Crisippo e l’ἐπελευστικὴ κίνησις: una tappa della polemica anti–accademica?
-
Manuel Mazzetti
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.
Bibliografia
Babut, D. 2004. Plutarque. Oeuvres morales, vol. XV/1, Paris, Les Belles Lettres.Search in Google Scholar
Bett, R. 1997. Sextus Empiricus. Against the Ethicists, Oxford, Clarendon Press.Search in Google Scholar
Bobzien, S. 1998. Determinism and Freedom in Stoic Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Bobzien, S. 2000. “Did Epicurus Discover the Free Will Problem?”, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 19, 287–337.10.1093/oso/9780198866732.003.0007Search in Google Scholar
Boys–Stones, G. 1996. “The ἐπελευστικὴ δύναμις in Aristo’s Psychology of Action”, Phronesis 41, 75–94.10.1163/156852896321051792Search in Google Scholar
Cherniss, H. 1976. Plutarch. Moralia, vol. XIII/2, London, Loeb Classical Library.Search in Google Scholar
Donini, P. L. 1989. Ethos. Aristotele e il determinismo, Alessandria, Edizioni Dell’Orso.Search in Google Scholar
Englert, W. G. 1987. Epicurus on the Swerve and Voluntary Action, Atlanta, Scholars Press.Search in Google Scholar
Frede 1990. “Fatalism and Future Truth”, Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 6, 195–227.10.1163/2213441790X00133Search in Google Scholar
Ioppolo, A. M. 1980. Aristone di Chio e lo Stoicismo antico, Napoli, Bibliopolis.Search in Google Scholar
Ioppolo, A. M. 1994. “Il concetto di causa nella filosofia ellenistica e romana”, Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt II 36.7, 4491–4545 (ora in Dibattiti filosofici ellenistici, a cura di B. Centrone, R. Chiaradonna, D. Quarantotto, E. Spinelli, Sankt Augustin, Academia Verlag, 2013, 17–68).10.1515/9783110883732-003Search in Google Scholar
Ioppolo, A. M. 2012. “Chrysippus and the Action Theory of Aristo of Chios”, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy Suppl. 43, 197–222.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199646043.003.0011Search in Google Scholar
Long, A. A.–Sedley, D. N. 1987. The Hellenistic Philosophers, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511808050Search in Google Scholar
Mansfeld, J. 1999. “Theology”, in The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, ed. by K. Algra, J. Barnes, J. Mansfeld, M. Schofield, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 452–478.10.1017/CHOL9780521250283.014Search in Google Scholar
Masi, F. G. 2014. “L’ente accidentale e il rifiuto della necessità causale. Aristotele, Metafisica E 3”, in C. Tugnoli (ed.), Libero arbitrio. Teorie e prassi della libertà, Napoli, Liguori, 115–154.Search in Google Scholar
Mazzetti, M. 2016. “La regola e l’eccezione: l’accidente come argomento contro il determinismo in Aristotele, Met. VI 3”, Annali di studi umanistici 4, 21–46.Search in Google Scholar
Moreau, J. 1948. “Aristone et le Stoïcisme”, Revue des Études Anciennes 50, 27–48.10.3406/rea.1948.3387Search in Google Scholar
O’ Keefe, Th. 2005. Epicurus on Freedom, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511482571Search in Google Scholar
Pohlenz, M. 1949. “Review: La démonologie de Plutarque. Essai sur les idées religieuses et les mythes d’un Platonicien éclectique by Guy Soury”, Gnomon 21, 347–354.Search in Google Scholar
Purinton, J. S. 1999. “Epicurus on ‘Free Volition’ and the Atomic Swerve”, Phronesis 44, 253–299.10.1163/15685289960464601Search in Google Scholar
Rescher, N. 1995. “Choice without Preference: The Problem of Buridan’s Ass”, in Id., Essays in the History of Philosophy, Aldershot, Avebury, Ashgate, 77–114.Search in Google Scholar
Rieth, O. 1933. Grundbegriffe der Stoischen Ethik. Eine traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung, Berlin, Weidmann.Search in Google Scholar
Rist, J. M. 1969. Stoic Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Salles, R. 2005. The Stoics on Determinism and Compatibilism, Burlington, Ashgate.Search in Google Scholar
Schofield, M. 1984. “Ariston of Chios and the Unity of Virtue”, Ancient Philosophy 4, 83–96.10.5840/ancientphil19844124Search in Google Scholar
Sedley, D. N. 1982. “The Stoic Criterion of Identity”, Phronesis 27, 255–275.10.1163/156852882X00177Search in Google Scholar
Sedley, D. N. 2018. “Stoics and Their Critics on Diachronic Identity”, Rhizomata 6, 24–39.10.1515/rhiz-2018-0002Search in Google Scholar
Spinelli, E. 1995. Sesto Empirico. Contro gli etici, Napoli, Bibliopolis.Search in Google Scholar
Spinelli, E.–Verde, F. 2014. “Alle radici del libero arbitrio? Aporie e soluzioni nelle filosofie ellenistiche”, in Libero arbitrio. Storia di una controversia filosofica, a cura di M. De Caro, M. Mori, E. Spinelli, Roma, Carocci, 59–98.Search in Google Scholar
Theiler, W. 1946. “Tacitus und die antike Schicksalslehre”, in O. Gigon, Phyllobolia für Peter von der Mühll zum 60. Geburtstag, Basel, Benno Schwabe, 35–90.Search in Google Scholar
Zanatta, M. 1993. Plutarco. Le contraddizioni degli Stoici, Milano, BUR.Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Articles
- Escatologia e conoscenza salvifica in Empedocle: una rilettura della metempsicosi alla luce delle teorie fisiologiche sulla mente
- Peut-on avoir la vie en puissance ? Sur la cohérence du κοινότατος λόγος de l’âme
- Aristotle on the Differences in Material Organisation Between Spoken and Written Language: An Inquiry into Part-Whole Relations
- The Compound of Substratum and Essence. On a Puzzling Reference in Aristotle’s Metaphysics Z 13.1038b2–3
- Crisippo e l’ἐπελευστικὴ κίνησις: una tappa della polemica anti–accademica?
- Simplicius on the Individuation of Material Substances
- Notes
- One Socrates and Many. A Discussion of the Volume Socrates and the Socratic Dialogue
- Scholarship in Process. A Reconstruction of Vlastos’ Method of Research into the History of Philosophy
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Articles
- Escatologia e conoscenza salvifica in Empedocle: una rilettura della metempsicosi alla luce delle teorie fisiologiche sulla mente
- Peut-on avoir la vie en puissance ? Sur la cohérence du κοινότατος λόγος de l’âme
- Aristotle on the Differences in Material Organisation Between Spoken and Written Language: An Inquiry into Part-Whole Relations
- The Compound of Substratum and Essence. On a Puzzling Reference in Aristotle’s Metaphysics Z 13.1038b2–3
- Crisippo e l’ἐπελευστικὴ κίνησις: una tappa della polemica anti–accademica?
- Simplicius on the Individuation of Material Substances
- Notes
- One Socrates and Many. A Discussion of the Volume Socrates and the Socratic Dialogue
- Scholarship in Process. A Reconstruction of Vlastos’ Method of Research into the History of Philosophy
