David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Classical Quarterly 16 (02):256- (1966)
There is more evidence for Empedocles than for any early Greek philosopher before Democritus, yet the details of his philosophy remain controversial and often hopelessly obscure. Jaeger called Empedocles a ‘philosophical centaur’, which aptly sums up the seeming disparity between the and the There is no agreement about the famous simile to illustrate respiration, generally known as the Clepsydra, and the stages and nature of the cosmic cycle continue to be disputed. Perhaps we can never be certain about these aspects of Empedocles' thought, for the evidence fails at every crucial point and the imaginative reconstructions which have to serve are unlikely to win universal acceptance. It may then appear hazardous to discuss the fragments concerned with thinking and sense-perception, for these too are riddled with problems. I do so prompted partly by the timely reprint of J. I. Beare's book, Greek Theories of Elementary Cognition, and also because this feature of Empedocles has been touched on by modern scholars but not studied in any detail. At the same time the significance of the is greatly affected by how we interpret the theory of sense-perception and thinking
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Constantinos Macris & Pénélope Skarsouli (2012). La sagesse et les pouvoirs du mystérieux??? du fragment 129 d'Empédocle. Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 75 (3):357.
Similar books and articles
Howard M. Robinson (1982). Matter and Sense: A Critique of Contemporary Materialism. Cambridge University Press.
Rachana Kamtekar (2009). Knowing by Likeness in Empedocles. Phronesis 54 (3):215-238.
William J. Wainwright (1982). Mysticism and Sense Perception. In Steven M. Cahn & David Shatz (eds.), Religious Studies. Oxford University Press 257 - 278.
D. E. Cooper (1970). Materialism and Perception. Philosophical Quarterly 20 (October):334-346.
Michael D. Fish (1968). Are Sense-Data Material Things? Logique Et Analyse 11 (December):459-467.
Martin E. Lean (1953). Sense-Perception And Matter: A Critical Analysis Of C. D. Broad's Theory Of Perception. Ny: Humanities Press.
Mark Eli Kalderon (forthcoming). Aristotle on Transparency. In Thomas Crowther & Clare Mac Cumhail (eds.), Perceptual Ephemera.
Knight Dunlap (1920). Mysticism, Freudianism, and Scientific Psychology. Freeport, N.Y.,Books for Libraries Press.
James W. Cornman (1971). Materialism and Sensations. Yale University Press.
R. I. Aaron (1958). The Common Sense View of Sense-Perception. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 58:1-14.
Don Locke (1971). Must a Materialist Pretend He's Anaesthetized? Philosophical Quarterly 21 (July):217-31.
F. de Vignemont & P. Fourneret (2004). The Sense of Agency: A Philosophical and Empirical Review of the "Who" System. Consciousness and Cognition 13 (1):1-19.
Stepan Lisy (2012). Preliminary Remarks for the Comparative Study of Mysticism: Mysticism is What Unio Mystica Is... Communio Viatorum 54 (1):88-107.
Jody Graham (1997). Common Sense and Berkeley's Perception by Suggestion. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 5 (3):397 – 423.
Added to index2010-12-09
Total downloads15 ( #297,055 of 1,940,955 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #457,798 of 1,940,955 )
How can I increase my downloads?