Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Post-Hellenistic Philosophy on God and the World

Post-Hellenistic Philosophy on God and the World 1IntroductionIn antiquity, Plato’s Timaeus was standardly considered an inquiry into nature. As a result, this work was often used as an introduction to the study of the physical world on the crucial assumption that this world displayed order and structure—in short, on the crucial assumption that it was a cosmos. Although Aristotle wrote extensively on the natural world, he did not write on the cosmos per se. The De mundo may be regarded as a subsequent attempt by an unknown author to fill out what was perceived as a lacuna in Aristotle’s philosophy.That the De mundo is an attempt to fill a lacuna vis-à-vis the Stoic practice of writing on the cosmos was first suggested by Jaap Mansfeld (Mansfeld 1992, pp. 391–411). This suggestion has been elaborated further by Taneli Kakkonen (Kukkonen 2014, pp. 311–52). I am not convinced by recent attempts to argue that the De mundo is an authentic work by Aristotle (most notably, Reale & Bos 1995; a few of their arguments can be found in the online critical assessment of the volume under review by Abraham Bos: https://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2021/2021.06.24/). Moreover, both in the Timaeus and in the De mundo the structure and order displayed in the cosmos is http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Rhizomata de Gruyter

Post-Hellenistic Philosophy on God and the World

Falcon, Andrea
Rhizomata , Volume 10 (1): 9 – Aug 1, 2022
Download PDF
9 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/de-gruyter/post-hellenistic-philosophy-on-god-and-the-world-01K0O4zqGf
Publisher
de Gruyter
Copyright
© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
ISSN
2196-5110
eISSN
2196-5110
DOI
10.1515/rhiz-2022-0009
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

1IntroductionIn antiquity, Plato’s Timaeus was standardly considered an inquiry into nature. As a result, this work was often used as an introduction to the study of the physical world on the crucial assumption that this world displayed order and structure—in short, on the crucial assumption that it was a cosmos. Although Aristotle wrote extensively on the natural world, he did not write on the cosmos per se. The De mundo may be regarded as a subsequent attempt by an unknown author to fill out what was perceived as a lacuna in Aristotle’s philosophy.That the De mundo is an attempt to fill a lacuna vis-à-vis the Stoic practice of writing on the cosmos was first suggested by Jaap Mansfeld (Mansfeld 1992, pp. 391–411). This suggestion has been elaborated further by Taneli Kakkonen (Kukkonen 2014, pp. 311–52). I am not convinced by recent attempts to argue that the De mundo is an authentic work by Aristotle (most notably, Reale & Bos 1995; a few of their arguments can be found in the online critical assessment of the volume under review by Abraham Bos: https://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2021/2021.06.24/). Moreover, both in the Timaeus and in the De mundo the structure and order displayed in the cosmos is

Journal

Rhizomata – de Gruyter

Published: Aug 1, 2022

There are no references for this article.