Marrying Stoicism with Platonism? Pseudo-Plutarch's Use of the Circe Episode

Domaradzki, Mikołaj

doi:10.1353/ajp.2020.0019

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…38. See, e.g., Hahm 1977, 57-90;Gilabert 1985, 81-106;Lapidge 1978, 161-85;Todd 1978, 137-60;Domaradzki 2014, 9-12, with further references. 39.…”

Section: Allegoresis Vs Etymologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Struck (2004, 280 n. 6) brilliantly observes that Plutarch's testimony is very difficult to reconcile with Long's suggestion. For other scholars who reject (or ignore) Long's argument and classify the Samos/Argos interpretation as allegorical, see, e.g., Blönnigen 1992, 30;Struck 2004, 280;Ramelli and Lucchetta 2004, 112 with n. 94;Goulet 2005, 114-15;Gourinat 2005, 10-11, 19-20;Most 2010, 30;Domaradzki 2014, 7-12. Recently, van Sijl (2010 has argued that the Samos/Argos interpretation should be characterized as symbolical rather allegorical (for a criticism of this view, see below in the main text).…”

Section: Allegoresis Vs Etymologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This seems rather unfortunate and confusing, for treating allegory as an interpretation technique entails obfuscating the difference between the poet and the interpreter. Furthermore, defining both allegory and allegoresis as kinds of interpretation makes it very difficult to do justice to the various forms of hermeneutical activity of the Presocratic thinkers (see further Domaradzki 2015;2017;2019). 41.…”

Section: Allegoresis Vs Etymologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…61. For a classic proponent of the apology view, see Zeller 1909, 345; for a classic advocate of the appropriation view, see Tate 1930, 2-4 (both critically discussed by Most 1989, 2019. For more articulations of the appropriation view, see Wehrli 1928, 94-95;Tate 1929b, 144-45;1934, 110-14;Buffière 1956, 138-41;Blönnigen 1992, 23, 41;Goulet 2005, 117, 119. aims do not have to be mutually exclusive: the desire to save the revered tradition and the desire to exploit its authority for buttressing a theory might work hand in hand.…”

Section: Allegoresis Vs Rationalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although Heraclitus confuses Anaxagoras and Xenophanes, on which see Buffière 1956, 93 n. 35;1962, 101 n. 2. 17. For a recent discussion, see Domaradzki 2017 (in what follows, I use some of the findings presented there). Interestingly, however, a case can be made that in one form or another allegoresis can be found already in Homer, on which see Most 1993 and now Kotwick 2020.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Stoic Allegoresis: The Problem of Definition and Influence

Domaradzki

2022

Classical Philology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

VER SEVENTY YEARS AGO, Phillip De Lacy wrote his seminal paper on Stoic poetics, where he famously stated that among "certain well known Stoic views about poems" there is the one that "Homer's myths are allegorical expressions of the truths of physical and ethical philosophy." 1 Indeed, many a scholar has ascribed to the Stoics this view. While it would be impossible to cite all the relevant works here, one should definitely mention the classic and influential monographs by Félix Buffière 2 and Jean Pépin. 3 Yet, some researchers have impugned the accuracy of this view. Thus, for example, Peter Steinmetz found in the early Stoa "keine allegorische Deutung von Dichtung als Dichtung," 4 whereas Anthony A. Long even more forcefully argued that one should altogether refrain from attributing allegorical interpretation to the Stoics. 5 Such criticisms have triggered a heated debate about the extent to which Stoic approach can be labeled as "allegorical" at all. Some scholars have (with various qualifications) embraced Long's (and Steinmetz's) conclusions, 6 others have rejected them (with varying degrees of vehemence), 7 and there is still no consensus regarding the issue. 8 In light of this plethora of conflicting positions, the purpose of the present article will be twofold.This work was supported by the National Science Centre, Poland [grant number 2017/25/B/HS1/00559]. I would like to thank CP's anonymous reviewers for their useful comments and helpful suggestions.1.

show abstract

“…38. See, e.g., Hahm 1977, 57-90;Gilabert 1985, 81-106;Lapidge 1978, 161-85;Todd 1978, 137-60;Domaradzki 2014, 9-12, with further references. 39.…”

Section: Allegoresis Vs Etymologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Allegoresis Vs Etymologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Allegoresis Vs Etymologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Allegoresis Vs Rationalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Stoic Allegoresis: The Problem of Definition and Influence

Domaradzki

2022

Classical Philology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Dlaczego Mojżesz, Homer i Platon nie pisali wprost? Strategia interpretacji tekstów kanonicznych u Filona, Maksyma z Tyru i Numeniusza z Apamei

Bednarek

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interpretacja alegoryczna była narzędziem hermeneutycznym często stosowanym w pismach myślicieli z kręgu medioplatonizmu. Pierwotnie powstała w dyskusjach nad spuścizną Homera alegoreza była wykorzystywana także przez interpretatorów Biblii oraz pism filozoficznych. Alegoreci, dostrzegający w interpretowanych tekstach wyrażenia figuratywne, byli świadomi, że przy ich dosłownym odczytaniu, są one niejasne, a czasami nawet nieprawdziwe. Celem artykułu jest analiza strategii obrony wyrażeń figuratywnych (głównie antropomorfizmów i alegorii), podjętej w utworach wybranych myślicieli medioplatońskich: Filona z Aleksandrii (Quod Deus immutabilis sit, De somniis oraz De sacrificiis Abeli et Caini), Maksyma z Tyru (Mowa IV, XVII i XXVI) oraz Numeniusza z Apamei (Fragment 23 i 24). Historyczno-filozoficzna analiza poszczególnych utworów, zawierających interpretacje pism Mojżesza, Homera i Platona, dowodzi, że obrona pism uznawanych za kanoniczne stanowiła ważny element interpretacji przeprowadzanej przez medioplatoników. Zastosowanie metody porównawczej pozwala zaś na dostrzeżenie w argumentacji medioplatońskich interpretatorów zarówno cech specyficznych dla każdego z nich, jak i elementów wspólnych, takich jak sceptyczne podejście do kompetencji intelektualnych i filozoficznych większości ludzi w poszczególnych społeczeństwach oraz przekonanie o pedagogicznej wartości języka figuratywnego i konieczności jego stosowania w komunikacji.

show abstract

Maximus of Tyre on the Zeus of Homer and Plato

Domaradzki

Bednarek

2021

Erga-Logoi. Rivista Di Storia, Letteratura, Diritto E Culture Dell'antichità

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present article discusses the ingenious account of Zeus that was put forward by Maximus of Tyre in his Orations IV and XXVI. When reading into Homer various Platonic and Stoic concepts, Maximus originally amalgamates the notion of Demiurge with that of Providence. As he thus unearths Homer’s latent theology, Maximus not only praises the heritage of Greek culture but also demonstrates the close affinity between poetry and philosophy.

show abstract

Marrying Stoicism with Platonism? Pseudo-Plutarch's Use of the Circe Episode

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Stoic Allegoresis: The Problem of Definition and Influence

Stoic Allegoresis: The Problem of Definition and Influence

Dlaczego Mojżesz, Homer i Platon nie pisali wprost? Strategia interpretacji tekstów kanonicznych u Filona, Maksyma z Tyru i Numeniusza z Apamei

Maximus of Tyre on the Zeus of Homer and Plato

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About