By Stephen E Gersh
Having now benefited from workable variants and stories of a number of the most vital authors in the Neoplatonic culture of western philosophy, it's time for us to learn those fabrics extra actively when it comes to the philosophical advancements of the past due 20th century that supply the best possibilities for intertextual exploration. The hermeneutical venture that beckons was once began in Stephen Gersh's Neoplatonism after Derrida: Parallelograms (Brill, 2006) and is raised to a better strength in his current quantity. right here a brand new path is charted within the examining of such historical authors as Proclus, Damascius, Augustine, Pseudo-Dionysius, and Meister Eckhart via a severe engagement with the deconstructions of pagan and Christian Neoplatonic texts within the writings of Jacques Derrida.
Read Online or Download Being Different: More Neoplatonism after Derrida PDF
Similar greek & roman books
Proclus' observation on Plato's discussion Timaeus is arguably crucial observation on a textual content of Plato, supplying extraordinary insights into 8 centuries of Platonic interpretation. This 2007 version provided the 1st new English translation of the paintings for almost centuries, development on major advances in scholarship on Neoplatonic commentators.
Having now benefited from possible variants and stories of some of the most vital authors in the Neoplatonic culture of western philosophy, it's time for us to learn those fabrics extra actively by way of the philosophical advancements of the overdue 20th century that offer the best possibilities for intertextual exploration.
This is often probably the most fascinating of all post-Aristotelian Greek philosophical texts, written at a vital second within the defeat of paganism by way of Christianity, advert 529, while the Emperor Justinian closed the pagan Neoplatonist institution in Athens. Philoponus in Alexandria used to be a super Christian thinker, steeped in Neoplatonism, who became the pagans' principles opposed to them.
- Agora, Academy, and the Conduct of Philosophy
- The Cambridge Companion to the Roman Republic
- La metafisica
- Etica a Nicomaco
- Prudes, Perverts, and Tyrants: Plato's Gorgias and the Politics of Shame
Additional resources for Being Different: More Neoplatonism after Derrida
The crucial notion here is the reference to ontological predicates. 11 The beginning of this sub-section is marked by the phrase “on the other hand” (d’autre part …). 12 HTAS, p. 103/CNPP, p. 565. 13 HTAS, pp. 102–103/CNPP, pp. 564–565 triton genos. 14 HTAS, p. 103/CNPP, p. 565 triton para ta duo ekeina (Plato, Sophist 243E—cf. Soph. 256B and 259C). 1. 15 Derrida’s discussion of the Timaeus passages,16 unlike that of the Republic passage treated earlier, involves an element of deconstruction. It begins with what might again be termed the “predicative” aspects of Plato’s account of Khōra,17 although a subtle shift in the conceptual basis of the argument is now discernible.
5. 26 chapter one Conclusion Derrida’s encounter with Neoplatonism in the specific forms of the structure of Negative Theology and the structure of Conversion provides a good example of his reading of the text of philosophy in general. But how does his encounter with Neoplatonism differ from an immanent reading of that philosophy? 1. One of the main tasks in section I. of “How to Avoid Speaking: Denials” was to explain the distinction between Negative Theology and deconstruction. 172 This distinction was further illuminated by Derrida’s discussion of the first component of paradigm A of Negative Theology— the notion of the Good as “beyond being” in Plato’s Republic—in section II.
67 ff. 27 This movement of discourse being accompanied by a certain weakening of the emphasis on mediation, continuity, and causality. 28 The Form of the Good and Khōra are here treated as typical “asymmetrical contradictories” with which deconstruction can perform its operation. See pp. 31–32. 1. bridging the gap 37 In outlining his first paradigm, Derrida states that he will content himself with a few “schematic traits” (traits schématiques) relevant to the specific question: How to avoid speaking of negative theology?