Proclus On The Existence Of Evils

He also protected higher causes from responsibility by saying that evil may result from a combination of goods. Proclus objects: evil is real, and not the mere privation of form. Rather, it is a parasite feeding off good. Parasites have no proper cause, and higher beings are thus vindicated as being the causes only of the good off which evil feeds."--BOOK JACKET.

Proclus' On the Existence of Evils is not a commentary, but helps to compensate for the dearth of Neoplatonist ethical commentaries. The central question addressed in the work is: how can there be evil in a providential world? Neoplatonists agree that it cannot be caused by higher and worthier beings. Plotinus had said that evil is matter, which, unlike Aristotle, he collapsed into mere privation or lack, thus reducing its reality. He also protected higher causes from responsibility by saying that evil may result from a combination of goods. Proclus objects: evil is real, and not a privation. Rather, it is a parasite feeding off good. Parasites have no proper cause, and higher beings are thus vindicated as being the causes only of the good off which evil feeds.

This volume represents some of the activities of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy from the academic year 1997-98. It contains nine colloquia that were hosted by eight different colleges and universities in the greater Boston area. Discussions of the works of Plato dominate this volume, with six of the nine colloquia based on Platonic texts. Appropriately, the colloquia begin with an analysis of division in the ancient atomists. Later, a study of truth in Aristotle gives a counterpoint to the Platonic interplay of drama and pedagogy or logic and rhetoric examined in papers about the "Theaetetus" and "Symposium." A presentation of Proclus's account of evil revisits some of the issues of sophistry and morality discussed in relation to Plato's "Republic" and "Euthydemus." Finally, the remaining Platonic papers are in a way not about Plato at all, but about Socrates and Xanthippe, supplementing Platonic dialogues with Xenophon and others. Underneath these discussions of ancient texts current modes of philosophy run along, providing a score of alternative interpretative schemes. This publication has also been published in hardback, please click here for details.

'The universe is, as it were, one machine, wherein the celestial spheres are analogous to the interlocking wheels and the particular beings are like the things moved by the wheels, and all events are determined by an inescapable necessity. To speak of free choice or self determination is only an illusion we human beings cherish.' Thus writes Theodore the engineer to his old friend Proclus, one of the last major Classical philosophers. Proclus' reply is one of the most remarkable discussions on fate, providence and free choice in Late Antiquity. It continues a long debate that had started with the first polemics of the Platonists against the Stoic doctrine of determinism. How can there be a place for free choice and moral responsibility in a world governed by an unalterable fate? Proclus discusses ten problems on providence and fate, foreknowledge of the future, human responsibility, evil and punishment (or seemingly absence of punishment), social and individual responsibility for evil, and the unequal fate of different animals. Until now, despite its great interest, Proclus' treatise has not received the attention it deserves, probably because its text is not very accessible to the modern reader. It has survived only in a Latin medieval translation and in some extensive Byzantine Greek extracts. This first English translation, based on a retro-conversion that works out what the original Greek must have been, brings the arguments he formulates again to the fore.

The T&T Clark Handbook of Suffering and the Problem of Evil provides an extensive exploration of the theology of theodicy, asking questions such as should all instances of suffering necessarily be understood as evil? Why would an omnipotent and benevolent God allow or perpetrate evil? Is God unable or unwilling to reduce human and non-human suffering on Earth? Does humanity have the capacity to exercise a moral evaluation of God's motives and intentions? Conventional disciplinary boundaries have tended to separate theological approaches to these questions from philosophical ones. This volume aims to overcome these boundaries by including biblical (Part I), historical (Part II), doctrinal (Part III), philosophical (Part IV), and pastoral, interreligious perspectives and alternative intersections (Part V) on theodicy. Authors include thinkers from analytic and continental traditions, multiple Christian denominations and other religions, and both established and younger scholars, providing a full variety of approaches. What unites the essays is an attempt to answer these questions from the perspective of biblical testimony, historical scholarship, modern theological and philosophical thinking about the concept of God, non-Christian religions, science and the arts. The result is a combination of in-depth analysis and breadth of scope, making this a benchmark work for further studies in the theology of suffering and evil.

It is not soul, not intellect, not imagination, opinion, reason and not understanding, not logos, not intellection, not spoken, not thought, not number, not order, not greatness, not smallness, not equality, not inequality, not likeness, not unlikeness, not having stood, not moved, not at rest, not powerful, not intepowerful, not light, not living, not life, not eternity, not time, not intellectual contact with it, not knowledge, not truth, not kingship, not wisdom, not one, not unity, not divinity, not goodness, not spirit , not sonhood, not fatherhood, ..., not something among what is not, not something among what is, not known as it is by beings, not a knower of beings as they are. There is neither logos, name, or knowledge of it. It is neither dark nor light, not error, and not truth. There is universally neither postulation nor abstraction of it. While there are produced postulations and abstractions of those after it, we neither postulate nor abstract it. Since beyond all postulation is the all-complete and single Cause of all; beyond all abstraction: the preeminence of that absolutely free of all and beyond the whole. (Dionysius the Areopagite, De mystica theologia V).

This books delves into the major tenets of Syrianus' philosophical teachings on the Timaeus and Parmenides based on the testimonia of Proclus, as found in Proclus' commentaries on Plato's Timaeus and Parmenides, and Damascius, as reported in his On First Principles and commentary on Plato's Parmenides.