Volume 5, Issue 2

Abstract: The Socratic instruction (64 b ) to clarify “what kind of death” a philosopher would deserve suggests two different notions of “death” in the Phaedo : physical demise and philosophy. This double meaning makes it possible for the Platonic Socrates to address a dual audience with a dual purpose: His interlocutors will receive consolation, while the perceptive reader will focus on practicing philosophy on the basis of the hypothesis of Forms. Socrates’ final words can also be illuminated as a vindication of his adherence to logos : the cock to Asclepius has to be offered as a sign of gratitude for healing misology.

Abstract: This article aims to give a critical and up to date survey on the medical theories expounded in the Timaeus , trying to make clear to which extent Plato took an interest in medicine, which medical issues in the dialogue are original and which are not. In providing an extended treatment of the medical ideas contained in the Timaeus , the Anonymus Londiniensis papyrus is also of assistance in this sense . This paper highlights those points on which the papyrus differs from the Platonic text, providing thus insight into Plato’s etiological assumptions.

Abstract: Aristotle is committed to three propositions which seem to be mutually inconsistent: (1) He thinks that natural phenomena occur either always or for the most part. Natural phenomena, and a fortiori the core properties determining the nature of an entire species, cannot be rarities; (2) He states that theoretical understanding is an essential, dominant component of human nature; (3) He observes that human theoretical understanding is rare. I evaluate possible alternative ways of solving the inconsistency, and show that they all involve considerable difficulties.

Abstract: The following article is a contribution to the rich debate concerning happiness or fulfilment ( eudaimonia ) in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics . It argues that eudaimonia is theōria in accordance with what Aristotle repeatedly says in Book X of the Nicomachean Ethics . However, happy life ( eudaimōn bios ) is a complex way of life which includes not only theoretical activity but also the exercising of other virtues including the so-called moral or social ones. The article shows that Aristotle differentiates between eudaimonia on the one hand and the happy or fulfilled life ( eudaimōn bios ) on the other, and shows how this distinction clarifies Aristotle’s account of eudaimonia .