The Dream Theory in Theaetetus is Plato’s generalised account of Presocratic elements. Evidence for this given from Laws, Phaedo, Timaeus, and through a comparison with Aristotle’s account.

The Dream Theory in Theaetetus is Plato’s generalised account of Presocratic elements. Evidence for this given from Laws, Phaedo, Timaeus, and through a comparison with Aristotle’s account.

The Dream Theory in Theaetetus is Plato’s generalised account of Presocratic elements. Evidence for this given from Laws, Phaedo, Timaeus, and through a comparison with Aristotle’s account.

A response to John Finamore, “The Divided Line and the Cave in Proclus’ Republic Commentary.”

A response to John Finamore, “The Divided Line and the Cave in Proclus’ Republic Commentary.”

Interpretations of the Theaetetus digression fail to see how it functions in Plato’s argument because they have taken its praise of the philosopher at face value. But this is not the philosopher from Republic. His otherworldliness reflects both Theodorus’ mathematical understanding of philosophy as the study of ‘divine’ objects and the judgeme…[Read more]

Interpretations of the Theaetetus digression fail to see how it functions in Plato’s argument because they have taken its praise of the philosopher at face value. But this is not the philosopher from Republic. His otherworldliness reflects both Theodorus’ mathematical understanding of philosophy as the study of ‘divine’ objects and the judgeme…[Read more]

Review of: Neoplatonism after Derrida. Parallelograms. By Stephen Gersh. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 2006. Pp. xv + 223. $147.00 (cloth). ISBN 9789004151550.

Review: (M.) Martijn Proclus on Nature. Philosophy of Nature and its Methods in Proclus’ Commentary on Plato’s Timaeus. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Pp. x + 360. £105. 978900-4181915 The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 2012

Neoplatonism after Derrida is a significant study of the history of philosophy, and covers ground rarely explored before, in an extremely thorough, fruitful, and persuasive manner. However, it poses serious interpretive problems for the reader. It presents an extremely detailed and complex analysis of both Neoplatonism and Derridean…[Read more]

In his commentary on Euclid, Proclus says both that the first principle of geometry are self-evident and that they are hypotheses received from the single, highest, unhypo- thetical science, which is probably dialectic. The implication of this seems to be that a geometer both does and does not know geometrical truths. This dilemma only exists if…[Read more]

I examine the relation between sensation and discursive thought (dianoia) in Plato, Plotinus, and Proclus. In Theaetetus, a soul whose highest faculty was sensation would have no unified experience of the sensible world, lacking universal ideas to give order to the sensible flux. It is implied that such universals are grasped by the soul’s t…[Read more]

According to his Cratylus commentary Proclus thinks that, although an oracle or a poet is the customary promulgator of a divine name, it is the philosopher who is the authoritative interpreter of that divine name. The reason for this is that the philosopher has the same access to the source of revelation as does the oracle or the poet, because the…[Read more]

In this paper I will examine Proclus’ Commentary on the First Alcibiades of Plato in order to shed light on his doctrine of the partial soul’s nous. Proclus’ epistemology is in many ways the heart of his system. The human soul is a microcosm, and because each of its faculties corresponds to one or other order of the macrocosm, the soul’s knowled…[Read more]