{"title":"Cicero, Academica 1.45","authors":"Charles W. Snyder","doi":"10.1075/bpjam.00071.sny","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Focused on the reference to Socrates’ confession of ignorance at Academica 1.45, this paper\n challenges the common assumption that the passage transmits Arcesilaus’ conception of Socrates. This paper develops in two steps\n a more plausible reading of the passage. According to this reading, Cicero presents an interpretation of Arcesilaus’ historical\n relation to Socrates. In conclusion, the paper argues that traditional readings of Acad. 1.45 underestimate not\n only Cicero’s originality as an historical thinker, but also his clever reconstruction of Academic history, as it effectively\n opposes the controversial Academic history defended by Antiochus in the early first century BCE.","PeriodicalId":165187,"journal":{"name":"Bochumer Philosophisches Jahrbuch für Antike und Mittelalter","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bochumer Philosophisches Jahrbuch für Antike und Mittelalter","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/bpjam.00071.sny","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Focused on the reference to Socrates’ confession of ignorance at Academica 1.45, this paper
challenges the common assumption that the passage transmits Arcesilaus’ conception of Socrates. This paper develops in two steps
a more plausible reading of the passage. According to this reading, Cicero presents an interpretation of Arcesilaus’ historical
relation to Socrates. In conclusion, the paper argues that traditional readings of Acad. 1.45 underestimate not
only Cicero’s originality as an historical thinker, but also his clever reconstruction of Academic history, as it effectively
opposes the controversial Academic history defended by Antiochus in the early first century BCE.