By the sophists to Aristotle through Plato

There is a substantial difference between our way of 'philosophizing', born out of Descartes' clear and well-defined thinking and bent on building alternative (aut-aut) models, and the classical (especially Platonic-Aristotelian) way where a constant use of technical and methodical pluralism serves to juxtapose different (et-et) schemes necessary to grasp an intrinsically one-manifold reality. The ancient Philosophers bring a great wealth of schemes into play, albeit in different forms. This is to say that one could also come across statements that are clearly mismatched and sometimes even at odds with one another, without either giving rise to a real contradiction or (even less so) a quasi relativistic viewpoint. Quite the contrary, an approach of this kind focuses on the necessary knowledge of a reality which, however, is multiform.By assuming this interpretative paradigm and applying it to some of the most pivotal reflections of the Sophists, Plato and Aristotle, the Authors of the contributions herein provide a number of particularly eloquent examples of that typically 'Greek' movement, which is to proceed steadily by association of possibilities, rejecting the either/or solicitations and hinging their reflections upon the more open and dynamic 'and-and' combination.The authors believe that many of the puzzles of Ancient philosophy that have involved and divided scholars can acquire a new and convincing explanation with this paradigm.

Auteur

Maurizio Migliori: Full Professor of Ancient Philosophy History at the University of Macerata, Faculty of Literature and Philosophy, Department of Philosophy and Human Science unitl 2015. European Representative of the Executive Committee of the International Plato Society (2001-2007). Author of many books on Plato (Il disordine ordinato. La filosofia dialettica di Platone. 2 vv., I. Dialettica, metafisica e cosmologia; II. Dall'anima alla prassi etica e politica, Morcelliana, Brescia 2013), on the dialogues (Parmenides, Philebus, Sophist, Statesman), and on Aristotle (Aristotele, La generazione e la corruzione, traduzione, introduzione e commento di M. Migliori, Revisione, aggiornamento e saggio bibliografico di Lucia Palpacelli, Bompiani, Milano 2013).Elisabetta Cattanei (Genoa, 1966), after graduating (1988) and getting a PhD in philosophy (1993) at the Catholic University in Milan, did her research in the 'Philologisches Seminar' of the Uni-Tuebingen and a 'Post-Doc' program in History of ancient mathematics (Regensburg-Paris); since Nov. 1999 she has been teaching at the University in Cagliari (I), where she's now Fullprofessor of History of Ancient Philosophy. In the last 7 years she has been directing 'local units' of 3 different National Research Projects (PRIN) about Aristotle and Aristoteleanism. Her publications are focussed on the relations between mathematics and philosophy, especially before Euclid.Arianna Fermani: Researcher in History of Ancient Philosophy at the University of Macerata (Italy), Full Member of the International Plato Society and Member of the Collegium Politicum. Her researches focus, particularly, on Ancient Ethics and on some anthropological and political questions posed by Platonic and Aristotelian reflection. Some of her publications: Vita felice umana: in dialogo con Platone e Aristotle, Eum, Macerata 2006 (Portuguese translation: A vida feliz humana, Diálogo com Platão e Aristóteles, Editora Paulus, São Paulo 2015); Aristotele, Le Tre Etiche, edited by A. Fermani, Bompiani, Milano 2008; M. Migliori, L.M. Napolitano Valditara and A. Fermani (Eds.), Inner Life and Soul. Psyche in Plato, Academia Verlag Sankt Augustin 2011;L'etica di Aristotele. Il mondo della vita umana, Morcelliana, Brescia 2012; Tò kakòn pollachôs lèghetai': the polivocity of the notion of evil in the Aristotelian Ethics, in C. Baracchi (ed.), The Bloomsbury Companion to Aristotle, Bloomsbury, London 2014, pp. 241-259.

Texte du rabat

There is a substantial difference between our way of 'philosophizing', born out of Descartes' clear and well-defined thinking and bent on building alternative (aut-aut) models, and the classical (especially Platonic-Aristotelian) way where a constant use of technical and methodical pluralism serves to juxtapose different (et-et) schemes necessary to grasp an intrinsically one-manifold reality. The ancient Philosophers bring a great wealth of schemes into play, albeit in different forms. This is to say that one could also come across statements that are clearly mismatched and sometimes even at odds with one another, without either giving rise to a real contradiction or (even less so) a quasi relativistic viewpoint. Quite the contrary, an approach of this kind focuses on the necessary knowledge of a reality which, however, is multiform.
By assuming this interpretative paradigm and applying it to some of the most pivotal reflections of the Sophists, Plato and Aristotle, the Authors of the contributions herein provide a number of particularly eloquent examples of that typically 'Greek' movement, which is to proceed steadily by association of possibilities, rejecting the either/or solicitations and hinging their reflections upon the more open and dynamic 'and-and' combination.
The authors believe that many of the puzzles of Ancient philosophy that have involved and divided scholars can acquire a new and convincing explanation with this paradigm.