Ammonius, who taught most of the leading sixth-century Neoplatonists, introduced the methods of his own teacher, Proclus, from Athens to Alexandria. These are exemplified in his commentaries: for instance, in the set of ten introductory questions prefixed to this commentary, which became standard. The commentary is interesting for the light it sheds on the religious situation in Alexandria. It used to be said that the Alexandrian Neoplatonist school was allowed to remain open after the Athenian school closed because Ammonius has agreed with the Christian authorities to keep quiet about his religious views. On the contrary, as this commentary shows he freely declared his belief in the Neoplatonist deities. The philosophical problems considered by Ammonius offer a unique insight into Aristotle's Categories. They exercise the mind and deepen understanding of the subject matter. Modern readers would do well to put the same questions to themselves.
"Ammonius, who taught most of the leading sixth-century Neoplatonists, introduced the methods of his own teacher, Proclus, from Athens to Alexandria. These are exemplified in his commentaries: for instance, in the set of ten introductory questions prefixed to this commentary, which became standard. The commentary is interesting for the light it sheds on the religious situation in Alexandria. It used to be said that the Alexandrian Neoplatonist school was allowed to remain open after the Athenian school closed because Ammonius has agreed with the Christian authorities to keep quiet about his religious views. On the contrary, as this commentary shows he freely declared his belief in the Neoplatonist deities. The philosophical problems considered by Ammonius offer a unique insight into Aristotle's Categories. They exercise the mind and deepen understanding of the subject matter. Modern readers would do well to put the same questions to themselves."--Bloomsbury Publishing.
"Ammonius, who taught most of the leading sixth-century Neoplatonists, introduced the methods of his own teacher, Proclus, from Athens to Alexandria. These are exemplified in his commentaries: for instance, in the set of ten introductory questions prefixed to this commentary, which became standard. The commentary is interesting for the light it sheds on the religious situation in Alexandria. It used to be said that the Alexandrian Neoplatonist school was allowed to remain open after the Athenian school closed because Ammonius has agreed with the Christian authorities to keep quiet about his religious views. On the contrary, as this commentary shows he freely declared his belief in the Neoplatonist deities. The philosophical problems considered by Ammonius offer a unique insight into Aristotle's Categories. They exercise the mind and deepen understanding of the subject matter. Modern readers would do well to put the same questions to themselves."--Bloomsbury Publishing
Chapters 5 and 6 of Aristotle's Categories describe his first two categories, Substance and Quantity. It is usually taken that Plotinus attacked Aristotle's Categories, but that Porphyry and Iamblichus restored it to the curriculum once and for all. Nonetheless, the introduction to this text stresses how much of the defence of Aristotle Porphyry was able to draw out of Plotinus' critical discussion. Simplicius' commentary is our most comprehensive account of the debate on the validity of Aristotle's Categories. One subject discussed by Simplicius in these chapters is where the differentia of a species (eg the rationality of humans) fits into the scheme of categories. Another is why Aristotle elevates the category of Quantity to second place, above the category of Quality. Further, de Haas shows how Simplicius distinguishes different kinds of universal order to solve some of the problems.
This volume completes, starting from chapter 6, the commentary by the young Philoponus on Aristotle's Categories, of which chapters 1–5 were previously published in this series (Philoponus: On Aristotle Categories 1–5 with Philoponus: A Treatise Concerning the Whole and the Parts). This ancient commentary was the first work in the Aristotelian syllabus after a general introduction to Aristotle by the same author. It is influenced by an extant short anonymous record of Philoponus' teacher Ammonius' lectures on the same work, but Philoponus' commentary is two and a half times as long as that anonymous record, and includes special contributions of Philoponus' own, for example in philology, Christian theology and in disagreements with Aristotle. This English translation of Philoponus' work is the latest volume in the Ancient Commentators on Aristotle series and makes this philosophical work accessible to a modern readership. The translation is accompanied by an introduction, comprehensive commentary notes, bibliography, glossary of translated terms and a subject index.
One of his six introductions to philosophy, widely used by students in Alexandria, Ammonius' lecture on Porphyry was recorded in writing by his students in the commentary translated here. Along with five other types of introductions (three of which are translated in the Ancient Commentators on Aristotle volume Elias and David: Introductions to Philosophy with Olympiodorus: Introduction to Logic) it made Greek philosophy more accessible to other cultures. These introductions became standard in Ammonius' school and included a popular set of five or more definitions of philosophy, some of them drawn from commentaries on quite different works. Ammonius' lecture expounded the most celebrated and discussed previous introduction written by Porphyry 200 years earlier, which was devoted to five main technical terms of Aristotle's logic. Ammonius was sympathetic to Porphyry because they both sought to harmonise the views of Plato and Aristotle with each other, arguing in different ways that the two philosophers did not disagree about the nature of universals. Porphyry's introduction was a hugely influential work for centuries after its composition, and this commentary by Ammonius served to maintain its position at the centre of later schools of philosophy. This English translation of Ammonius' work is the latest volume in the Ancient Commentators on Aristotle series and makes this philosophical work accessible to a modern readership. The translation is accompanied by an introduction, comprehensive commentary notes, bibliography, glossary of translated terms and a subject index.
Philoponus' On Aristotle Categories 1-5 discusses the nature of universals, preserving the views of Philoponus' teacher Ammonius, as well as presenting a Neoplatonist interpretation of Aristotle's Categories. Philoponus treats universals as concepts in the human mind produced by abstracting a form or nature from the material individual in which it has its being. The work is important for its own philosophical discussion and for the insight it sheds on its sources. For considerable portions, On Aristotle Categories 1-5 resembles the wording of an earlier commentary which declares itself to be an anonymous record taken from the seminars of Ammonius. Unlike much of Philoponus' later writing, this commentary does not disagree with either Aristotle or Ammonius, and suggests the possibility that Philoponus either had access to this earlier record or wrote it himself. This edition explores these questions of provenance, alongside the context, meaning and implications of Philoponus' work. The English translation is accompanied by an introduction, comprehensive commentary notes, bibliography, glossary of translated terms and a subject index. The latest volume in the Ancient Commentators on Aristotle series, the edition makes this philosophical work accessible to a modern readership. Philoponus was a Christian writing in Greek in 6th century CE Alexandria, where some students of philosophy were bilingual in Syriac as well as Greek. In this Greek treatise translated from the surviving Syriac version, Philoponus discusses the logic of parts and wholes, and he illustrates the spread of the pagan and Christian philosophy of 6th century CE Greeks to other cultures, in this case to Syria. Philoponus, an expert on Aristotle's philosophy, had turned to theology and was applying his knowledge of Aristotle to disputes over the human and divine nature of Christ. Were there two natures and were they parts of a whole, as the Emperor Justinian proposed, or was there only one nature, as Philoponus claimed with the rebel minority, both human and divine? If there were two natures, were they parts like the ingredients in a chemical mixture? Philoponus attacks the idea. Such ingredients are not parts, because they each inter-penetrate the whole mixture. Moreover, he abandons his ingenious earlier attempts to support Aristotle's view of mixture by identifying ways in which such ingredients might be thought of as potentially preserved in a chemical mixture. Instead, Philoponus says that the ingredients are destroyed, unlike the human and divine in Christ. This English translation of Philoponus' treatise is the latest volume in the Ancient Commentators on Aristotle series and makes this philosophical work accessible to a modern readership. The translation in each volume is accompanied by an introduction, comprehensive commentary notes, bibliography, glossary of translated terms and a subject index.
Simplicius' commentary on Aristotle's Categories is the most comprehensive philosophical critique of the work ever written, representing 600 years of criticism. In his Categories, Aristotle divides what exists in the sensible world into ten categories of Substance, Quantity, Relative, Quality and so on. Simplicius starts with a survey of previous commentators, and an introductory set of questions about Aristotle's philosophy and about the Categories in particular. The commentator, he says, needs to present Plato and Aristotle as in harmony on most things. Why are precisely ten categories named, given that Plato did with fewer distinctions? We have a survey of views on this. And where in the scheme of categories would one fit a quality that defines a substance - under substance or under quality? In his own commentary, Porphyry suggested classifying a defining quality as something distinct, a substantial quality, but others objected that this would constitute an eleventh. The most persistent question dealt with here is whether the categories classify words, concepts, or things.
