绝望时代的共和主义:西塞罗对卡托斯多葛主义的批判

IF 0.3 3区 历史学 0 CLASSICS
POLIS Pub Date : 2023-02-06 DOI:10.1163/20512996-12340391
Mark E. Yellin
{"title":"绝望时代的共和主义:西塞罗对卡托斯多葛主义的批判","authors":"Mark E. Yellin","doi":"10.1163/20512996-12340391","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis essay examines two articles by Rex Stem about Cicero and Cato: ‘The First Eloquent Stoic and Cato the Younger’ and ‘Cicero as Orator and Political Philosopher: The Value of the Pro Murena for Ciceronian Political Thought’. It places these articles in dialogue and draws upon them to present an overarching argument about Cicero’s critique of Cato’s Stoicism. It also assesses their respective defenses of Roman republicanism, offering counterarguments to Cicero’s critique of Cato and underlining the ways in which the two men were allies.","PeriodicalId":43237,"journal":{"name":"POLIS","volume":"105 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Republicanism in Desperate Times: Cicero’s Critique of Cato’s Stoicism\",\"authors\":\"Mark E. Yellin\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/20512996-12340391\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThis essay examines two articles by Rex Stem about Cicero and Cato: ‘The First Eloquent Stoic and Cato the Younger’ and ‘Cicero as Orator and Political Philosopher: The Value of the Pro Murena for Ciceronian Political Thought’. It places these articles in dialogue and draws upon them to present an overarching argument about Cicero’s critique of Cato’s Stoicism. It also assesses their respective defenses of Roman republicanism, offering counterarguments to Cicero’s critique of Cato and underlining the ways in which the two men were allies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43237,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"POLIS\",\"volume\":\"105 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"POLIS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/20512996-12340391\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"CLASSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"POLIS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/20512996-12340391","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"CLASSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文考察了雷克斯·斯特恩关于西塞罗和卡托的两篇文章:《第一个雄辩的斯多葛派和年轻的卡托》和《作为演说家和政治哲学家的西塞罗:对西塞罗政治思想的支持》。它把这些文章放在对话中,并利用它们来提出一个关于西塞罗对卡托斯多葛主义的批判的总体论点。它还评估了他们各自对罗马共和主义的捍卫,对西塞罗对卡托的批评提出了反驳,并强调了两人是盟友的方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Republicanism in Desperate Times: Cicero’s Critique of Cato’s Stoicism
This essay examines two articles by Rex Stem about Cicero and Cato: ‘The First Eloquent Stoic and Cato the Younger’ and ‘Cicero as Orator and Political Philosopher: The Value of the Pro Murena for Ciceronian Political Thought’. It places these articles in dialogue and draws upon them to present an overarching argument about Cicero’s critique of Cato’s Stoicism. It also assesses their respective defenses of Roman republicanism, offering counterarguments to Cicero’s critique of Cato and underlining the ways in which the two men were allies.
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
POLIS
POLIS CLASSICS-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信