtually everyone was aware of their contents. In this paper, I argue that in his Works and Days, Hesiod is advocating a new type of political arete which is clearly reformist whereas in the Theogony his position is conservative. In the Theogony, Hesiod believes that the socio-political order advocated by Zeus, that is, the Homeric model, must be followed. In Works and Days, on the other hand, he wants to overthrow that model. If one considers that the poet had the power of a priest during the archaic period and that Hesiod’s reputation as a poet in his own lifetime was certainly noteworthy (to say nothing of his posthumous reputation), his poetry must have been a catalyst for many movements pushing for social reform, that is, the same social reform Hesiod is advocating for in the Works and Days.
Research Interests:
Plato's evaluations of the written and spoken word are complex, even ambiguous. On the one hand, he clearly privileges the give-and-take oral conversation as the paradigm for philosophical discussion, and on the basis of this paradigm he... more
Plato's evaluations of the written and spoken word are complex, even ambiguous. On the one hand, he clearly privileges the give-and-take oral conversation as the paradigm for philosophical discussion, and on the basis of this paradigm he offers strong critiques of the written word, notably in the Phaedrus and Letter 7. On the other hand, he is a most famous enemy of the oral performance of poetry − notwithstanding the fact that in the Republic he gives 'music' a prominent place in education. When we turn to the Laws, we encounter another aspect or dimension of Plato's thinking about the written word and poetic performance. Here Plato argues that for political and moral salvation in the city of Magnesia the laws themselves are to be versified and performed as songs. But what are we to make of this recommendation? To explore the relationship between writing and poetic performance, I begin with a discussion of Plato's account of the introduction of written laws, turn to his recommendation concerning the dramatic representation of the laws, and then end with a review of the precedents for Plato's position. My overall aim is to show that, drawing on historical precedents of which he was no doubt aware, Plato in the Laws truly does recommend the public performance of the laws. Singing and dancing the laws is not a fanciful suggestion: the poetic performance of the written laws is intended to be compulsory for the entire citizen body.
Research Interests:
In the history of literature, few stories have received as much attention as the astonishing story of Atlantis. Books on the subject runs into the thousands. Since Plato explicitly tells us the Atlantis story is “true,” the “general... more
In the history of literature, few stories have received as much attention as the astonishing story of Atlantis. Books on the subject runs into the thousands. Since Plato explicitly tells us the Atlantis story is “true,” the “general reader” assumes it to be so. On the other hand, the vast majority of classical scholars take the story to be what Plato explicitly denies it to be: invented myth. There have been, of course, attempts to describe the character of the story as “intermediate” between the first two, i.e., a “likely story,” or as a “synthesis” of them, i.e., a myth written in the form of a history.
The most convincing exposition, in my view, of the Atlantis myth is by the French scholar Pierre Vidal-Naquet. But, at the end of his analysis, Vidal-Naquet compares Plato’s story to a game – a game that was not “serious” because for Plato history always and inevitably takes the form of a progressive degeneration, so that humanity cannot escape its destiny. In this paper I hope to show that Plato’s philosophy of history is not negative but positive, for it contains the solution to humanity’s future well being both on earth and in the afterlife. I begin --to avoid bias—by presenting the main argument of those who uphold the historical existence of Atlantis. Second, I explain how, where and why the Atlantis story is introduced in Plato’s Timaeus, as well as discussing its relation to the Republic. Third, I expound Vidal-Naquet’s thesis, which is the most convincing interpretation to date and accords with much of what I have to say on the subject. Fourth, I endeavour to show how all this fits in with Plato’s new philosophy of history – a philosophy closely connected with his own historia peri phuseos, i.e., an inquiry into the origin and evolution of the present order of things. Finally, I give a brief analysis of Plato’s theory of the mixed constitution and how such a constitution would prevent the destruction of contemporary Athens or any other state.
The most convincing exposition, in my view, of the Atlantis myth is by the French scholar Pierre Vidal-Naquet. But, at the end of his analysis, Vidal-Naquet compares Plato’s story to a game – a game that was not “serious” because for Plato history always and inevitably takes the form of a progressive degeneration, so that humanity cannot escape its destiny. In this paper I hope to show that Plato’s philosophy of history is not negative but positive, for it contains the solution to humanity’s future well being both on earth and in the afterlife. I begin --to avoid bias—by presenting the main argument of those who uphold the historical existence of Atlantis. Second, I explain how, where and why the Atlantis story is introduced in Plato’s Timaeus, as well as discussing its relation to the Republic. Third, I expound Vidal-Naquet’s thesis, which is the most convincing interpretation to date and accords with much of what I have to say on the subject. Fourth, I endeavour to show how all this fits in with Plato’s new philosophy of history – a philosophy closely connected with his own historia peri phuseos, i.e., an inquiry into the origin and evolution of the present order of things. Finally, I give a brief analysis of Plato’s theory of the mixed constitution and how such a constitution would prevent the destruction of contemporary Athens or any other state.
Research Interests:
Natural theology (theologia naturalis or physicos) has a long and complex history that is closely connected with the origin and evolution of western philosophy. By “natural theology,” I understand a rational discourse that aims to... more
Natural theology (theologia naturalis or physicos) has a long and complex history that is closely connected with the origin and evolution of western philosophy. By “natural theology,” I understand a rational discourse that aims to demonstrate that god organizes and governs the world. In this paper, I retrace the origin and controversy surrounding the notion. My aim is to show why Plato of the Laws (notably, Laws 10) should be considered as the true creator of “natural theology.” In conjunction, I argue that the natural theology of the Laws is similar what we generally attribute to Stoics. This natural theology demonstrates that god (or reason) governs nature and that god is immanent in nature (or even identified with it) and not external to it.
This paper was originally published in International Studies in Philosophy 36 (1) 2004, 129-150. Publication of International Studies in Philosophy was suspended by the editor, Stephen David Ross, in 2008 with the completion of volume 40, issue 2. The journal was acquired by the Philosophy Documentation Center in 2011, and is being reorganized under its auspices. All published issues of the journal (under both titles) are available online. There is also a French version in Une philosophie dans l’histoire: Hommages à Raymond Klibansky (eds Bjarne Melkevik et Jean-Marc Narbonne), Sainte- Foy : Les Presses de l’Université Laval, 2000, 25-46.
I’m uploading here the penultimate version. My position on some of the points argued for in this paper have since changed, but not the primary thesis.
This paper was originally published in International Studies in Philosophy 36 (1) 2004, 129-150. Publication of International Studies in Philosophy was suspended by the editor, Stephen David Ross, in 2008 with the completion of volume 40, issue 2. The journal was acquired by the Philosophy Documentation Center in 2011, and is being reorganized under its auspices. All published issues of the journal (under both titles) are available online. There is also a French version in Une philosophie dans l’histoire: Hommages à Raymond Klibansky (eds Bjarne Melkevik et Jean-Marc Narbonne), Sainte- Foy : Les Presses de l’Université Laval, 2000, 25-46.
I’m uploading here the penultimate version. My position on some of the points argued for in this paper have since changed, but not the primary thesis.
Research Interests:
The word theologia is attested for the first time in Plato’s Republic II, 379a4: Hoi tupoi peri theologias. According to Werner Jaeger (The Theology of the Early Greek Philosophers, Oxford 1947, 4-13), Plato coined the word to support the... more
The word theologia is attested for the first time in Plato’s Republic II, 379a4: Hoi tupoi peri theologias. According to Werner Jaeger (The Theology of the Early Greek Philosophers, Oxford 1947, 4-13), Plato coined the word to support the introduction of a new doctrine which resulted from a conflict between the mythical and the natural (rational) approach to the problem of God. For Jaeger, the word theologia designates what Aristotle was later to call theologikê or “first philosophy (hê protê philosophia) – whence his translation of hoi tupoi peri theologias by “outlines of theology.” Victor Goldschmidt, for his part, in an illuminating article entitled “Theologia” (in Questions Platoniciennes, Paris, 1970, 141-72) will have nothing to do with such a contention. He argues that the word theologia here used by Plato means nothing more than a species of muthologia. While the principal lexicons agree with Jaeger, that is, that theologia bears the sense of “science of divine things,” the majority of contemporary translators follow Goldschmidt in taking theologia as an equivalent to muthologia or a species of it. In view of the importance of the concept of theologia in the Western tradition, I believe it merits another analysis. The aim of this paper is to show that the word theologia in this passage of the Republic can mean “science of divine things,” contrary to the claim of Goldschmidt and his followers, but not in the context of natural philosophy as Jaeger seems to imply. The most important thing is to determine whether the element logia should be translated as “science” or “speech,” that is, whether Plato is making a value judgement about theos. I argue that he does, and this is something that contemporary translators continue to miss.
Research Interests:
The following essay on historia is the original English version of my chapter “L’Historia comme genre littéraire dans la pensée grecque archaïque,” in Lire les présocratiques (eds. L. Brisson, Arnaud Macé and Anne-Laure Therme), Paris:... more
The following essay on historia is the original English version of my chapter “L’Historia comme genre littéraire dans la pensée grecque archaïque,” in Lire les présocratiques (eds. L. Brisson, Arnaud Macé and Anne-Laure Therme), Paris: PUF, 2012, 61- 78. This is also reflected in the bibliography.
In this chapter, I begin with the origin and meaning of the term historiê, examine some of the possible factors behind it, and then turn to the most important genres that fall under its scope, beginning with the peri phuseôs tradition, and then turning to “history” as a narrative account of human actions, and finally to medicine.
In this chapter, I begin with the origin and meaning of the term historiê, examine some of the possible factors behind it, and then turn to the most important genres that fall under its scope, beginning with the peri phuseôs tradition, and then turning to “history” as a narrative account of human actions, and finally to medicine.
Research Interests:
In Being, Humanity, and Understanding, Lloyd juxtaposes ancient and modern worlds in order to illuminate an amazingly rich, but deeply enigmatic, variety of ideas about cosmologies or world pictures (1). More precisely, Lloyd investigates... more
In Being, Humanity, and Understanding, Lloyd juxtaposes ancient and modern worlds in order to illuminate an amazingly rich, but deeply enigmatic, variety of ideas about cosmologies or world pictures (1). More precisely, Lloyd investigates the ideas humans have held about three topics: being (“ontologies”), humanity (including morality), and understanding (of the world and one another).
Lloyd convincingly shows how the history of ancient science and philosophy can have a major impact on the cutting-edge research currently underway in cognitive science and related fields by encouraging us to rethink many of our habitual assumptions with respect to ontology, morality, nature, culture, relativism, realism, and many other topics. But there is also another important related contribution. It’s the role of tolerance! Lloyd convincingly argues (contra our own present Eurocentric worldview) that there is no one “correct” way of understanding the world and humanity’s place in it. Culture is by nature “pluralistic.” Like the prisoners in Plato’s cave, we are all too often prisoners of deep-seated ontological assumptions. Lloyd helps us emerge into the light.
Along with an introduction and epilogue, the book contains five chapters: 1, “Humanity between Beasts and Gods”; 2, “Error”; 3, “Ancient Understandings Reassessed and the Consequences from Ontologies”; 4, “Languages and Audiences”; and 5, “Philosophical Implications.” In this review, I provide a detailed synopsis of each chapter, and then offer some critical comments. The latter are connected with the history of consciousness, and the topic of hermeneutics. More to the point, I’m interested in the advent of introspection in the history of science, and when the conscious distinction between the literal and the metaphorical was first made.
This review appeared in Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 85(1) 2015, 137-42. I’m posting here the penultimate English version.
Lloyd convincingly shows how the history of ancient science and philosophy can have a major impact on the cutting-edge research currently underway in cognitive science and related fields by encouraging us to rethink many of our habitual assumptions with respect to ontology, morality, nature, culture, relativism, realism, and many other topics. But there is also another important related contribution. It’s the role of tolerance! Lloyd convincingly argues (contra our own present Eurocentric worldview) that there is no one “correct” way of understanding the world and humanity’s place in it. Culture is by nature “pluralistic.” Like the prisoners in Plato’s cave, we are all too often prisoners of deep-seated ontological assumptions. Lloyd helps us emerge into the light.
Along with an introduction and epilogue, the book contains five chapters: 1, “Humanity between Beasts and Gods”; 2, “Error”; 3, “Ancient Understandings Reassessed and the Consequences from Ontologies”; 4, “Languages and Audiences”; and 5, “Philosophical Implications.” In this review, I provide a detailed synopsis of each chapter, and then offer some critical comments. The latter are connected with the history of consciousness, and the topic of hermeneutics. More to the point, I’m interested in the advent of introspection in the history of science, and when the conscious distinction between the literal and the metaphorical was first made.
This review appeared in Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 85(1) 2015, 137-42. I’m posting here the penultimate English version.
Research Interests:
In Physics II.3, Aristotle outlines his famous theory of the four causes (aitiai) — the material, the formal, the efficient, and the final, which are the ways in which something can be said to be “responsible for” something else. It... more
In Physics II.3, Aristotle outlines his famous theory of the four causes (aitiai) — the material, the formal, the efficient, and the final, which are the ways in which something can be said to be “responsible for” something else. It behooves the natural philosopher (physikos), he argues, to know all four principles (archai) or causes (aitiai) in order to answer the “how and why” of all natural change (Physics II.7; see also Metaphysics V.2). Aristotle is convinced that it is these causes that his predecessors, ancient and modern, were searching for, but he was the first to consciously find a solution to the quest. In his illuminating analysis of the notion of physis in Physics II.1, which proceeds his doctrine of the four causes in II. 3, the Stagirite contends that the first philosophers identified physis or nature with the primary “material” or “substance” (ousia), out of which everything in the cosmos is composed (193a10-28; cf. 203a2). After reiterating at the beginning of the Metaphysics (I.3. 983a24ff) that there are four recognizable types of principles (archai) or causes (aitiai), Aristotle then discusses the position of the earliest philosophers (tôn protôn philosophêsantôn). He again claims that they only recognized the “material” cause (en hulên eidei) of things (983b7-14; at 987a3-7, using the term sômatikê or “corporeal”). More to the point, they argued that everything in the cosmos arises from one basic substance, principle or cause, and perishes back into it, such that nothing is ever created or destroyed since any physical difference is only a difference of state or phase of the original material (Metaphysics I.3, 983b7-14). In sum, Aristotle insists that the first philosophers were material monists who were unaware of the three other kinds of causes. This interpretation is embraced by the vast majority of scholars and interpreters of ancient philosophy.
What would almost naturally follow from this, is that the first philosophers could be considered atheistic materialists. But Aristotle and many of his modern interpreters were well aware that the monism of the early Ionian philosophers was not so simplistic as to exclude any reference to the other causes in the Aristotelian quartet. In both the Physics and the Metaphysics, the original substance is invariably characterized as “alive” and/or as having within itself the principle of movement and change (archê kinêseôs kai metabolês, Physics II.1, 193a 29-30; Metaphysics I. 3, 983b7-27; On the Soul I.2, 405a19-20; I.5, 411aff). And, in Physics III. 4, 203b7ff, Aristotle states that the material monists claim that the primordial substance or archê is not only divine (to theion), but that it also steers, guides or governs everything (panta kubernan). From this perspective, the early Ionian archê seems to grasp what Aristotle understands by the material, efficient and final causes. He reproaches them for not “consciously” separating the three. But the philosophical and metaphysical problem with which we are confronted and which deserves our closest attention in light of Aristotle’s testimonia is the following: what is the relation between “consciousness” and “spontaneous generation” in the all-embracing research on nature (historia peri physeôs) put forward by the first philosophers? Or, to put it in more modern terms: what is the relation between “creationism” and “evolutionism” in early Greek philosophy? In this paper, I hope to shed new light on this relation, an area most scholars and historians of ancient philosophy have either skirted or failed to address in a comprehensive manner.
This paper was originally a keynote address I gave at the Third OUSIA International Symposium on Classical Studies on Aristotle Physics and the ancient physikoi at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, May 31-June 3, 2010
What would almost naturally follow from this, is that the first philosophers could be considered atheistic materialists. But Aristotle and many of his modern interpreters were well aware that the monism of the early Ionian philosophers was not so simplistic as to exclude any reference to the other causes in the Aristotelian quartet. In both the Physics and the Metaphysics, the original substance is invariably characterized as “alive” and/or as having within itself the principle of movement and change (archê kinêseôs kai metabolês, Physics II.1, 193a 29-30; Metaphysics I. 3, 983b7-27; On the Soul I.2, 405a19-20; I.5, 411aff). And, in Physics III. 4, 203b7ff, Aristotle states that the material monists claim that the primordial substance or archê is not only divine (to theion), but that it also steers, guides or governs everything (panta kubernan). From this perspective, the early Ionian archê seems to grasp what Aristotle understands by the material, efficient and final causes. He reproaches them for not “consciously” separating the three. But the philosophical and metaphysical problem with which we are confronted and which deserves our closest attention in light of Aristotle’s testimonia is the following: what is the relation between “consciousness” and “spontaneous generation” in the all-embracing research on nature (historia peri physeôs) put forward by the first philosophers? Or, to put it in more modern terms: what is the relation between “creationism” and “evolutionism” in early Greek philosophy? In this paper, I hope to shed new light on this relation, an area most scholars and historians of ancient philosophy have either skirted or failed to address in a comprehensive manner.
This paper was originally a keynote address I gave at the Third OUSIA International Symposium on Classical Studies on Aristotle Physics and the ancient physikoi at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, May 31-June 3, 2010
Research Interests:
In this paper, I examine Plato’s references to, and the potential role of, “chance” and “divine inspiration” in the context of the realization of the “perfect city.” In conjunction, I examine Plato’s references in the Republic to other... more
In this paper, I examine Plato’s references to, and the potential role of, “chance” and “divine inspiration” in the context of the realization of the “perfect city.” In conjunction, I examine Plato’s references in the Republic to other inspirational phenomena, including the Delphi Oracle, Socrates’ daimon, and poetic insights. I also contextualize the vocabulary relative to the phenomenon of inspiration from Homer to Plato, with the aim of showing that Plato would place more faith in inspiration than chance, although the two, at times, must overlap. I show that the references to inspiration indicate to what degree Plato remained captivated by the iconic poetry of Homer and Hesiod. Finally, I note the difference between the Greek and the Judeo-Christian notions of “revelation.” This paper is part of a larger research project on the role of inspiration in philosophy and poetry in ancient Greece.
These are the works cited in the paper, the published version of which has an integrated bibliography at the end of the volume.
Leonard Brandwood. A Word Index to Plato. Leeds: Maney & Son Ltd, 1976.
Pierre Chantraine. Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque. 4 vols. Paris: Klincksieck,
1968–80.
Gerard Naddaf. “The Role of the Poet in Plato’s Ideal Cities of Callipolis and Magnesia.”
Kriterion 46, no. 116 (July/Dec. 2007): 329–49.
Gerard Naddaf. A. “Algunas reflexiones sobre la noción griega temprana de inspiración poética.”
ARETĖ: Revista de Filosofía 21, no. 2 (2009): 51–86.
Gerard Naddaf. B. “Allegory and the Origins of Philosophy,” in Logos and Mythos:
Philosophical Essays in Greek Literature, ed. W. Wians, 99–131. Albany: SUNY Press, 2009.
Gerard Naddaf. “Spontaneous generation and creationism in Pre-Socratic monism in light of Aristotle’s analysis in the Physics,” Anais de Filosofia Clássica 8, no. 5 (2010): 23-40.
These are the works cited in the paper, the published version of which has an integrated bibliography at the end of the volume.
Leonard Brandwood. A Word Index to Plato. Leeds: Maney & Son Ltd, 1976.
Pierre Chantraine. Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque. 4 vols. Paris: Klincksieck,
1968–80.
Gerard Naddaf. “The Role of the Poet in Plato’s Ideal Cities of Callipolis and Magnesia.”
Kriterion 46, no. 116 (July/Dec. 2007): 329–49.
Gerard Naddaf. A. “Algunas reflexiones sobre la noción griega temprana de inspiración poética.”
ARETĖ: Revista de Filosofía 21, no. 2 (2009): 51–86.
Gerard Naddaf. B. “Allegory and the Origins of Philosophy,” in Logos and Mythos:
Philosophical Essays in Greek Literature, ed. W. Wians, 99–131. Albany: SUNY Press, 2009.
Gerard Naddaf. “Spontaneous generation and creationism in Pre-Socratic monism in light of Aristotle’s analysis in the Physics,” Anais de Filosofia Clássica 8, no. 5 (2010): 23-40.
Research Interests:
The birth of philosophy is generally identified with the rejection of mythopoiesis and the adoption of rational explanations in terms of causality (e.g., Cornford, Guthrie, Vernant, Burkert, West, Curd, Laks, Long), whence the popular... more
The birth of philosophy is generally identified with the rejection of mythopoiesis and the adoption of rational explanations in terms of causality (e.g., Cornford, Guthrie, Vernant, Burkert, West, Curd, Laks, Long), whence the popular expression from muthos to logos or from myth to reason. Much has been written on this famous transition, which many once considered as a “miracle.” However, there is little on how the proponents of myth responded. They fought back with mutho-logia, that is, with a logos about myth. This “rational” approach invoked the same logos that is generally associated with philosophia. In fact, philosophia and muthologia are at times so intimately connected that, until the Enlightenment period, it is often difficult to distinguish between them. This is due to the “spell” of myth, particularly Greek/Homeric myth, or to be more precise, because of the allegorical interpretation of Homeric myth.
In this essay, I examine the origins and development of this unremarked —albeit remarkable—“story.” I want to show to what degree the pre-Platoic project of philosophy was at time overshadowed by the allegorical approach to myth. Given the importance of allegoresis, that is, allegorizing as a conscious interpretative mode, it is most surprising that histories of ancient philosophy rarely mention the notion in the development of early Greek philosophy. The seeds of my later work on reflective self-consciousness and the origins of philosophy are already found here.
In this essay, I examine the origins and development of this unremarked —albeit remarkable—“story.” I want to show to what degree the pre-Platoic project of philosophy was at time overshadowed by the allegorical approach to myth. Given the importance of allegoresis, that is, allegorizing as a conscious interpretative mode, it is most surprising that histories of ancient philosophy rarely mention the notion in the development of early Greek philosophy. The seeds of my later work on reflective self-consciousness and the origins of philosophy are already found here.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
In this paper, I examine Plato's references to, and the potential role of, " chance " and " divine inspiration " in the context of the realization of the " perfect city. " In conjunction, I examine Plato's references in the Republic to... more
In this paper, I examine Plato's references to, and the potential role of, " chance " and " divine inspiration " in the context of the realization of the " perfect city. " In conjunction, I examine Plato's references in the Republic to other inspirational phenomena, including the Delphi Oracle, Socrates' daimon, and poetic insights. I also contextualize the vocabulary relative to the phenomenon of inspiration from Homer to Plato, with the aim of showing that Plato would place more faith in inspiration than chance, although the two, at times, must overlap. I show that the references to inspiration indicate to what degree Plato remained captivated by the iconic poetry of Homer and Hesiod. Finally, I note the difference between the Greek and the Judeo-Christian notions of " revelation. " This paper is part of a larger research project on the role of inspiration in philosophy and poetry in ancient Greece.
abstract In this paper, I attempt to reconstruct the early life of the " historical " Socrates. My aim is to understand when his " eureka " or exaiphnes moments concerning his " self-conscious " encounters with the divine may have... more
abstract In this paper, I attempt to reconstruct the early life of the " historical " Socrates. My aim is to understand when his " eureka " or exaiphnes moments concerning his " self-conscious " encounters with the divine may have occurred. I argue that while still a " young man, " Socrates who was born into a well-connected family, developed a following among the children of the Athenian elite as one who introduced a radical new form of education into Athenian culture. However, in contrast to other intellectual mavericks, notably Anaxagoras and Protagoras, I show that Socrates is a deeply religious figure, but one with a formidable method of inquiry that all come to respect. I maintain that Socrates was acutely self-conscious (sunoida emautôi, Apology 21b4-5, 22c8) of the belief that he was not only divinely inspired but also god's representative on earth, and that god has given him the means to perform his task, which both he and his disciples know is exceedingly difficult (sunoida emautôi, Symposium 216a3, b3). This paper, which was condensed for this talk and contribution, is part of a much longer project on the " historical " Socrates.
abstract In this paper, I examine some of the historical references in the famous " autobiographical " passage in the Phaedo (96a-99d), in which Socrates' describes his enthusiasm for natural philosophy when he was young. Although much... more
abstract In this paper, I examine some of the historical references in the famous " autobiographical " passage in the Phaedo (96a-99d), in which Socrates' describes his enthusiasm for natural philosophy when he was young. Although much ink has been spilled about the passage, not enough attention has been given to the time frame that may be covered by the term neos or " young " in the expression " when I was young " (neos ôn, 96a6). Depending on the timeframe neos may be thought to cover — and there are at least two different age ranges — scholars' may have incorrectly identified some of the historical figures (e.g., Diogenes of Apollonia) Socrates appears to be alluding to. Moreover, clarifying the meaning of neos may also contribute to the dating of the work and periods of activity of Anaxagoras. Finally, I argue that the evidence suggests that Socrates may never have lost interest in natural philosophy. In sum, there is much more that we can glean from this passage than generally assumed. This paper, which was condensed for this talk and contribution, is part of a much longer project on the " historical " Socrates. These are the works cited in the paper, the published version of which has an integrated bibliography at the end of the volume.
This article of a detailed critical review of a collection of recent essays entitled Qu’est-ce que la philosophie présocratique? What is Presocratic Philosophy?, edited by André Laks and Claire Louguet (Lille: Presses Universitaires du... more
This article of a detailed critical review of a collection of recent essays entitled Qu’est-ce que la philosophie présocratique? What is Presocratic Philosophy?, edited by André Laks and Claire Louguet (Lille: Presses Universitaires du Septentrion, 2002). I examine the strengths and weaknesses of the various contributions.
Research Interests:
It is generally considered that the civilization of ancient Greece with its characteristic art and thought is linked with us in ways that other societies are not. Through its cultural ascendency over Rome, ancient Greece is seen as the... more
It is generally considered that the civilization of ancient Greece with its characteristic art and thought is linked with us in ways that other societies are not. Through its cultural ascendency over Rome, ancient Greece is seen as the foundation of European/Western civilization. However, according to Afrocentrists, what we generally call the Greek legacy is, in fact, a stolen legacy – stolen or derived from Egypt, and thus Africa. This thesis, at first sight absurd, has, in fact, a long and complex history that originated in ancient Greece. In this essay, I examine in context recent books by two influential scholars, Mary Lefkowitz and Martin Bernal, who are on opposite sides of the controversy, and offer some perspective of my own.
Research Interests:
... not just an entertainer as M. Heath argues.2 His poems have an obvious didactic function, and since there is a strong ???personal??? touch to the ... judgements (itheie?? isi dike?? isin).47 His word is sure, and expertly he makes a... more
... not just an entertainer as M. Heath argues.2 His poems have an obvious didactic function, and since there is a strong ???personal??? touch to the ... judgements (itheie?? isi dike?? isin).47 His word is sure, and expertly he makes a quick end of even a great dispute (mega neikos).48 This ...
Research Interests:
This essay is the penultimate version of my contribution to The Edinburgh Critical History of Greek and Roman Philosophy (eds. Guiseppe Cambiano and Alexandra Lianeri). Greek cosmological models are grounded in an explicit concept of... more
This essay is the penultimate version of my contribution to The Edinburgh Critical History of Greek and Roman Philosophy (eds. Guiseppe Cambiano and Alexandra Lianeri).
Greek cosmological models are grounded in an explicit concept of nature (phusis). This concept is inseparable from the peri phuseôs tradition, which seeks to explain how the present order of things was established from beginning to end. In this essay, I try to capture the essence of the cosmological model for each of the primary figures in the historical period in question, one of the richest in world history. I begin with each figure’s view on the fundamental principle/s (phusis as archê) underlying the present order of things and end with the figure’s perspective on the structure and ‘destiny’ of the kosmos. Although the variations are extraordinary, the Greek cosmologists all shared the firm conviction that the world is wholly ‘natural’, not partly natural and partly supernatural. Nonetheless, each felt the need to refute the innovations of his predecessors with what he considered a better solution. Although this can give the impression that there were no ‘scientific’ discoveries with which all could agree, we see that some discoveries, connected with astronomy, eventually were taken for granted by all. Astronomy (speculative, observational, and mathematical) have a prominent place in this essay. Ironically, it also begins and ends with astronomy’s relation to astrology, but not because the Greeks were interested in foretelling the future by studying the stars. Rather, it is important to understand the history behind the phenomenon of astrology and how it was connected with astronomy. With this in mind, this essay starts with the Mesopotamians. Their creation story, like the peri phuseôs accounts, explains the origin of the present order of things—including the origin of humanity—and in fact culminates with a socio-political model that legitimates the role of the king and the state. In this context astronomy/astrology has a critical purpose: it is the key to interpreting the will of the gods.
Greek cosmological models are grounded in an explicit concept of nature (phusis). This concept is inseparable from the peri phuseôs tradition, which seeks to explain how the present order of things was established from beginning to end. In this essay, I try to capture the essence of the cosmological model for each of the primary figures in the historical period in question, one of the richest in world history. I begin with each figure’s view on the fundamental principle/s (phusis as archê) underlying the present order of things and end with the figure’s perspective on the structure and ‘destiny’ of the kosmos. Although the variations are extraordinary, the Greek cosmologists all shared the firm conviction that the world is wholly ‘natural’, not partly natural and partly supernatural. Nonetheless, each felt the need to refute the innovations of his predecessors with what he considered a better solution. Although this can give the impression that there were no ‘scientific’ discoveries with which all could agree, we see that some discoveries, connected with astronomy, eventually were taken for granted by all. Astronomy (speculative, observational, and mathematical) have a prominent place in this essay. Ironically, it also begins and ends with astronomy’s relation to astrology, but not because the Greeks were interested in foretelling the future by studying the stars. Rather, it is important to understand the history behind the phenomenon of astrology and how it was connected with astronomy. With this in mind, this essay starts with the Mesopotamians. Their creation story, like the peri phuseôs accounts, explains the origin of the present order of things—including the origin of humanity—and in fact culminates with a socio-political model that legitimates the role of the king and the state. In this context astronomy/astrology has a critical purpose: it is the key to interpreting the will of the gods.
Research Interests:
The ancient Greek notion of “care of the self” and the self-knowledge it presupposes is premised on the concept of introspection. Introspection obviously involves “consciousness”; more precisely, it implies a “conscious” notion of the... more
The ancient Greek notion of “care of the self” and the self-knowledge it presupposes is premised on the concept of introspection. Introspection obviously involves “consciousness”; more precisely, it implies a “conscious” notion of the “self.” Consciousness itself can be notorious difficult to define and explain. In this paper, I examine some of the historical precedents for “caring for the self” as we find them in Plato’s earlier dialogues, notably the Apology, and the kind of consciousness it presupposes.
This was an invited paper for a panel on “Care of the self in early Greek philosophy” organized by Annie Larivée for the 80th Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences, University of New Brunswick, May 2011. I’ve added a few references to my more recent work on the topic.
This was an invited paper for a panel on “Care of the self in early Greek philosophy” organized by Annie Larivée for the 80th Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences, University of New Brunswick, May 2011. I’ve added a few references to my more recent work on the topic.
Research Interests:
There is a striking passage in Plato’s Laws that claims “it’s a risk to appeal to prayer, if you lack intelligence” (euchêi chrêsthai sphaleron einai noun mê kektêmenon, 688b6-7). In other words, what you wish for in your prayers should... more
There is a striking passage in Plato’s Laws that claims “it’s a risk to appeal to prayer, if you lack intelligence” (euchêi chrêsthai sphaleron einai noun mê kektêmenon, 688b6-7). In other words, what you wish for in your prayers should be supported by your rational judgement (phronêsei, 687e7-8). This was, I believe, axiomatic for Plato from his youth, and it seems that Socrates held the same position from his youth: he claims in the Crito (46b) that he is the kind of man who has always been (ou monon nun, alla kai aei) persuaded by the argument (logôi) that on reflection seemed best to him (logizomenôi beltistos phainêtai). Although Socrates claims in the Apology that God has instructed him by means of oracles, dreams, and other forms of divine manifestation that he should practise philosophy (Apology 33c; 29d; 38a), there is nothing in this or other Socratic encounters with the divine to suggest that he believed “supernatural” beings could or would counter the laws of nature. For both Plato and Socrates, the gods are by nature good (Republic 379b) and perfect (381b), and thus, like “natural” laws, they do not change. Prayers and sacrifices offered up with the aim of changing a god’s behavior are thus useless.
The position of Plato and Socrates thus accords with the standard naturalist interpretation of the Presocratics—that they believed the world functioned entirely according to natural laws. I agree with this interpretation, but I am nonetheless intrigued by the question of what the early Greek philosophers thought they were doing when they entered a temple to pray and/or sacrifice to the gods. We must consider it more than probable that they did so, notwithstanding their bold and revolutionary thesis. It is highly unlikely that the early Greek philosophers (before 450 BC) would have even entertained notions that we associate with atheism. In this regard, I tend to agree with Andrew Gregory’s claim in his recent book The Presocratics and the Supernatural (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2013) that “not only could presocratic intellectuals devise their own theologies apart from the Greek religious tradition, they could devise their own means of prayer and notions of piety as well, entirely in accord with their naturalistic theologies” (109). But what were those means of prayer and notions of piety?
In this paper I’ll argue that the answer lies in the strong similarity between the Presocratics and the Platonic texts cited above. In both instances, it is by seeing the connection of phusis with the divine that we gain both a nous of our own and a model to follow—and thus the capacity to act rationally and piously, by conforming our actions to the divine order of the universe. I’ll thus be examining in context a number of the early Greek natural philosophers, but also, in context, Socrates famous “autobiographical” passage in the Phaedo (96a-99d) in which Socrates describes his enthusiasm for natural philosophy (peri phuseôs historia) when he was young (neos ôn, 96a6). We’ll see that in many respects the natural philosophers were all engaged in a kind of theologia naturalis, but perhaps closer to what Thomas Nagel calls natural teleology. Finally, I’ll examine in context the notion and roles of hymns.
The position of Plato and Socrates thus accords with the standard naturalist interpretation of the Presocratics—that they believed the world functioned entirely according to natural laws. I agree with this interpretation, but I am nonetheless intrigued by the question of what the early Greek philosophers thought they were doing when they entered a temple to pray and/or sacrifice to the gods. We must consider it more than probable that they did so, notwithstanding their bold and revolutionary thesis. It is highly unlikely that the early Greek philosophers (before 450 BC) would have even entertained notions that we associate with atheism. In this regard, I tend to agree with Andrew Gregory’s claim in his recent book The Presocratics and the Supernatural (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2013) that “not only could presocratic intellectuals devise their own theologies apart from the Greek religious tradition, they could devise their own means of prayer and notions of piety as well, entirely in accord with their naturalistic theologies” (109). But what were those means of prayer and notions of piety?
In this paper I’ll argue that the answer lies in the strong similarity between the Presocratics and the Platonic texts cited above. In both instances, it is by seeing the connection of phusis with the divine that we gain both a nous of our own and a model to follow—and thus the capacity to act rationally and piously, by conforming our actions to the divine order of the universe. I’ll thus be examining in context a number of the early Greek natural philosophers, but also, in context, Socrates famous “autobiographical” passage in the Phaedo (96a-99d) in which Socrates describes his enthusiasm for natural philosophy (peri phuseôs historia) when he was young (neos ôn, 96a6). We’ll see that in many respects the natural philosophers were all engaged in a kind of theologia naturalis, but perhaps closer to what Thomas Nagel calls natural teleology. Finally, I’ll examine in context the notion and roles of hymns.
Research Interests:
In this paper, I attempt to reconstruct the early life of the “historical” Socrates. My aim is to understand when his “eureka” or exaiphnes moments concerning his “self-conscious” encounters with the divine may have occurred. I argue that... more
In this paper, I attempt to reconstruct the early life of the “historical” Socrates. My aim is to understand when his “eureka” or exaiphnes moments concerning his “self-conscious” encounters with the divine may have occurred. I argue that while still a “young man,” Socrates who was born into a well-connected family, developed a following among the children of the Athenian elite as one who introduced a radical new form of education into Athenian culture. However, in contrast to other intellectual mavericks, notably Anaxagoras and Protagoras, I show that Socrates is a deeply religious figure, but one with a formidable method of inquiry that all come to respect. I maintain that Socrates was acutely self-conscious (sunoida emautôi, Apology 21b4-5, 22c8) of the belief that he was not only divinely inspired but also god’s representative on earth, and that god has given him the means to perform his task, which both he and his disciples know is exceedingly difficult (sunoida emautôi, Symposium 216a3, b3). This paper, which was condensed for this talk and contribution, is part of a much longer project on the “historical” Socrates.
Research Interests:
In this paper, I examine some of the historical references in the famous “autobiographical” passage in the Phaedo (96a-99d), in which Socrates’ describes his enthusiasm for natural philosophy when he was young. Although much ink has been... more
In this paper, I examine some of the historical references in the famous “autobiographical” passage in the Phaedo (96a-99d), in which Socrates’ describes his enthusiasm for natural philosophy when he was young. Although much ink has been spilled about the passage, not enough attention has been given to the time frame that may be covered by the term neos or “young” in the expression “when I was young” (neos ôn, 96a6). Depending on the timeframe neos may be thought to cover — and there are at least two different age ranges — scholars’ may have incorrectly identified some of the historical figures (e.g., Diogenes of Apollonia) Socrates appears to be alluding to. Moreover, clarifying the meaning of neos may also contribute to the dating of the work and periods of activity of Anaxagoras. Finally, I argue that the evidence suggests that Socrates may never have lost interest in natural philosophy. In sum, there is much more that we can glean from this passage than generally assumed. This paper, which was condensed for this talk and contribution, is part of a much longer project on the “historical” Socrates.
These are the works cited in the paper, the published version of which has an integrated bibliography at the end of the volume.
John Burnet, Plato: Euthyphro, Apology of Socrates, Crito, ed. with notes, Oxford: Clarendon Paperbacks, 1924/1977.
Danial Graham, “Socrates on Samos,” Classical Quarterly 58 (2008): 308–13.
R. Hackforth, Plato’s Phaedo, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1955.
Pierre Hadot, “The Figure of Socrates,” in Philosophy as a Way of Life,” edited and with an Introduction by Arnold I. Davidson, London: Blackwell Publishing, 1995/2015.
Thomas Hubbard, “Peer Homosexuality,” in A Companion to Greek and Roman Sexualities, ed. Thomas K. Hubbard, London: Wiley Blackwell, 128-49.
Charles Kahn, Plato and the Socratic Dialogue: The Philosophic Use of a Literary Form, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
Andrew Lear, “Ancient Pederasty: An Introduction,” in A Companion to Greek and Roman Sexualities, ed. Thomas K. Hubbard, London: Wiley Blackwell, 2014, 102-27.
Andrew Lear, “Was pederasty problematized”? in Sex in Antiquity: Exploring Gender and Sexuality in the Ancient World, ed. Mark Masterson, Nancy Sorkin Rabinowitz and James Robson, London: Routledge, 2015, 115-36.
Gerard Naddaf, The Greek Concept of Nature, Albany: State University of New York Press, 2005.
Gerard Naddaf, “The young ‘historical’ Socrates in the Apology and Symposium,” in Selected Papers from the Tenth Symposium Platonicum: The Symposium, ed. Mauro Tulli and Gabriele Cornelli, Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag, 2015, 448-53.
Christopher Rowe, Plato. Phaedo, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
David Sedley, Creationism and its Critics in Antiquity, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2007.
These are the works cited in the paper, the published version of which has an integrated bibliography at the end of the volume.
John Burnet, Plato: Euthyphro, Apology of Socrates, Crito, ed. with notes, Oxford: Clarendon Paperbacks, 1924/1977.
Danial Graham, “Socrates on Samos,” Classical Quarterly 58 (2008): 308–13.
R. Hackforth, Plato’s Phaedo, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1955.
Pierre Hadot, “The Figure of Socrates,” in Philosophy as a Way of Life,” edited and with an Introduction by Arnold I. Davidson, London: Blackwell Publishing, 1995/2015.
Thomas Hubbard, “Peer Homosexuality,” in A Companion to Greek and Roman Sexualities, ed. Thomas K. Hubbard, London: Wiley Blackwell, 128-49.
Charles Kahn, Plato and the Socratic Dialogue: The Philosophic Use of a Literary Form, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
Andrew Lear, “Ancient Pederasty: An Introduction,” in A Companion to Greek and Roman Sexualities, ed. Thomas K. Hubbard, London: Wiley Blackwell, 2014, 102-27.
Andrew Lear, “Was pederasty problematized”? in Sex in Antiquity: Exploring Gender and Sexuality in the Ancient World, ed. Mark Masterson, Nancy Sorkin Rabinowitz and James Robson, London: Routledge, 2015, 115-36.
Gerard Naddaf, The Greek Concept of Nature, Albany: State University of New York Press, 2005.
Gerard Naddaf, “The young ‘historical’ Socrates in the Apology and Symposium,” in Selected Papers from the Tenth Symposium Platonicum: The Symposium, ed. Mauro Tulli and Gabriele Cornelli, Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag, 2015, 448-53.
Christopher Rowe, Plato. Phaedo, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
David Sedley, Creationism and its Critics in Antiquity, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2007.
Research Interests:
Abstract The Discovery of Physis and the First Secular Theories of Everything Gerard Naddaf, York University Invited Paper XIII International Ontology Congress Physics and Ontology San Sebastian, October 2-6, 2018 In contemporary... more
Abstract
The Discovery of Physis and the First Secular Theories of Everything
Gerard Naddaf, York University
Invited Paper
XIII International Ontology Congress
Physics and Ontology
San Sebastian, October 2-6, 2018
In contemporary science and philosophy, the orthodox view is to consider “reductive materialism” the only legitimate way of accounting for all things, past, present and future — for, that is, what some may call “theories of everything.” According to this view, all psychological phenomena, including mind, life, and consciousness, are also reducible to physics and chemistry.
In his recent controversial but important book, Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False (Oxford: OUP, 2012), Thomas Nagel argues against “reductive materialism” and reductionist interpretation of biological evolution. But Nagel is also an atheist, so he’ll have nothing to do with the theistic option and its contention that the intentionality of a purposive being is at work behind the present order of things. Nagel argues instead for a special kind of teleology that he calls “natural teleology” as the only valid explanation. The existence of teleological laws means that certain physical outcomes have a much higher probability than the laws of physics alone would allow because they are on a path toward certain results.
What interests me with Nagel’s proposal is that we find a historical precedent for it at the origins of philosophy and science in what is called the discovery or invention of nature or physis. In this paper, I’ll argue that when we turn to the history of philosophy before Aristotle, we see that this natural teleology, to borrow Nagel’s expression, led some thinkers to affirm reductive materialism, which in turn generated, as a reaction to it, theism as a philosophical position, a theism grounded in arguments for the existence of God/gods. In other words, there were no arguments for the existence of God before a case was made for atheism. In this battle of Titans, the concept of nature or physis was at the centre of the controversy, and the political and social ramifications were as acute then as they are now.
The aim of this paper is to introduce the philosophers and scientists participating in this congress on physis to the different parties in the original dispute and to their terms of reference. But my presentation here will also have something to say about the emergence of a new form of thinking, if not a new kind of Homo sapiens: the advent of Homo philosophicus, and the self-conscious reflexivity this being presupposes.
The Discovery of Physis and the First Secular Theories of Everything
Gerard Naddaf, York University
Invited Paper
XIII International Ontology Congress
Physics and Ontology
San Sebastian, October 2-6, 2018
In contemporary science and philosophy, the orthodox view is to consider “reductive materialism” the only legitimate way of accounting for all things, past, present and future — for, that is, what some may call “theories of everything.” According to this view, all psychological phenomena, including mind, life, and consciousness, are also reducible to physics and chemistry.
In his recent controversial but important book, Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False (Oxford: OUP, 2012), Thomas Nagel argues against “reductive materialism” and reductionist interpretation of biological evolution. But Nagel is also an atheist, so he’ll have nothing to do with the theistic option and its contention that the intentionality of a purposive being is at work behind the present order of things. Nagel argues instead for a special kind of teleology that he calls “natural teleology” as the only valid explanation. The existence of teleological laws means that certain physical outcomes have a much higher probability than the laws of physics alone would allow because they are on a path toward certain results.
What interests me with Nagel’s proposal is that we find a historical precedent for it at the origins of philosophy and science in what is called the discovery or invention of nature or physis. In this paper, I’ll argue that when we turn to the history of philosophy before Aristotle, we see that this natural teleology, to borrow Nagel’s expression, led some thinkers to affirm reductive materialism, which in turn generated, as a reaction to it, theism as a philosophical position, a theism grounded in arguments for the existence of God/gods. In other words, there were no arguments for the existence of God before a case was made for atheism. In this battle of Titans, the concept of nature or physis was at the centre of the controversy, and the political and social ramifications were as acute then as they are now.
The aim of this paper is to introduce the philosophers and scientists participating in this congress on physis to the different parties in the original dispute and to their terms of reference. But my presentation here will also have something to say about the emergence of a new form of thinking, if not a new kind of Homo sapiens: the advent of Homo philosophicus, and the self-conscious reflexivity this being presupposes.
Research Interests:
In contemporary science and philosophy, the orthodox view is to consider “reductive materialism” the only legitimate way of accounting for all things, past, present and future — for, that is, what some may call “theories of everything.”... more
In contemporary science and philosophy, the orthodox view is to consider “reductive materialism” the only legitimate way of accounting for all things, past, present and future — for, that is, what some may call “theories of everything.” According to this view, all psychological phenomena, including mind, life, and consciousness, are also reducible to physics and chemistry.
In his recent controversial but important book, Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False (Oxford: OUP, 2012), Thomas Nagel argues against “reductive materialism” and reductionist interpretation of biological evolution. But Nagel is also an atheist, so he’ll have nothing to do with the theistic option and its contention that the intentionality of a purposive being is at work behind the present order of things. Nagel argues instead for a special kind of teleology that he calls “natural teleology” as the only valid explanation. The existence of teleological laws means that certain physical outcomes have a much higher probability than the laws of physics alone would allow because they are on a path toward certain results.
What interests me with Nagel’s proposal is that we find a historical precedent for it at the origins of philosophy and science in what is called the discovery or invention of nature or physis. In this paper, I’ll argue that when we turn to the history of philosophy before Aristotle, we see that this natural teleology, to borrow Nagel’s expression, led some thinkers to affirm reductive materialism, which in turn generated, as a reaction to it, theism as a philosophical position, a theism grounded in arguments for the existence of God/gods. In other words, there were no arguments for the existence of God before a case was made for atheism. In this battle of Titans, the concept of nature or physis was at the centre of the controversy, and the political and social ramifications were as acute then as they are now.
The aim of this paper is to introduce the philosophers and scientists participating in this congress on physis to the different parties in the original dispute and to their terms of reference. But my presentation here will also have something to say about the emergence of a new form of thinking, if not a new kind of Homo sapiens: the advent of Homo philosophicus, and the self-conscious reflexivity this being presupposes.
In his recent controversial but important book, Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False (Oxford: OUP, 2012), Thomas Nagel argues against “reductive materialism” and reductionist interpretation of biological evolution. But Nagel is also an atheist, so he’ll have nothing to do with the theistic option and its contention that the intentionality of a purposive being is at work behind the present order of things. Nagel argues instead for a special kind of teleology that he calls “natural teleology” as the only valid explanation. The existence of teleological laws means that certain physical outcomes have a much higher probability than the laws of physics alone would allow because they are on a path toward certain results.
What interests me with Nagel’s proposal is that we find a historical precedent for it at the origins of philosophy and science in what is called the discovery or invention of nature or physis. In this paper, I’ll argue that when we turn to the history of philosophy before Aristotle, we see that this natural teleology, to borrow Nagel’s expression, led some thinkers to affirm reductive materialism, which in turn generated, as a reaction to it, theism as a philosophical position, a theism grounded in arguments for the existence of God/gods. In other words, there were no arguments for the existence of God before a case was made for atheism. In this battle of Titans, the concept of nature or physis was at the centre of the controversy, and the political and social ramifications were as acute then as they are now.
The aim of this paper is to introduce the philosophers and scientists participating in this congress on physis to the different parties in the original dispute and to their terms of reference. But my presentation here will also have something to say about the emergence of a new form of thinking, if not a new kind of Homo sapiens: the advent of Homo philosophicus, and the self-conscious reflexivity this being presupposes.
Research Interests:
The Discovery of Physis and the First Secular Theories of Everything Gerard Naddaf, York University Invited Paper XIII International Ontology Congress Physics and Ontology San Sebastian, October 2-6, 2018 In contemporary science and... more
The Discovery of Physis and the First Secular Theories of Everything Gerard Naddaf, York University Invited Paper XIII International Ontology Congress Physics and Ontology San Sebastian, October 2-6, 2018 In contemporary science and philosophy, the orthodox view is to consider " reductive materialism " the only legitimate way of accounting for all things, past, present and future — for, that is, what some may call " theories of everything. " According to this view, all psychological phenomena, including mind, life, and consciousness, are also reducible to physics and chemistry. In his recent controversial but important book, Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False (Oxford: OUP, 2012), Thomas Nagel argues against " reductive materialism " and reductionist interpretation of biological evolution. But Nagel is also an atheist, so he'll have nothing to do with the theistic option and its contention that the intentionality of a purposive being is at work behind the present order of things. Nagel argues instead for a special kind of teleology that he calls " natural teleology " as the only valid explanation. The existence of teleological laws means that certain physical outcomes have a much higher probability than the laws of physics alone would allow because they are on a path toward certain results. What interests me with Nagel's proposal is that we find a historical precedent for it at the origins of philosophy and science in what is called the discovery or invention of nature or physis. In this paper, I'll argue that when we turn to the history of philosophy before Aristotle, we see that this natural teleology, to borrow Nagel's expression, led some thinkers to affirm reductive materialism, which in turn generated, as a reaction to it, theism as a philosophical position, a theism grounded in arguments for the existence of God/gods. In other words, there were no arguments for the existence of God before a case was made for atheism. In this battle of Titans, the concept of nature or physis was at the centre of the controversy, and the political and social ramifications were as acute then as they are now. The aim of this paper is to introduce the philosophers and scientists participating in this congress on physis to the different parties in the original dispute and to their terms of reference. But my presentation here will also have something to say about the emergence of a new form of thinking, if not a new kind of Homo sapiens: the advent of Homo philosophicus, and the self-conscious reflexivity this being presupposes.
Research Interests:
Sacred Texts: From Inspiration to Philosophy and Allegory Public Lecture: The University of Sydney, November 11, 2011 Gerard Naddaf, York University Abstract One of the main contentions I want make in this presentation is that... more
Sacred Texts: From Inspiration to Philosophy and Allegory
Public Lecture: The University of Sydney, November 11, 2011
Gerard Naddaf, York University
Abstract
One of the main contentions I want make in this presentation is that self-conscious reflections on what it means for a poet, prophet, or seer to be “divinely” inspired were contingent on making a distinction between literal and figurative meanings (about the gods) and that this distinction only appears in ancient Greece with the advent of the alphabet and philosophy. I begin with an overview of the origin of writing systems to test the hypothesis that they necessarily change the way societies think about themselves. I show that while writing began in Mesopotamia around 3200 BCE and had a profound impact over the centuries on the civilizations there (and elsewhere too!), there is no evidence that it led to the kind of self-conscious critical analysis we associate with philosophy in ancient Greece. Indeed, these cultures make no clear distinction between the literal and the figurative as it concerns the relation between gods and men. But another point that interests me with the Mesopotamian tradition is that there is no reference to “divine” inspiration as we find it in ancient Greece or in the sacred texts of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. On the other hand, all of these cultures were profoundly influenced by the Mesopotamian creation myths and, of course, the written word.
Thus after situating Mesopotamia in the context of the origin of divine inspiration, I give an overview of the three religious traditions which consider their respective canonical “scriptures” as divinely inspired. I’m referring to the “sacred” books of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. They are indeed religions of the Book!
I use these as a primer to the ancient Greek notion of divine inspiration as it is evidenced in the poems of Homer and Hesiod and the subsequent Greek reaction. Essentially, I examine the complex interface between belief in inspiration, the origins of philosophy, and the practice of allegory. I begin with Homer and Hesiod, turn to the origin of philosophy, move on to the first quarrel between philosophy and poetry, and then review the birth of the practice of allegorical interpretation. I give an overview of the role allegory played in the philosophic, religious, and even scientific traditions from this period to at least the Enlightenment. I also endeavour to show how believers practiced allegorical interpretation in relation to the Torah, the Christian Bible, and later the Qur’an. In doing so, I show, that although there has always been a struggle between the literal and allegorical interpretations of sacred texts, the practitioners of allegory commonly viewed both religious and philosophical texts as emanating from the same divine source — that is, as inspired by God. I end with some reflections on the interpretative clashes between competitive “inspired” texts.
Public Lecture: The University of Sydney, November 11, 2011
Gerard Naddaf, York University
Abstract
One of the main contentions I want make in this presentation is that self-conscious reflections on what it means for a poet, prophet, or seer to be “divinely” inspired were contingent on making a distinction between literal and figurative meanings (about the gods) and that this distinction only appears in ancient Greece with the advent of the alphabet and philosophy. I begin with an overview of the origin of writing systems to test the hypothesis that they necessarily change the way societies think about themselves. I show that while writing began in Mesopotamia around 3200 BCE and had a profound impact over the centuries on the civilizations there (and elsewhere too!), there is no evidence that it led to the kind of self-conscious critical analysis we associate with philosophy in ancient Greece. Indeed, these cultures make no clear distinction between the literal and the figurative as it concerns the relation between gods and men. But another point that interests me with the Mesopotamian tradition is that there is no reference to “divine” inspiration as we find it in ancient Greece or in the sacred texts of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. On the other hand, all of these cultures were profoundly influenced by the Mesopotamian creation myths and, of course, the written word.
Thus after situating Mesopotamia in the context of the origin of divine inspiration, I give an overview of the three religious traditions which consider their respective canonical “scriptures” as divinely inspired. I’m referring to the “sacred” books of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. They are indeed religions of the Book!
I use these as a primer to the ancient Greek notion of divine inspiration as it is evidenced in the poems of Homer and Hesiod and the subsequent Greek reaction. Essentially, I examine the complex interface between belief in inspiration, the origins of philosophy, and the practice of allegory. I begin with Homer and Hesiod, turn to the origin of philosophy, move on to the first quarrel between philosophy and poetry, and then review the birth of the practice of allegorical interpretation. I give an overview of the role allegory played in the philosophic, religious, and even scientific traditions from this period to at least the Enlightenment. I also endeavour to show how believers practiced allegorical interpretation in relation to the Torah, the Christian Bible, and later the Qur’an. In doing so, I show, that although there has always been a struggle between the literal and allegorical interpretations of sacred texts, the practitioners of allegory commonly viewed both religious and philosophical texts as emanating from the same divine source — that is, as inspired by God. I end with some reflections on the interpretative clashes between competitive “inspired” texts.
Research Interests:
The origin and meaning of " poetic inspiration " has always been the subject of considerable controversy. What critics rarely ask are: what words or phrases did the early poetic texts use to express the poetic genius or mousikê we... more
The origin and meaning of " poetic inspiration " has always been the subject of considerable controversy. What critics rarely ask are: what words or phrases did the early poetic texts use to express the poetic genius or mousikê we associate with inspiration in the early Greek poetry, and thus prior to the Classical period? In this presentation, I examine both the terminology employed by Homer and Hesiod to express the poetic experience and the role of the aoidos or singer/poet in their respective accounts. I argue that not only are the physical and figurative notions of " inspiration " in Homer and Hesiod confused, that is, they are not consciously distinguished for the poets, but poetry itself for Homer and Hesiod must have been seen as a divine gift — as willed by the gods. I also argue that a number of etymologies and contexts strongly suggest that a type of mania or ecstatic possession was very much a part of the early poetic process. Finally, I argue that there is evidence to suggest that an intoxicating substance and dance may have been preconditions for poetic ecstasy and performance, and that these are also part of the inspirational process for Plato in the Laws.
Research Interests:
This is my critical book review of Christopher Bobonich (ed.), Plato’s Laws: A Critical Guide, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010 for the Journal of Hellenic Studies 132 (2012), 262-264. I was given more space than usual to... more
This is my critical book review of Christopher Bobonich (ed.), Plato’s Laws: A Critical Guide, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010 for the Journal of Hellenic Studies 132 (2012), 262-264. I was given more space than usual to provide an overview and/or critic of each of the contributions.
Research Interests:
This is my review of V. Caston & D.W. Graham (eds), Presocratic Philosophy. Essays in Honour of Alexander Mourelatos, Ashgate, 2002 for The Classical Review 55.2 (2005), 339-402. I was given more space than usual to provide the original... more
This is my review of V. Caston & D.W. Graham (eds), Presocratic Philosophy. Essays in Honour of Alexander Mourelatos, Ashgate, 2002 for The Classical Review 55.2 (2005), 339-402. I was given more space than usual to provide the original flavour of each of the twenty-two essays in the volume, and at times some terse critical comments of my own.
Research Interests:
This is my published review in the Journal of the History of Philosophy of G.J. Reyhams-Schils’ Plato’s Timaeus as Cultural Icon, Notre Dame University Press, 2002 for 42 (3) 2004, 335-37. Given the influence of Plato’s Timaeus in the... more
This is my published review in the Journal of the History of Philosophy of G.J. Reyhams-Schils’ Plato’s Timaeus as Cultural Icon, Notre Dame University Press, 2002 for 42 (3) 2004, 335-37. Given the influence of Plato’s Timaeus in the history of western culture and science -- it was the main rival to Genesis, and quality and scope of the essays, it is well worth drawing your attention to the volume in case some may have missed it.
Research Interests:
This is my English review of Luc Brisson and Walter Meyerstein’s Inventer l’Univers: Le Problème de la connaissance et les modèles cosmologiques, Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1991. The review was published in Phoenix 49(1995), 83-86. An... more
This is my English review of Luc Brisson and Walter Meyerstein’s Inventer l’Univers: Le Problème de la connaissance et les modèles cosmologiques, Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1991. The review was published in Phoenix 49(1995), 83-86. An English translation of this book was later published with the title Inventing the Universe by the State University of New York Press in 1995.
Research Interests:
While few would deny that the Presocratics were great theorizers, there has also been considerable consensus that the Presocratics did not develop methods to test their hypotheses. This can give the impression that there were no... more
While few would deny that the Presocratics were great theorizers, there has also been considerable consensus that the Presocratics did not develop methods to test their hypotheses. This can give the impression that there were no “scientific” discoveries with which all could agree. Daniel Graham sets out to debunk this well-entrenched thesis. The question is when and with whom did scientific discoveries begin? Although the usual response is to date the shift from speculative to scientific (or empirical) astronomy to the mid-fourth century BC with Eudoxus of Cnidus, Graham argues that scientific astronomy actually originated in the fifth century with Parmenides and Anaxagoras. His focus in this book is on the “scientific” contributions of these two figures to astronomy in general and regarding eclipses in particular. Graham sees Parmenides as behind the most creative burst of scientific energy until then (96) and Anaxagoras “as the Einstein of his age” (4). Their genius is all the more extraordinary, he argues, if we consider they were working as lone astronomers (contra Kuhn).
Graham’s essay is as iconoclastic as it is insightful. No one has made a more compelling case for empirical science in Presocratic thought using a definition of science that would meet the most strict contemporary standards. The book is divided into seven chapters and ends with two appendices. It also includes a number of useful interpretive figures. In this review article, I first provide an overview of each of the chapters so readers will get a sense of the ingenuity behind the narration and just how novel a thesis it is. I then provide a critical assessment of some of the points I find problematic (the short shrift given to Anaximander, whom I see as the epitome of genius) or that deserve further clarification (the dating of astronomical events and the relation between Parmenides and Anaxagoras). I also draw attention to the importance of reflective self-consciousness as what distinguishes the Greeks from their predecessors and contemporaries.
Graham’s essay is as iconoclastic as it is insightful. No one has made a more compelling case for empirical science in Presocratic thought using a definition of science that would meet the most strict contemporary standards. The book is divided into seven chapters and ends with two appendices. It also includes a number of useful interpretive figures. In this review article, I first provide an overview of each of the chapters so readers will get a sense of the ingenuity behind the narration and just how novel a thesis it is. I then provide a critical assessment of some of the points I find problematic (the short shrift given to Anaximander, whom I see as the epitome of genius) or that deserve further clarification (the dating of astronomical events and the relation between Parmenides and Anaxagoras). I also draw attention to the importance of reflective self-consciousness as what distinguishes the Greeks from their predecessors and contemporaries.
Research Interests:
One of the main contentions I want make in this presentation is that self-conscious reflections on what it means for a poet, prophet, or seer to be “divinely” inspired were contingent on making a distinction between literal and figurative... more
One of the main contentions I want make in this presentation is that self-conscious reflections on what it means for a poet, prophet, or seer to be “divinely” inspired were contingent on making a distinction between literal and figurative meanings (about the gods) and that this distinction only appears in ancient Greece with the advent of the alphabet and philosophy. I begin with an overview of the origin of writing systems to test the hypothesis that they necessarily change the way societies think about themselves. I show that while writing began in Mesopotamia around 3200 BCE and had a profound impact over the centuries on the civilizations there (and elsewhere too!), there is no evidence that it led to the kind of self-conscious critical analysis we associate with philosophy in ancient Greece. Indeed, these cultures make no clear distinction between the literal and the figurative as it concerns the relation between gods and men. But another point that interests me with the Mesopotamian tradition is that there is no reference to “divine” inspiration as we find it in ancient Greece or in the sacred texts of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. On the other hand, all of these cultures were profoundly influenced by the Mesopotamian creation myths and, of course, the written word.
Thus after situating Mesopotamia in the context of the origin of divine inspiration, I give an overview of the three religious traditions which consider their respective canonical “scriptures” as divinely inspired. I’m referring to the “sacred” books of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. They are indeed religions of the Book! I use these as a primer to the ancient Greek notion of divine inspiration as it is evidenced in the poems of Homer and Hesiod and the subsequent Greek reaction. Essentially, I examine the complex interface between belief in inspiration, the origins of philosophy, and the practice of allegory. I begin with Homer and Hesiod, turn to the origin of philosophy, move on to the first quarrel between philosophy and poetry, and then review the birth of the practice of allegorical interpretation. I give an overview of the role allegory played in the philosophic, religious, and even scientific traditions from this period to at least the Enlightenment. I also endeavour to show how believers practiced allegorical interpretation in relation to the Torah, the Christian Bible, and later the Qur’an. In doing so, I show, that although there has always been a struggle between the literal and allegorical interpretations of sacred texts, the practitioners of allegory commonly viewed both religious and philosophical texts as emanating from the same divine source — that is, as inspired by God. I end with some reflections on the interpretative clashes between competitive “inspired” texts.
Thus after situating Mesopotamia in the context of the origin of divine inspiration, I give an overview of the three religious traditions which consider their respective canonical “scriptures” as divinely inspired. I’m referring to the “sacred” books of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. They are indeed religions of the Book! I use these as a primer to the ancient Greek notion of divine inspiration as it is evidenced in the poems of Homer and Hesiod and the subsequent Greek reaction. Essentially, I examine the complex interface between belief in inspiration, the origins of philosophy, and the practice of allegory. I begin with Homer and Hesiod, turn to the origin of philosophy, move on to the first quarrel between philosophy and poetry, and then review the birth of the practice of allegorical interpretation. I give an overview of the role allegory played in the philosophic, religious, and even scientific traditions from this period to at least the Enlightenment. I also endeavour to show how believers practiced allegorical interpretation in relation to the Torah, the Christian Bible, and later the Qur’an. In doing so, I show, that although there has always been a struggle between the literal and allegorical interpretations of sacred texts, the practitioners of allegory commonly viewed both religious and philosophical texts as emanating from the same divine source — that is, as inspired by God. I end with some reflections on the interpretative clashes between competitive “inspired” texts.
Research Interests:
As part of the launch of the Canadian Business Ethics Research Network, there was an opportunity for public participation in a case presentation, concerning the ethical implications of promoting a particular hip hop concert in Toronto.... more
As part of the launch of the Canadian Business Ethics Research Network, there was an opportunity for public participation in a case presentation, concerning the ethical implications of promoting a particular hip hop concert in Toronto.
Hip hop artist 50 Cent was on an international tour in December 2005, when his Toronto concert raised a storm of controversy. There had already been 48 gun-related deaths in Toronto in 2005, and, with his controversial lyrics and image, a public debate occurred about whether or not 50 Cent, a convicted criminal, should be permitted to perform in Canada.
50 Cent’s lyrics and public image incorporate themes of violence, misogyny, gang life, and urban crime. Like a number of other hip hop artists, 50 Cent is specifically branded to be controversial, and makes regular references to his own life experiences. If nothing else, this makes the lyrics authentic.
Into this mix, a Toronto-based entertainment company, specializing in promoting concerts in this genre on a national scale, was recruited by 50 Cent’s international concert promoter to provide marketing and promotion for the Toronto Concert. Because the tour was already in progress, it would go ahead whether or not the Toronto promoter became involved in the marketing. Thus, for the company, the decision was not about whether or
not the tour should happen, but whether or not they should be involved in the marketing and promotion of the Toronto show.
There was a panel discussion and debate on the issues surrounding the controversy at York University’s Schulich School of Business on 28 September 2007. The discussion and debate included the promoter. I was asked by a philosopher colleague, the late Wesley Cragg, who held an endowed chair in ethics at the business school, and who was one of the organizers, if I would give what might be Plato’s stand in light of his position on censorship in the Republic. The following is my intervention in the debate, and an illustration of what I see as the relevance of Plato today.
Hip hop artist 50 Cent was on an international tour in December 2005, when his Toronto concert raised a storm of controversy. There had already been 48 gun-related deaths in Toronto in 2005, and, with his controversial lyrics and image, a public debate occurred about whether or not 50 Cent, a convicted criminal, should be permitted to perform in Canada.
50 Cent’s lyrics and public image incorporate themes of violence, misogyny, gang life, and urban crime. Like a number of other hip hop artists, 50 Cent is specifically branded to be controversial, and makes regular references to his own life experiences. If nothing else, this makes the lyrics authentic.
Into this mix, a Toronto-based entertainment company, specializing in promoting concerts in this genre on a national scale, was recruited by 50 Cent’s international concert promoter to provide marketing and promotion for the Toronto Concert. Because the tour was already in progress, it would go ahead whether or not the Toronto promoter became involved in the marketing. Thus, for the company, the decision was not about whether or
not the tour should happen, but whether or not they should be involved in the marketing and promotion of the Toronto show.
There was a panel discussion and debate on the issues surrounding the controversy at York University’s Schulich School of Business on 28 September 2007. The discussion and debate included the promoter. I was asked by a philosopher colleague, the late Wesley Cragg, who held an endowed chair in ethics at the business school, and who was one of the organizers, if I would give what might be Plato’s stand in light of his position on censorship in the Republic. The following is my intervention in the debate, and an illustration of what I see as the relevance of Plato today.
Research Interests:
To most, myths are merely fantastic stories. But for Luc Brisson, one of the great living Plato scholars, myth is a key factor in what it means to be human - a condition of life for all. Essential and inescapable, myth offers a guide for... more
To most, myths are merely fantastic stories. But for Luc Brisson, one of the great living Plato scholars, myth is a key factor in what it means to be human - a condition of life for all. Essential and inescapable, myth offers a guide for living, forming the core of belonging and group identity.
In 1999 Quebec classicist Louis-André Dorion published a series of French conversations with Brisson on the idea of myth. In Making Sense of Myth Gerard Naddaf offers an extended and updated English translation of these conversations, as well as a new set of discussions between himself and Brisson. Beginning with Brisson's childhood in the village of Saint-Esprit, Quebec, through his education as a gifted child in minor seminaries starting at age eleven, and continuing with his years in Paris, first as a graduate student and later at the Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Brisson tells the story of his escape from an all-encompassing myth - the one promulgated by the Roman Catholic Church. The philosopher situates Quebec society as inseparable from the history of the Catholic Church in Quebec, and argues that this correlation offers a perfect paradigm of myth and mythmaking. Naddaf’s introduction and afterword contextualize the conversations by discussing Brisson’s and Plato’s understanding of the origin and meaning of myth, elaborating on the role of myth in anthropogeny, in the creation of selfhood, and in multiculturalism.
Making Sense of Myth promises both a philosophy of myth and a philosophy of life, one inspired by Brisson’s lifelong engagement with the great Western philosopher Plato.
https://www.mqup.ca/making-sense-of-myth-products-9780228020714.php
In 1999 Quebec classicist Louis-André Dorion published a series of French conversations with Brisson on the idea of myth. In Making Sense of Myth Gerard Naddaf offers an extended and updated English translation of these conversations, as well as a new set of discussions between himself and Brisson. Beginning with Brisson's childhood in the village of Saint-Esprit, Quebec, through his education as a gifted child in minor seminaries starting at age eleven, and continuing with his years in Paris, first as a graduate student and later at the Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Brisson tells the story of his escape from an all-encompassing myth - the one promulgated by the Roman Catholic Church. The philosopher situates Quebec society as inseparable from the history of the Catholic Church in Quebec, and argues that this correlation offers a perfect paradigm of myth and mythmaking. Naddaf’s introduction and afterword contextualize the conversations by discussing Brisson’s and Plato’s understanding of the origin and meaning of myth, elaborating on the role of myth in anthropogeny, in the creation of selfhood, and in multiculturalism.
Making Sense of Myth promises both a philosophy of myth and a philosophy of life, one inspired by Brisson’s lifelong engagement with the great Western philosopher Plato.
https://www.mqup.ca/making-sense-of-myth-products-9780228020714.php
Research Interests: Cultural History, Mythology, Philosophy, Multiculturalism, Plato, and 15 moreHistory of Christianity, Social and Cultural Anthropology, Québec History, Storytelling, Pre-Socratic (Pre-Platonic) Philosophy, Ancient Philosophy, Evolution of Consciousness, Greek Myth, Plato and Platonism, Anaximander, Ancient Greek Language, Canadian and Quebec Politics, Catholic Church, Selfhood, and Anthropology of Religion
Gerard Naddaf Making Sense of Myth: Conversations with Luc Brisson This is the penultimate version of the introduction to my book Making Sense of Myth: Conversations with Luc Brisson, which will be released in March 2024. To most,... more
Gerard Naddaf
Making Sense of Myth: Conversations with Luc Brisson
This is the penultimate version of the introduction to my book Making Sense of Myth: Conversations with Luc Brisson, which will be released in March 2024.
To most, myths are merely fantastic stories. But for Luc Brisson, one of the great living Plato scholars, myth is a key factor in what it means to be human – a condition of life for all. Essential and inescapable, myth offers a guide for living, forming the core of belonging and group identity.
In these free-flowing conversations, Brisson provides a lucid historical analysis of why the history of Quebec society is inseparable from the history of the Catholic Church in Quebec, and the correlation is a perfect paradigm of myth and mythmaking. Ultimately, Brisson wants to explain how his work on myth corresponds to his own biographical path, which, as he shows in these conversations, was itself rooted in myth – that of the Catholic Church in Quebec. But we soon see that his theory of myth and its practical application is relevant to each and every one of us, regardless of our particular background.
The conversations begin with Brisson’s genealogy and then narrate the story of his escape from an all-encompassing myth promulgated by the Roman Catholic Church of his youth. The myth or myths that made Brisson who he is are thus front and centre here. We learn of his recruitment by the Catholic Church as a gifted (but handicapped) child from a modest rural Quebec family at age eleven to begin training in a seminary in view of becoming a “janissary” of the church, the awakening of reflective consciousness he underwent, and his own noble lie to get an education that he would not have otherwise received. There is something for everyone here, but the book offers first and foremost a philosophy of myth that is inseparable from a philosophy of life.
The earlier conversations recorded here (with Louis-André Dorion) contain some of the most insightful ideas on the origin of bisexuality. There’s also ample coverage of Brisson's Orphic research, and a long synopsis on why the big bang is still a myth on a par with Plato’s Timaeus. Brisson's world travels, his decades living in Paris, and Quebec culture and politics also occupy a prominent place in these conversations, but always in the background is Brisson's attention to myth and, by extension, politics.
In our later conversations (part 4), there are insightful observations on why originality is a mirage; the constraints of the publish-or-perish phenomenon in academia; Brisson's experience working in teams; his and others' interpretations of Plato; the differences between Greek and Abrahamic religions; the place of myth in the modern world; and Brisson's theory for why reason will “always” be tied to myth, to mention but a handful of the themes touched on here.
It’s the final section of part 4 that brings together the whole. Myth, as Brisson understands it, comprises stories that give us our identity; they’re a way of unconsciously (until Plato, that is) controlling the individual within the community to which he or she belongs. As such, myths are creators of the self, of one’s identity. The notion of individuality is a kind of mirage; it’s as if there is no self independent of one’s larger group or community. For Brisson, myth is a phenomenon that few have given any real thought to, and yet it’s a key to understanding what it means to be human, and to the future destiny of humanity itself.
This book is for an educated and intellectually curious English-reading public (and not just scholars and philosophers), so I provide over three hundred notes to add necessary context. I also have an introduction (link to pdf of the penultimate version appended below) and an afterword. The former puts Plato and myth into context, and also gives readers a sense of what to expect in the conversations. In the latter, I describe the role of myth in anthropogeny (from the origin of language), in the evolution of the self and of consciousness (culminating in the creation of the Western mind), and in multiculturalism. I engage with myth in the current political and social climate, including current world events.
https://www.mqup.ca/making-sense-of-myth-products-9780228020714.php
Making Sense of Myth: Conversations with Luc Brisson
This is the penultimate version of the introduction to my book Making Sense of Myth: Conversations with Luc Brisson, which will be released in March 2024.
To most, myths are merely fantastic stories. But for Luc Brisson, one of the great living Plato scholars, myth is a key factor in what it means to be human – a condition of life for all. Essential and inescapable, myth offers a guide for living, forming the core of belonging and group identity.
In these free-flowing conversations, Brisson provides a lucid historical analysis of why the history of Quebec society is inseparable from the history of the Catholic Church in Quebec, and the correlation is a perfect paradigm of myth and mythmaking. Ultimately, Brisson wants to explain how his work on myth corresponds to his own biographical path, which, as he shows in these conversations, was itself rooted in myth – that of the Catholic Church in Quebec. But we soon see that his theory of myth and its practical application is relevant to each and every one of us, regardless of our particular background.
The conversations begin with Brisson’s genealogy and then narrate the story of his escape from an all-encompassing myth promulgated by the Roman Catholic Church of his youth. The myth or myths that made Brisson who he is are thus front and centre here. We learn of his recruitment by the Catholic Church as a gifted (but handicapped) child from a modest rural Quebec family at age eleven to begin training in a seminary in view of becoming a “janissary” of the church, the awakening of reflective consciousness he underwent, and his own noble lie to get an education that he would not have otherwise received. There is something for everyone here, but the book offers first and foremost a philosophy of myth that is inseparable from a philosophy of life.
The earlier conversations recorded here (with Louis-André Dorion) contain some of the most insightful ideas on the origin of bisexuality. There’s also ample coverage of Brisson's Orphic research, and a long synopsis on why the big bang is still a myth on a par with Plato’s Timaeus. Brisson's world travels, his decades living in Paris, and Quebec culture and politics also occupy a prominent place in these conversations, but always in the background is Brisson's attention to myth and, by extension, politics.
In our later conversations (part 4), there are insightful observations on why originality is a mirage; the constraints of the publish-or-perish phenomenon in academia; Brisson's experience working in teams; his and others' interpretations of Plato; the differences between Greek and Abrahamic religions; the place of myth in the modern world; and Brisson's theory for why reason will “always” be tied to myth, to mention but a handful of the themes touched on here.
It’s the final section of part 4 that brings together the whole. Myth, as Brisson understands it, comprises stories that give us our identity; they’re a way of unconsciously (until Plato, that is) controlling the individual within the community to which he or she belongs. As such, myths are creators of the self, of one’s identity. The notion of individuality is a kind of mirage; it’s as if there is no self independent of one’s larger group or community. For Brisson, myth is a phenomenon that few have given any real thought to, and yet it’s a key to understanding what it means to be human, and to the future destiny of humanity itself.
This book is for an educated and intellectually curious English-reading public (and not just scholars and philosophers), so I provide over three hundred notes to add necessary context. I also have an introduction (link to pdf of the penultimate version appended below) and an afterword. The former puts Plato and myth into context, and also gives readers a sense of what to expect in the conversations. In the latter, I describe the role of myth in anthropogeny (from the origin of language), in the evolution of the self and of consciousness (culminating in the creation of the Western mind), and in multiculturalism. I engage with myth in the current political and social climate, including current world events.
https://www.mqup.ca/making-sense-of-myth-products-9780228020714.php
Research Interests: Evolutionary Psychology, Mythology, Philosophy of Mind, Presocratic Philosophy, Multiculturalism, and 14 moreTheology, Philosophical Anthropology, Plato, Consciousness (Psychology), Social and Cultural Anthropology, Québec History, Storytelling, Evolution of Consciousness, Ancient myth and religion, Cultural Anthropology, Ancient Greek Philosophy, Homeric poetry, Ancient Greek Mythology, and Canadian and Quebec Politics
This is my fifty-page introduction to my English translation and edition of Luc Brisson’s Plato the Myth Maker, University of Chicago Press, 1998. The aim of the introduction is to show the originality and importance both of Brisson’s... more
This is my fifty-page introduction to my English translation and edition of Luc Brisson’s Plato the Myth Maker, University of Chicago Press, 1998. The aim of the introduction is to show the originality and importance both of Brisson’s method and of Plato’s analysis in the context of contemporary debates over the origin and evolution of the oral tradition, both before and after the advent of literacy in Ancient Greece.