Simplicius of Cilicia

Book 3 of Aristotle's Physics elaborates definitions of change and infinity - concepts central to his theory of nature. In a sixth-century commentary on Physics 3, Philoponus makes use of Aristotle's views to argue for a Christian interpretation of infinity. In Physics Book 2, Aristotle defines nature as an internal source of change. By elaborating Aristotle's view of change, Book 3 takes an important step in establishing the claim - to be made in Book 8 - for a divine mover who causes change but in whom no change occurs. Book 3 also introduces Aristotle's doctrine of infinity as always potential, but never actual and never traversed. Here, as elsewhere, Philoponus turns Aristotle's arguments about infinity against the pagan Neoplatonist belief in a universe without a beginning.

"In this volume Simplicius is dealing with Aristotle's account of the Presocratics, and for many of them he is our chief or even sole authority. He quotes at length from Melissus, Parmenides and Zeno, sometimes from their original works but also from later writers from Plato onwards, drawing particularly on Alexander's lost commentary on Aristotle's Physics and on Porphyry. Much of his approach is just scholarly, but in places he reveals his Neoplatonist affiliation and attempts to show the basic agreement among his predecessors in spite of their apparent differences"--Provided by publisher.

"Aristotle believed that the outermost stars are carried round us on a transparent sphere. There are directions in the universe and a preferred direction of rotation. The sun moon and planets are carried on different revolving spheres. The spheres and celestial bodies are composed of an everlasting fifth element, which has none of the ordinary contrary properties like heat and cold which could destroy it, but only the facility for uniform rotation. But this creates problems as to how the heavenly bodies create light, and, in the case of the sun, heat. The value of Simplicius' commentary on On the Heavens 2, 1-9 lies partly in its preserving the lost comments of Alexander and in Simplicius' controversy with him. The two of them discuss not only the problem mentioned, but also whether soul and nature move the spheres as two distinct forces or as one. Alexander appears to have simplified Aristotle's system of 55 spheres down to seven, and some hints may be gleaned as to whether, simplifying further, he thinks there are seven ultimate movers, or only one."--Bloomsbury Publishing Aristotle believed that the outermost stars are carried round us on a transparent sphere. There are directions in the universe and a preferred direction of rotation. The sun moon and planets are carried on different revolving spheres. The spheres and celestial bodies are composed of an everlasting fifth element, which has none of the ordinary contrary properties like heat and cold which could destroy it, but only the facility for uniform rotation. But this creates problems as to how the heavenly bodies create light, and, in the case of the sun, heat. The value of Simplicius' commentary on On the Heavens 2,1-9 lies both in its preservation of the lost comments of Alexander and in Simplicius' controversy with him. The two of them discuss not only the problem mentioned, but also whether soul and nature move the spheres as two distinct forces or as one. Alexander appears to have simplified Aristotle's system of 55 spheres down to seven, and some hints may be gleaned as to whether, simplifying further, he thinks there are seven ultimate movers, or only one.

"Aristotle's Physics is about the causes of motion and culminates in a proof that God is needed as the ultimate cause of motion. Aristotle argues that things in motion need to be moved by something other than themselves - he rejects Plato's self-movers. On pain of regress, there must be an unmoved mover. If this unmoved mover is to cause motion eternally, it needs infinite power. It cannot, then, be a body, since bodies, being of finite size, cannot house infinite power. The unmoved mover is therefore an incorporeal God.". "Simplicius reveals that his teacher, Ammonius, harmonized Aristotle with Plato to counter Christian charges of pagan disagreement, by making Aristotle's God a cause not only of beginningless movement, but also of beginningless existence of the universe. Eternal existence, no less than eternal motion, calls for an infinite, and hence incorporeal, force. This anti-Christian interpretation turned Aristotle's God from a thinker into a certain kind of Creator, and so helped to make Aristotle's God acceptable to Saint Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century."--BOOK JACKET.

"Aristotle believed that the outermost stars are carried round us on a transparent sphere. There are directions in the universe and a preferred direction of rotation. The sun moon and planets are carried on different revolving spheres. The spheres and celestial bodies are composed of an everlasting fifth element, which has none of the ordinary contrary properties like heat and cold which could destroy it, but only the facility for uniform rotation. But this creates problems as to how the heavenly bodies create light, and, in the case of the sun, heat. The topics covered in this part of Simplicius' commentary are the speeds and distances of the stars; that the stars are spherical; why the sun and moon have fewer motions than the other five planets; why the sphere of the fixed stars contains so many stars whereas the other heavenly spheres contain no more than one (Simplicius has a long excursus on planetary theory in his commentary on this chapter); discussion of people's views on the position, motion or rest, shape, and size of the earth; that the earth is a relatively small sphere at rest in the centre of the cosmos."--Bloomsbury Publishing Aristotle believed that the outermost stars are carried round us on a transparent sphere. There are directions in the universe and a preferred direction of rotation. The sun, moon and planets are carried on different revolving spheres. The spheres and celestial bodies are composed of an everlasting fifth element, which has none of the ordinary contrary properties like heat and cold which could destroy it, but only the facility for uniform rotation. But this creates problems as to how the heavenly bodies create light, and, in the case of the sun, heat. The topics covered in this part of Simplicius' commentary are: the speeds and distances of the stars; that the stars are spherical; why the sun and moon have fewer motions than the other five planets; why the sphere of the fixed stars contains so many stars whereas the other heavenly spheres contain no more than one (Simplicius has a long excursus on planetary theory in his commentary on this chapter); discussion of people's views on the position, motion or rest, shape, and size of the earth; that the earth is a relatively small sphere at rest in the centre of the cosmos.

"Simplicius starts with a survey of previous commentators and an introductory set of questions about Aristotle's philosophy and about the Categories in particular. The commentator, he says, needs to present Plato and Aristotle as in harmony in most things."-- Publisher description. "Why were precisely ten categories named, given that Plato managed with fewer distinctions? Where in the scheme of categories would one fit a quality that defines a substance - under substance or under quality? In his own commentary, Porphyry suggested classifying a defining quality as something distinct, a substantial quality, but others objected that this would constitute an eleventh category. The most persistent question dealt with in Simplicius' commentary is whether the categories classify words, concepts, or things."--BOOK JACKET.

"In the three chapters of On the Heavens dealt with in this volume, Aristotle argues that the universe is ungenerated and indestructible. In Simplicius' commentary, translated here, we see a battle royal between the Neoplatonist Simplicius and the Aristotelian, Alexander, whose lost commentary on On the Heavens Simplicius partly preserves. Simplicius' rival, the Christian Philoponus, had conducted a parallel battle in his Against Proclus but had taken the side of Alexander against Proclus and other Platonists, arguing that Plato's Timaeus gives a beginning to the universe. Simplicius takes the Platonist side, denying that Plato intended a beginning. The origin on which Plato refers is, according to Simplicius, not a temporal origin, but the divine cause that produces the world without beginning."--Bloomsbury Publishing In the three chapters of On the Heavens dealt with in this volume, Aristotle argues that the universe is ungenerated and indestructible. In Simplicius' commentary, translated here, we see a battle royal between the Neoplatonist Simplicius and the Aristotelian Alexander, whose lost commentary on Aristotle's On the Heavens Simplicius partly preserves. Simplicius' rival, the Christian Philoponus, had conducted a parallel battle in his Against Proclus but had taken the side of Alexander against Proclus and other Platonists, arguing that Plato's Timaeus gives a beginning to the universe. Simplicius takes the Platonist side, denying that Plato intended a beginning. The origin to which Plato refers is, according to Simplicius, not a temporal origin, but the divine cause that produces the world without beginning.

"Aristotle classified the things in the world into ten categories: substance, quantity, quality, relation, etcetera. Plotinus, the founder of Neoplatonism, attacked the classification, accepting only the first four categories, rejecting the other six, and adding one of his own: change. He preferred Plato's classification into five kinds, including change. In this part of his commentary, Simplicius records the controversy on the six categories rejected by Plotinus: acting, being acted upon, being in a position, when, where, and having on. Plotinus' pupil and editor, Porphyry, defended all six categories as applicable to the physical world, even if not to the world of Platonic Forms to which Platonist studies must eventually progress. Porphyry's pupil, Iamblichus, went further: taken in a suitable sense, Aristotle's categories apply also to the world of Forms, although they require Pythagorean reinterpretation. Simplicius may be closer to Porphyry than to Iamblichus, and indeed Porphyry's defense established Aristotle's categories once and for all in Western thought. But the controversy of this period nonetheless revealed more effectively than any modern discussion the profound difficulties in Aristotle's categorial scheme."--BOOK JACKET.

This volume offers a new translation of the Neoplatonist philosopher Simplicius' commentary on the chapters concerning place and time in Aristotle's Physics, Book Four. Written after the closing of the Athenian Neoplatonist school in A.D. 529, the commentary clarifies the structure and meaning of Aristotle's arguments and provides a rich account of 800 years of interpretation. Surprisingly, in the first five chapters of Book Four Aristotle shows place as two-dimensional: one's place is the two-dimensional inner surface of one's surroundings. He also suggests that the upward motion of air and fire and the downward motion of earth and water are partly explained by the natural places to which they tend. Place thus has power (dunamis) of its own. In his last five chapters, Aristotle argues that if time did not entail change its passage would be undetectable, and that time, by definition countable, requires the existence of conscious beings to do the counting. Among the many relevant views that Simplicius records are those of Galen, who attacks this claim, and of Eudemus, who rebuts the Pythagorean theory that history will repeat itself exactly. J. O. Urmson's translation serves as a companion to his earlier translation of the Corollaries on Place and Time, in which Simplicius sets forth his own views as distinct from those of Aristotle. A major sourcebook for the interpretation of Aristotle, this volume will be welcomed by scholars and students in the fields of classics, ancient philosophy, ancient history, and medieval studies.

"Is there such a thing as three-dimensional space? Is space inert or dynamic? Is the division of time into past, present and future real? Does the whole of time exist all at once? Does it progress smoothly or by discontinuous leaps? Simplicius surveys ideas about place and time from the preceding thousand years of Greek Philosophy and reveals the extraordinary ingenuity of the late Neoplatonist theories, which he regards as marking a substantial advance on all previous ideas."--Bloomsbury Publishing Is there such a thing as three-dimensional space? Is space inert or dynamic? Is the division of time into past, present and future real? Does the whole of time exist all at once? Does it progress smoothly or by discontinuous leaps? Simplicius surveys ideas about place and time from the preceding thousand years of Greek Philosophy and reveals the extraordinary ingenuity of the late Neoplatonist theories, which he regards as marking a substantial advance on all previous ideas.

"Book 7 of Aristotle's Physics - once regarded as merely an undeveloped early version of Book 8 - has recently attracted renewed interest. Differences of opinion concerning its importance are as old as Aristotle's text, and Simplicius' commentary, written in the sixth century A.D., is an indispensable tool for understanding Book 7. Charles Hagen here gives the English reader access to this commentary for the first time." "Among the most important aspects of the commentary are Simplicius' explanation of the interconnections among the chapters of Book 7 and his references to a more extensive second version of Aristotle's text than the one that survives today. Acknowledging that Book 8 offers a more precise discussion of the subject covered in Book 7, the case for a prime mover, Simplicius both identifies ways in which Book 7 reveals Aristotle's acumen and clarifies its relationship to the other books in the Physics."--BOOK JACKET.

"The Enchiridion or Handbook of the first-century AD Stoic Epictetus was used as an ethical treatise both in Christian monasteries and by the sixth-century pagan Neoplatonist Simplicius. Simplicius chose it for beginners, rather than Aristotle's Ethics, because it presupposed no knowledge of logic. We thus get a fascinating chance to see how a pagan Neoplatonist transformed Stoic ideas. The text was relevant to Simplicius because he too, like Epictetus, was teaching beginners how to take the first steps towards eradicating emotion, although he is unlike Epictetus in thinking that they should give up public life rather than acquiesce, if public office is denied them. Simplicius starts from a Platonic definition of the person as rational soul, not body, ignoring Epictetus' further whittling down of himself to just his will or policy decisions. He selects certain topics for special attention in chapters 1, 8, 27 and 31. Things are up to us, despite Fate. Our sufferings are not evil, but providential attempts to turn us from the body. Evil is found only in the human soul. But evil is parasitic (Proclus' term) on good. The gods exist, are provident, and cannot be bought off.With nearly all of this the Stoics would agree, but for quite different reasons, and their own distinctions and definitions are to a large extent ignored. This translation of the Handbook is published in two volumes. This is the second volume, covering chapters 27-53; the first covers chapters 1-26"--Bloomsbury Publishing The Enchiridion or Handbook of the first-century AD Stoic Epictetus was used as an ethical treatise both in Christian monasteries and by the sixth-century pagan Neoplatonist Simplicius. Simplicius chose it for beginners, rather than Aristotle's Ethics, because it presupposed no knowledge of logic. We thus get a fascinating chance to see how a pagan Neoplatonist transformed Stoic ideas. The text was relevant to Simplicius because he too, like Epictetus, was teaching beginners how to take the first steps towards eradicating emotion, although he is unlike Epictetus in thinking that they should give up public life rather than acquiesce, if public office is denied them. Simplicius starts from a Platonic definition of the person as rational soul, not body, ignoring Epictetus' further whittling down of himself to just his will or policy decisions. He selects certain topics for special attention in chapters 1, 8, 27 and 31. Things are up to us, despite Fate. Our sufferings are not evil, but providential attempts to turn us from the body. Evil is found only in the human soul. But evil is parasitic (Proclus' term) on good. The gods exist, are provident, and cannot be bought off.With nearly all of this the Stoics would agree, but for quite different reasons, and their own distinctions and definitions are to a large extent ignored. This translation of the Handbook is published in two volumes. This is the second volume, covering chapters 27-53; the first covers chapters 1-26.

"Aristotle argues in On the Heavens 1.5-7 that there can be no infinitely large body, and in 1.8-9 that there cannot be more than one physical world. As a corollary in 1.9, he infers that there is no place, vacuum or time beyond the outermost stars. As one argument in favour of a single world, he argues that his four elements, earth, air, fire and water, have only one natural destination apiece. Moreover they accelerate as they approach it and acceleration cannot be unlimited. However, the Neoplatonist Simplicius, who wrote the commentary translated here in the sixth century AD, tells us that this whole world view was to be rejected by Strato, the third head of Aristotle's school. At the same time, he tells us the different theories of acceleration in Greek philosophy."--Bloomsbury Publishing Aristotle argues in On the Heavens 1.5-7 that there can be no infinitely large body, and in 1.8-9 that there cannot be more than one physical world. As a corollary in 1.9, he infers that there is no place, vacuum or time beyond the outermost stars. As one argument in favour of a single world, he argues that his four elements: earth, air, fire and water, have only one natural destination apiece. Moreover they accelerate as they approach it and acceleration cannot be unlimited. However, the Neoplatonist Simplicius, who wrote the commentary in the sixth century AD (here translated into English), tells us that this whole world view was to be rejected by Strato, the third head of Aristotle's school. At the same time, he tells us the different theories of acceleration in Greek philosophy.

Simplicius' On Aristotle's "On the Soul 1.1-2.4" is a major source for late Neoplatonist theories of thought and sense perception and offers considerable insight into an important area of Aristotelian philosophy. The present volume is the only English translation of the commentary and affords its readers the opportunity to consider the question of its disputed authorship. While most scholars attribute authorship of On Aristotle's "On the Soul 1.1-2.4" to Simplicius, some have judged it to be the work of Priscian, or of another philosopher. The commentary discusses the first half of On the Soul, which comprises Aristotle's survey of his predecessors' views, as well as his own account of the nature of the soul.

"Simplicius, the greatest surviving ancient authority on Aristotle's Physics, lived in the sixth century A. D. He produced detailed commentaries on several of Aristotle's works. Those on the Physics, which alone come to over 1,300 pages in the original Greek, preserve a centuries-old tradition of ancient scholarship on Aristotle. In Physics Book 5 Aristotle lays down some of the principles of his dynamics and theory of change. What does not count as change: change of relation? The flux of time? There is no change of change, yet acceleration is recognised. Aristotle defines 'continuous', 'contact' and 'next', and uses these definitions in discussing when we can claim that the same change or event is still going on. This volume is complemented by David Konstan's translation of Simplicius' commentary on Physics Book 6, which has already appeared in this series. It is Book 6 that gives spatial application to the terms defined in Book 5, and uses them to mount a celebrated attack on atomism. Simplicius' commentaries enrich our understanding of the Physics and of its interpretation in the ancient world."--Bloomsbury Publishing Simplicius, the greatest surviving ancient authority on Aristotle's Physics , lived in the sixth century A. D. He produced detailed commentaries on several of Aristotle's works. Those on the Physics, which alone come to over 1,300 pages in the original Greek, preserve a centuries-old tradition of ancient scholarship on Aristotle. In Physics Book 5 Aristotle lays down some of the principles of his dynamics and theory of change. What does not count as change: change of relation? The flux of time? There is no change of change, yet acceleration is recognised. Aristotle defines 'continuous', 'contact' and 'next', and uses these definitions in discussing when we can claim that the same change or event is still going on. This volume is complemented by David Konstan's translation of Simplicius' commentary on Physics Book 6, which has already appeared in this series. It is Book 6 that gives spatial application to the terms defined in Book 5, and uses them to mount a celebrated attack on atomism. Simplicius' commentaries enrich our understanding of the Physics and of its interpretation in the ancient world.