Crisippo和ἐπελευστικὴκίνησις:反—学术争论的一个阶段?

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Elenchos Pub Date : 2019-11-21 DOI:10.1515/elen-2019-0018
M. Mazzetti
{"title":"Crisippo和ἐπελευστικὴκίνησις:反—学术争论的一个阶段?","authors":"M. Mazzetti","doi":"10.1515/elen-2019-0018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The purpose of this paper is to identify the upholders of the thesis reported by Plutarch, De Stoicorum repugnantiis 23, aimed to reject Stoic determinism. A brief introduction will be devoted to the relationship between this text and the more general context of the Stoic philosophy. Then, I will take into account the objection against Stoic determinism raised by some anonymous philosophers: according to it, causal determinism would be inconsistent with the choice among indistinguishables. Chrysippus replied that if that choice were not determined, it would occur without causes; and this would be absurd. Then I will summarize the most likely hypotheses about the identification of Chrysippus’ opponents, and I will opt for Academics. Finally, I will try to conjecture the link between Plutarch’s passage and the debate among Stoics and Academics about indistinguishables, as we know it from other sources.","PeriodicalId":38726,"journal":{"name":"Elenchos","volume":"40 1","pages":"383 - 400"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/elen-2019-0018","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Crisippo e l’ἐπελευστικὴ κίνησις: una tappa della polemica anti–accademica?\",\"authors\":\"M. Mazzetti\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/elen-2019-0018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The purpose of this paper is to identify the upholders of the thesis reported by Plutarch, De Stoicorum repugnantiis 23, aimed to reject Stoic determinism. A brief introduction will be devoted to the relationship between this text and the more general context of the Stoic philosophy. Then, I will take into account the objection against Stoic determinism raised by some anonymous philosophers: according to it, causal determinism would be inconsistent with the choice among indistinguishables. Chrysippus replied that if that choice were not determined, it would occur without causes; and this would be absurd. Then I will summarize the most likely hypotheses about the identification of Chrysippus’ opponents, and I will opt for Academics. Finally, I will try to conjecture the link between Plutarch’s passage and the debate among Stoics and Academics about indistinguishables, as we know it from other sources.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38726,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Elenchos\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"383 - 400\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-11-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/elen-2019-0018\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Elenchos\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/elen-2019-0018\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Elenchos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/elen-2019-0018","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

摘要

本文的目的是找出普鲁塔克的论文De Stoicorum regnantiis 23的支持者,该论文旨在拒绝斯多葛决定论。一个简短的介绍将致力于这篇文章和斯多葛派哲学的更一般的背景之间的关系。然后,我将考虑一些匿名哲学家对斯多葛决定论提出的反对意见:根据它,因果决定论将与不可区分的选择不一致。克里西普斯回答说,如果这种选择没有被决定,它就会毫无原因地发生;这将是荒谬的。然后我将总结关于克里西普斯反对者身份的最可能的假设,我将选择学术界。最后,我将尝试推测普鲁塔克的这段话与斯多葛学派和学者之间关于不可区分的争论之间的联系,正如我们从其他来源所知道的那样。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Crisippo e l’ἐπελευστικὴ κίνησις: una tappa della polemica anti–accademica?
Abstract The purpose of this paper is to identify the upholders of the thesis reported by Plutarch, De Stoicorum repugnantiis 23, aimed to reject Stoic determinism. A brief introduction will be devoted to the relationship between this text and the more general context of the Stoic philosophy. Then, I will take into account the objection against Stoic determinism raised by some anonymous philosophers: according to it, causal determinism would be inconsistent with the choice among indistinguishables. Chrysippus replied that if that choice were not determined, it would occur without causes; and this would be absurd. Then I will summarize the most likely hypotheses about the identification of Chrysippus’ opponents, and I will opt for Academics. Finally, I will try to conjecture the link between Plutarch’s passage and the debate among Stoics and Academics about indistinguishables, as we know it from other sources.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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