The essay provides a critical assessment of the objections raised, especially by P. Destrée, against the cognitivistic interpretation of the pleasure of tragedy. It is pointed out that in the Poetics, chapter 4, it is unsound to distinguish between the pleasure of artistic imitation and the child’s pleasure for learning through imitation or the pleasure of the philosopher engaged in theoria. Moreover, the reference to children and philosophers proves that it is uncorrect to distinguish in the verb manthanein between the (...) meaning “to understand” and “to learn” and to say that the latter does not fit the example of painting. Consequently, this example cannot mean that contemplating the picture has as its only out-come a trivial recognition of the identity of the real object and the painted subject-matter. Actually, the tragedy’s audience sees in the plot a case which is exemplary (because it is universal) for particular actions and states of affair already known; and of these situations the audience understands and learns the causes with pleasure. Also the position of chapter 4 in the opening section of the book (chapters 1-5), which is entirely devoted to a general treatment of mimesis, confirms that all is said there of the pleasure must be a general premise for the treatment of all particular kind of pleasure recorded in the book: consequently, for the treatment of tragic pleasure in chapter 14 as well. (shrink)

In Aristotle’s Politics viii 7, 1341b 38–40, there is a reference to some books peri poietikes in which katharsis will be explained more clearly. The future tense of the verb is important and may be the sign of the aristotelian origin of the reference; it would prove in an indisputable way that, when writing Pol. vii–viii, Aristotle thought of a Poetics as the obvious sequel for the discussion about educational problems. So, the logical connection of the argument in Politics and (...) Poetics is in agreement with (and is confirmed by) the famous definition of tragedy in Poet. 6, 1449b 24–28: here Aristotle says that the various items of the definition must be obtained from “the things already said”, but the reference is not fully satisfied by Poetics 1–5: in these chapters no mention is made of katharsis, pity and fear. For these items the reference is satisfied only by the text of Politics viii 7, and the two references, Pol. viii 7 to a Poetics, Poet.6 (by implication) to Pol. viii 7, agree about the sequel of the books and strengthen each other. But the topics of katharsis and education never are fully clarified, neither in the Politics, nor in the Poetics. (shrink)

The volume collects the most important papers Pierluigi Donini wrote in the last three decades with the aim of promoting a better assessment of post-hellenistic philosophy. The philosophical relevance of post-hellenistic philosophy is now widely (though not yet universally) recognized. Yet much remains to be done. The common practice of focusing each single school in itself detracts from a balanced assessment of the strategies exploited by many philosophers of the period. On the assumption that debates among schools play (...) a major role in the philosophy of the commentators, Donini concentrates on the interaction between leading Aristotelians and Platonists and demonstrates that the developments of both systems of thought were heavily influenced by a continuous confrontation between the two schools.And whereas in cases such as Alcinous and Aspasius this is basically uncontroversial, for other authors such us Alexander, Antiochus and Plutarch the pioneering work of Donini paves the way for a better understanding of their doctrines and definitely confirms the intellectual importance of the first imperial age, when the foundations were laid of versions of both Aristotelianism and Platonism which were bound to influence the whole history of European thought, from Late Antiquity onwards. (shrink)

A differenza dell'età moderna e contemporanea, nell'antichità e nel Medioevo, moltissimi sono stati i commenti che hanno avuto il valore di testi filosofici fondamentali, vere e proprie pietre miliari nella storia del pensiero. E questo è il caso di Alessandro di Afrodisia e del commento che qui si presenta, per la prima volta tradotto in italiano, al De Anima di Aristotele. L'opera di Alessandro ebbe un'enorme influenza sul pensiero del Medioevo e del Rinascimento e per questo motivo, oltre ad essere (...) un passaggio obbligato per la conoscenza della filosofia antica e tardoantica, essa può interessare anche studiosi e studenti della filosofia di queste due età più recenti. (shrink)

In this book the most important aristotelian passages concerning the question of determinism are thoroughly reexamined: chapter 9 of de interpretatione, chapter 3 of Metaphysics's book VI, several chapters from the Ethics, as well as some texts from the aristotelian commentator Alexander of Aphrodisias. This is the author's main contention: "In Aristotle's view the world of social relations and of human behaviours really is always highly undetermined; but this is mainly due to the unpredictable intersections of the different causal series (...) issuing from each agent involved, while in each of these series at least one element tends to remain constant (indeed, it is the most stable element in every situation): the personal character of the human agent and the kind of response this character offers to the new situations that constantly arise.". (shrink)

In Plutarch’s De Facie in Orbe Lunae myth plays throughout a greater more significant role than that which it has, albeit considerable, during the final part of the narration in chapters 26-30. That is to say, chapter 1 shows that myth even enters the logical and scientific reasoning of the first part of the dialogue and then turns out to be in chapter 21 an indispensable and decisive tool with a view to demonstrating the moon’s earthy nature. Thus, both in (...) Syllas’ mythical narration in chapters 26-30 and in chapter 21, which quotes the Platonic myth in the Phaedo, myth always has the same function: to suggest something that logic and scientific rationality are unable to say. (shrink)

Nombreux signes montrent qu’Aristote a conçu la Poétique en continuité avec les livres de la Politique consacrés au problème de l’éducation. Lue à la lumière de ces textes, la Poétique manisfeste la volonté de son auteur d’attribuer à la poésie, et en particulier à la poésie tragique, la fonction d’aider les hommes adultes dont le caractère a déjà été formé, à développer la phronèsis, la sagesse pratique qui guide de manière rationnelle le comportement et stabilise l’équilibre des émotions de l’agent. (...) Si cette fonction n’est pas rendue explicite dans les pages de ce traité, c’est probablement dû à la conscience à laquelle Aristote est arrivé de ce que la tragédie peut atteindre sa finalité sans une représentation publique, au moyen de la seule lecture privée de son texte. Cette idée suffit à relâcher les liens entre la réflexion sur la poésie et l’étude des institutions politiques de la cité et de leurs tâches éducatives.RiassuntoPer molti indizi la Poetica di Aristotele si revela concepita in continuità con i libri della Politica dedicati al problema educativo. Letta alla luce di questi scritti, la Poetica manifesta la volontà dei suo autore di attribuire alla poesia, specialmente tragica, la funzione di aiutare a sviluppare negli uomini adulti e già preventivamente formati nel carattere la phronesis, la sagezza pratica che guida razionalmente il comportamento e stabilisce l’equilibrio emotivo degli agenti. Se poi questa funzione non è resa esplicata nelle pagine dei trattato, cio si deve probabilmente alla nuova consapevolezza maturata da Aristotele che la tragedia potrebbe ottenere il suo scopo anche senza la pubblica rappresentazione e mediante la sola lettura privata dei testo. Questa intuizione basta ad allentare i legami tra la riflessione sulla poesia e lo studio delle istituzioni politiche cittadine e dei loro compiti educativi. (shrink)

The author seeks first to resolve the problem of the relative chronology of the Aristotelian Ethics: since only the Nicomachean Ethics presupposes the knowledge of Plato's Laws, the Eudemian Ethics must be prior, and must have its origin at a relatively early point in Aristotle's philosophical career. If the doctrines of the two Ethics are analyzed and compared in the light of this influence, an important difference can be seen between them. Whereas the Eudemian Ethics insist that virtue is based (...) on nature, the Nicomachean Ethics see moral education as based on habit. The traces of this new conception are also visible in the treatment of other themes related to virtue, including reason, happiness, and friendship. (shrink)

La struttura e l’argomentazione del libro Lambda della Metafisica sono condizionate dalla questione della possibilità di stabilire se esista o no un unico principio comune a tutte quante le sostanze possibili, sensibili e sovrasensibili. La discussione del libro, non conclusiva, lascia indeciso il problema: un esito spiegabile riferendo la formulazione di questo - e l’origine del libro - alla situazione di Aristotele negli anni dell’Academia, dove l’accettazione di princìpi comuni a tutte le cose si accompagnava alla convinzione che ci fosse (...) un’unica scienza generale per tutte le sostanze. Nel libro Lambda la classica distinzione aristotelica tra la fisica e la filosofia prima non riesce perciò ad essere stabilita. (shrink)

In the UN humanitarian response in Afghanistan post–September 11 we see a dangerous level of contraction that compromises the application of its basic principles for the sake of pursuing nationbuilding activities in the service of political agendas.

In this article the author provides new external evidence demonstrating that the correspondence between the philosopher Seneca and the apostle Paul is a forgery. The author compares archaeological data offered by inscriptions, graffiti and regionarii with information conveyed by the apocryphal letters. The setting of the epistles, as well as information about the duration and damages of the Neronian fire, contrast with the archaeological data, indicating that the text should be considered a forgery. The contribution shows that the forger worked (...) rather in a literary mode. Conversely, the only archaeological date that scholars have brought to support authenticity is probably not a Christian inscription and does not prove anything regarding a meeting between Seneca and Paul or Seneca’s conversion. The origin of the correspondence should instead be traced to the cult of the apostles Paul and Peter during the 3rd and 4th centuries. (shrink)

In recent years, the veracity of the tradition of the martyrdom of the apostles Peter and Paul has been disputed; recently, Brent Donald Shaw denied the historicity of the persecution of Christians. In this article, the author analyzes the texts of Tacitus and Suetonius as well as other texts omitted by Shaw and demonstrates the inconsistency of the hypotheses put forward by negationist scholars from a theoretical and historical point of view.