Monist and Dualist Tendencies in Platonism before Plotinus

J. Dillon
{"title":"Monist and Dualist Tendencies in Platonism before Plotinus","authors":"J. Dillon","doi":"10.1017/9781108584906.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An article by John Dillon (Trinity College, Dublin) argues that the Platonism that Plotinus inherits setting aside Ammonius Saccas, of whom we know all too little is by the later second century distinctly dualist in tendency, and is able, especially in the case of Plutarch, to quote Plato to its purpose. Plato himself, though, as the author maintains, is, despite appearances to the contrary, what one might term a 'modified monist'. That is to say, he fully recognizes the degree of imperfection and evil in the world, and holds it to be ineradicable, but he does not in the last resort believe in a positive countervailing force to the Good or the One. What we have is simply a negative force, whether Indefinite Dyad, disorderly World-Soul, or Receptacle, which is an inevitable condition of their being a world at all, but which, as a side-effect of introducing diversity, generates various sorts of imperfection. It is this scenario that justifies his follower Hermodorus in declaring that Plato recognizes only a single first principle, and it to this sort of monism if anything, in a more pronounced form that Plotinus returns. A Russian translation of this article is published in ΣΧΟΛΗ ΙΙ. 1 (2008) 11-20.","PeriodicalId":186264,"journal":{"name":"The Roots of Platonism","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Roots of Platonism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108584906.004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

An article by John Dillon (Trinity College, Dublin) argues that the Platonism that Plotinus inherits setting aside Ammonius Saccas, of whom we know all too little is by the later second century distinctly dualist in tendency, and is able, especially in the case of Plutarch, to quote Plato to its purpose. Plato himself, though, as the author maintains, is, despite appearances to the contrary, what one might term a 'modified monist'. That is to say, he fully recognizes the degree of imperfection and evil in the world, and holds it to be ineradicable, but he does not in the last resort believe in a positive countervailing force to the Good or the One. What we have is simply a negative force, whether Indefinite Dyad, disorderly World-Soul, or Receptacle, which is an inevitable condition of their being a world at all, but which, as a side-effect of introducing diversity, generates various sorts of imperfection. It is this scenario that justifies his follower Hermodorus in declaring that Plato recognizes only a single first principle, and it to this sort of monism if anything, in a more pronounced form that Plotinus returns. A Russian translation of this article is published in ΣΧΟΛΗ ΙΙ. 1 (2008) 11-20.
普罗提诺之前柏拉图主义的一元论和二元论倾向
约翰·狄龙(都柏林三一学院)的一篇文章认为,普罗提诺所继承的柏拉图主义,除了阿蒙纽斯·萨卡斯之外,我们对他知之甚少,在二世纪后期,他明显倾向于二元论,特别是在普鲁塔克的情况下,他能够引用柏拉图来达到目的。然而,正如作者所坚持的那样,柏拉图本人,尽管表面上与之相反,但我们可以称之为“修正的一元论者”。也就是说,他充分认识到世界上的不完美和邪恶的程度,并认为这是不可消除的,但他最终并不相信有一种积极的力量可以抵消善或唯一。我们所拥有的只是一种消极的力量,无论是无限的二元体,无序的世界-灵魂,还是容器,这是它们成为世界的必然条件,但作为引入多样性的副作用,它们产生了各种不完美。正是在这种情况下,他的追随者Hermodorus才有理由宣称柏拉图只承认一个第一原则,而这种一元论,如果有的话,以一种更明显的形式,普罗提诺回归了。本文的俄文翻译发表在ΣΧΟΛΗ ΙΙ。1(2008) 11-20。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信