The Proclus’s defense of contingence on Laws X against the Plutarch’s determinism

Mostrar todas las versiones(2)

In the present work we propose to analyze the proclean reading on Laws X 896a  –Where Plato seems to say that all the acts of the bodies depends on a causality of divine and psychological order– as a response to what Plutarch said in this regard. The cheronean maintains that, according to P...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Iversen, Francisco
Formato: Artículo publishedVersion
Lenguaje:Español
Publicado: Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires 2021
Materias:
Proclus
evil
Plato
soul
Proclo
mal
Platón
alma
Acceso en línea:https://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/CdF/article/view/8224
https://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/cgi-bin/library.cgi?a=d&c=cufilo&d=8224_oai
Aporte de:
Repositorio Digital de la Universidad de Buenos Aires (UBA) de Universidad de Buenos Aires
id I28-R145-8224_oai
record_format dspace
spelling I28-R145-8224_oai2025-11-17 Iversen, Francisco 2021-12-27 In the present work we propose to analyze the proclean reading on Laws X 896a  –Where Plato seems to say that all the acts of the bodies depends on a causality of divine and psychological order– as a response to what Plutarch said in this regard. The cheronean maintains that, according to Plato, evil is caused by an evil soul, which in eternal struggle with the good soul, officiates as a mechanical cause and guiding principle of the cosmos (De Iside et Osiride 370b-371a; De animae procreatione in Plato Timaeo 1014a-f). In our opinion, it is against the foregoing that the proclean effort is focused to point out that evil does not exist in its purity, nor in the superior entities (such as the soul of the world or Soul-hypostasis) although it is a deviation that is it occurs in individual human souls and operates as a parasitic entity (De malorum subsistentia I, 20-23). We aspire to use arguments that show in what sense Proclus defends the One-Good principle, which cannot have opposites, and the existence of evil in the lower entities without denying contingency or blaming the cosmos for evil En el presente trabajo proponemos analizar la lectura procleana del pasaje de Leyes X 896a y ss. –donde Platón parece hacer descansar todos los actos de los cuerpos en una causalidad de orden divino y psicológico– como una respuesta a lo antes dicho por Plutarco al respecto. El queroneata sostiene que, según Platón, el mal es causado por un alma mala, que en eterna lucha con el alma buena, oficia de causa mecánica y de principio rector del cosmos (De Iside et Osiride 370b-371a; De animae procreatione in Plato Timaeo 1014a-f). A nuestro criterio, es contra lo anterior que se centra el esfuerzo procleano para señalar que el mal no existe en su pureza, ni en las entidades superiores (como lo es el alma del mundo o Alma-hipóstasis) aunque sí como una desviación que se da en las almas humanas individuales y que opera como una entidad parasitaria (De malorum subsistentia I, 20-23). Aspiramos a esgrimir argumentos que muestren en qué sentido Proclo defiende el principio Uno-Bien, que no puede tener contrarios, y la existencia del mal en las entidades inferiores sin negar la contingencia ni culpar al cosmos del mal. application/pdf text/html https://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/CdF/article/view/8224 10.34096/cf.n75.8224 spa Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires https://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/CdF/article/view/8224/9862 https://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/CdF/article/view/8224/9876 Derechos de autor 2021 Cuadernos de filosofía Cuadernos de filosofía; Núm. 75 (2020): Julio-Diciembre 2362-485X 0590-1901 Proclus evil Plato soul Proclo mal Platón alma The Proclus’s defense of contingence on Laws X against the Plutarch’s determinism La defensa de Proclo de la contingencia en Leyes X contra el determinismo de Plutarco info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion https://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/cgi-bin/library.cgi?a=d&c=cufilo&d=8224_oai
institution Universidad de Buenos Aires
institution_str I-28
repository_str R-145
collection Repositorio Digital de la Universidad de Buenos Aires (UBA)
language Español
orig_language_str_mv spa
topic Proclus
evil
Plato
soul
Proclo
mal
Platón
alma
spellingShingle Proclus
evil
Plato
soul
Proclo
mal
Platón
alma
Iversen, Francisco
The Proclus’s defense of contingence on Laws X against the Plutarch’s determinism
topic_facet Proclus
evil
Plato
soul
Proclo
mal
Platón
alma
description In the present work we propose to analyze the proclean reading on Laws X 896a  –Where Plato seems to say that all the acts of the bodies depends on a causality of divine and psychological order– as a response to what Plutarch said in this regard. The cheronean maintains that, according to Plato, evil is caused by an evil soul, which in eternal struggle with the good soul, officiates as a mechanical cause and guiding principle of the cosmos (De Iside et Osiride 370b-371a; De animae procreatione in Plato Timaeo 1014a-f). In our opinion, it is against the foregoing that the proclean effort is focused to point out that evil does not exist in its purity, nor in the superior entities (such as the soul of the world or Soul-hypostasis) although it is a deviation that is it occurs in individual human souls and operates as a parasitic entity (De malorum subsistentia I, 20-23). We aspire to use arguments that show in what sense Proclus defends the One-Good principle, which cannot have opposites, and the existence of evil in the lower entities without denying contingency or blaming the cosmos for evil
format Artículo
publishedVersion
author Iversen, Francisco
author_facet Iversen, Francisco
author_sort Iversen, Francisco
title The Proclus’s defense of contingence on Laws X against the Plutarch’s determinism
title_short The Proclus’s defense of contingence on Laws X against the Plutarch’s determinism
title_full The Proclus’s defense of contingence on Laws X against the Plutarch’s determinism
title_fullStr The Proclus’s defense of contingence on Laws X against the Plutarch’s determinism
title_full_unstemmed The Proclus’s defense of contingence on Laws X against the Plutarch’s determinism
title_sort proclus’s defense of contingence on laws x against the plutarch’s determinism
publisher Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires
publishDate 2021
url https://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/CdF/article/view/8224
https://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/cgi-bin/library.cgi?a=d&c=cufilo&d=8224_oai
work_keys_str_mv AT iversenfrancisco theproclussdefenseofcontingenceonlawsxagainsttheplutarchsdeterminism
AT iversenfrancisco ladefensadeproclodelacontingenciaenleyesxcontraeldeterminismodeplutarco
AT iversenfrancisco proclussdefenseofcontingenceonlawsxagainsttheplutarchsdeterminism
_version_ 1851375828476100608

Ejemplares similares