Lucretius’ prolepsis

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Elenchos Pub Date : 2022-11-17 DOI:10.1515/elen-2022-0016
Chiara Rover
{"title":"Lucretius’ prolepsis","authors":"Chiara Rover","doi":"10.1515/elen-2022-0016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper aims to investigate the equivalent of Epicurus’ πρόληψις, the second criterion of the Epicurean Canonic (DL X 31 = fr. 35 Usener), in Lucretius’ De rerum natura (DRN). Taking stock of the several occurrences of the Latin terms notitia and notities in the six books of the poem, I show that Lucretius’ view about preconception remains faithful to Epicurus’ πρόληψις, and that the poet does not endorse a less empiricist position than his Master because of some influence of the Stoic ἔννοια. To this end, I will also briefly address an important case in which πρόληψις, albeit not clearly mentioned, plays an essential role, namely the prolepsis of the deity (DRN V 1169–1182). Finally, I explain how Lucretius can be of some help in grasping the controversial relationship between the criterion of πρόληψις and that of ἐπιβολὴ τῆς διανοίας (animi inectus/iactus), showing in which way the poet seems to consider the latter as a criterion of truth in its own right.","PeriodicalId":38726,"journal":{"name":"Elenchos","volume":"43 1","pages":"279 - 314"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Elenchos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/elen-2022-0016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This paper aims to investigate the equivalent of Epicurus’ πρόληψις, the second criterion of the Epicurean Canonic (DL X 31 = fr. 35 Usener), in Lucretius’ De rerum natura (DRN). Taking stock of the several occurrences of the Latin terms notitia and notities in the six books of the poem, I show that Lucretius’ view about preconception remains faithful to Epicurus’ πρόληψις, and that the poet does not endorse a less empiricist position than his Master because of some influence of the Stoic ἔννοια. To this end, I will also briefly address an important case in which πρόληψις, albeit not clearly mentioned, plays an essential role, namely the prolepsis of the deity (DRN V 1169–1182). Finally, I explain how Lucretius can be of some help in grasping the controversial relationship between the criterion of πρόληψις and that of ἐπιβολὴ τῆς διανοίας (animi inectus/iactus), showing in which way the poet seems to consider the latter as a criterion of truth in its own right.
摘要本文旨在研究伊壁鸠鲁经典(DL X 31=fr.35 Usener)的第二个标准——πρίληψις在Lucretius’De rerum natura(DRN)中的等价性。通过对这首诗的六本书中拉丁语名词notitia和notities的几次出现的评估,我表明卢克莱修关于先入为主的观点仍然忠实于伊壁鸠鲁的πρίληψις,并且诗人并不因为斯多葛学派的一些影响而赞同比他的大师更少的经验主义立场ἔμα。为此,我还将简要介绍一个重要的案例,在这个案例中,πρίληψις,尽管没有明确提及,但发挥着重要作用,即神的普罗列普西斯(DRN V 1169-1182)。最后,我解释了Lucretius如何帮助我们理解πρίληψις标准与ἐπιβιλὴ τῆς(animi inectus/iatus),表明诗人似乎以何种方式将后者视为真理的标准。
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
Elenchos
Elenchos Arts and Humanities-Classics
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
×
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
小红书