Plato And Aristotle In Agreement

George Karamanolis breaks new ground in the study of later ancient philosophy by examining the interplay of the two main schools of thought, Platonism and Aristotelianism, from the first century BC to the third century AD. Arguing against prevailing scholarly assumption, he argues that the Platonists turned to Aristotle only in order to elucidate Plato's doctrines and to reconstruct Plato's philosophy, and that they did not hesitate to criticize Aristotle when judging him to be at odds with Plato. Karamanolis offers much food for thought to ancient philosophers and classicists.

"Aristotle versus Plato. For a long time that is the angle from which the tale has been told, in textbooks on the history of philosophy and to university students. Aristotle's philosophy, so the story goes, was au fond in opposition to Plato's. But it was not always thus."—from the Introduction In a wide-ranging book likely to cause controversy, Lloyd P. Gerson sets out the case for the "harmony" of Platonism and Aristotelianism, the standard view in late antiquity. He aims to show that the twentieth-century view that Aristotle started out as a Platonist and ended up as an anti-Platonist is seriously flawed. Gerson examines the Neoplatonic commentators on Aristotle based on their principle of harmony. In considering ancient studies of Aristotle's Categories, Physics, De Anima, Metaphysics, and Nicomachean Ethics, the author shows how the principle of harmony allows us to understand numerous texts that otherwise appear intractable. Gerson also explains how these "esoteric" treatises can be seen not to conflict with the early "exoteric" and admittedly Platonic dialogues of Aristotle. Aristotle and Other Platonists concludes with an assessment of some of the philosophical results of acknowledging harmony.

Athenian and Alexandrian Neoplatonism and the Harmonization of Aristotle and Plato by I. Hadot deals with the Neoplatonist tendency to harmonize the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle. It shows that this harmonizing tendency, born in Middle Platonism, prevailed in Neoplatonism from Porphyry and Iamblichus, where it persisted until the end of this philosophy. Hadot aims to illustrate that it is not the different schools themselves, for instance those of Athens and Alexandria, that differ from one another by the intensity of the will to harmonization, but groups of philosophers within these schools.

This text, with its definitions of contract theories and political concepts and its treatment of constitutionalism builds, a link from Plato and Aristotle to the present. It compares Plato and Aristotle's principle points of agreement and disagreement including neglected and misunderstood concepts. Concluding that Plato and Aristotle are not too relevant to the modern scientific-industrial ago (and outdated with regard to women and slavery), but they did contribute to eventual development of the scientific attitude and modern limited government (constitutionalism).

Was Plato a Platonist? While ancient disciples of Plato would have answered this question in the affirmative, modern scholars have generally denied that Plato’s own philosophy was in substantial agreement with that of the Platonists of succeeding centuries. In From Plato to Platonism, Lloyd P. Gerson argues that the ancients are correct in their assessment. He arrives at this conclusion in an especially ingenious manner, challenging fundamental assumptions about how Plato’s teachings have come to be understood. Through deft readings of the philosophical principles found in Plato's dialogues and in the Platonic tradition beginning with Aristotle, he shows that Platonism, broadly conceived, is the polar opposite of naturalism and that the history of philosophy from Plato until the seventeenth century was the history of various efforts to find the most consistent and complete version of "anti-naturalism." Gerson contends that the philosophical position of Plato—Plato’s own Platonism, so to speak—was produced out of a matrix he calls "Ur-Platonism." According to Gerson, Ur-Platonism is the conjunction of five "antis" that in total arrive at anti-naturalism: anti-nominalism, anti-mechanism, anti-materialism, anti-relativism, and anti-skepticism. Plato’s Platonism is an attempt to construct the most consistent and defensible positive system uniting the five "antis." It is also the system that all later Platonists throughout Antiquity attributed to Plato when countering attacks from critics including Peripatetics, Stoics, and Sceptics. In conclusion, Gerson shows that Late Antique philosophers such as Proclus were right in regarding Plotinus as "the great exegete of the Platonic revelation."

The purpose of this study is to determine Aristotle's attitude toward the content and method of Plato's natural science. Plato and Aristotle have often been regarded as on opposite sides of a philosophic 'Great Divide'. On the other hand, those who have found that the two men were in agreement have sometimes mentioned only scattered instances of that agreement. There is need for a new comparison of the two philosopher- one which is limited in scope, based on the primary texts, and which is systematic and thorough in method. If successful, such a comparison would bring into sharp focus one phase of Aristotle's comments on Plato. Our attempt to meet this need is Aristotle's Criticism of Plato's TIMAEUS. In pursuing this study, it has been necessary to reject a number of uncritically-accepted interpre tations of the Timaeus. Contrary to the view of many, we have concluded that Aristotle largely agreed with Plato, both in the principles and presuppositions of his natural science. A number of implications stem from this study. There is, for example, the oft-questioned manner in which Aristotle treated Plato's philosophy. In the great majority of instances, Aristotle stands forth as a reliable reporter and a skilled critic. Moreover, the study sheds light on that ancient riddle: whether Plato and Aristotle are basically akin or at odds in their general philosophies.

De mundo is a protreptic to philosophy offering a unique view of God and the cosmos, inspired by Aristotle.

Plato in the Third Sophistic examines the influence and impact of Plato and Platonism in the era of Byzantine and Christian rhetoric. The volume brings together specially commissioned articles from leading scholars of late antique philosophy and literature. Their examinations show that Plato is the single most important and influential literary figure used to frame the literature of this time. Plato in the Third Sophistic will help scholars and students from a wide range of disciplines to better understand the development of Christian literature in this era as an essential link in the history of Platonism as well as that of Christianity.