Prolepsis y justicia en el epicureísmo
The influential 19th century philosophical historiography did not recognize in Epicureanism a political philosophy worthy of study. Based on an analysis of the Principal Doctrines and texts of Hermarchus, Polystratus and Lucretius, this paper aims to show that Epicureans developed a relevant political theory that connected two traditions: the Ionian naturalism and the Socratic reformulation of philosophy as the only true politics. In the establishment of justice through covenants and its continuity in the language through the prolepsis of what is just, they saw a finding that offered man the required security to satisfy his necessary natural desires and his survival.
RETHINKING A PROFESSIONAL RIVALRY: EARLY EPICUREANS AGAINST THE STOA
In the history of ancient Greek philosophy the Epicureans and the Stoics have been considered bitter professional rivals. My aim in the present paper is to explore the Epicurean side of this rivalry in the early days in the history of the two schools, that is, a time when both the Garden and the Stoa were striving to establish themselves in the philosophical arena of the Hellenistic era. There are two (at least) reasons why, I think, this is a worthwhile cause. First, the existence of a controversy between the two schools seems to be either simply taken for granted1 or passed over in silence; hence little attention has so far been dedicated to the exact terms of this controversy (if there was any) and the issues at stake quite generally. Second, a closer examination of the early Epicurean reception of and reaction to the Stoa may throw additional light on the dynamics that shaped the philosophical climate at the beginning of Hellenistic times and help us assess the position of the Epicurean school in it. In what follows I collect and review the extant evidence of anti-Stoic criticism by the early Epicureans; the principal questions I am concerned with are: a) how extensive the Epicurean critique against the Stoics appears to have been, b) what the main points of controversy were and, c) what these tell us about the Epicurean perception of and attitude towards the Stoa. Before I turn to the main part of my paper, a clarification of terminology and chronology is necessary. By the phrase ‘early Epicureans’ I refer collectively to Epicurus and his immediate followers, namely, all those eminent Epicureans for whom we know (or have good reasons to assume) that they had been direct students of Epicurus and had played an active role in the first Epicurean community in Lampsacus and then in Athens. The most important early Epicureans whose writings we know through papyri fragments and secondary sources are Metrodorus, Polyaenus, Hermarchus, Colotes, Idomeneus, Carneiscus and Polystratus.2 Thus the period on which my examination here primarily focusses extends roughly from the end of the fourth century B.C., when the Epicurean school was established, until
Beings of nature and reason: mythological masculinities in early 18th-century French art and visual culture
Statement of Originality Acknowledgments List of Illustrations Introduction 11 Chapter One Of Myth and Men 27 Chapter Two In the Likeness of Bacchus 62 Chapter Three Venus and a Satyr 97 Chapter Four Pan and Syrinx 141 Chapter Five Marsyas Flayed by the Order of Apollo 175 Conclusion 212 Catalogue of Images 227 Bibliography 300