Plotinus’ Account of Demiurgic Causation and its Philosophical Background

Plotinus’ account of the sensible world is based on two assumptions: 1. The sensible cosmos is rationally ordered, and its order depends on the activity of a prior cause. 2. This order does not reflect any rational design on the part of the cause, since the cause has no reasoning or calculation in it. Plotinus therefore rejects intelligent design theology, while at the same time maintaining that our world has an ordered structure, which is the effect of a superior cause. Here I aim to set this theory against its background. I will argue that the debate between Platonic and Aristotelian philosophers during the second century ce played a prominent role in the genesis of Plotinus’ account. A crucial passage to assess Plotinus’ view of demiurgic causation is the opening chapter of Enneads vi.7 (treatise 38). It contains an exegetical section on the Timaeus, where Plotinus considers Plato’s account of the making of the cosmos and the fashioning of the human bod

DIPL 3101 Concepts in Leadership

The purpose of this undergraduate course is to investigate and analyze historical and contemporary concepts of leadership and explore traits, strategies, and techniques that define leadership. Attention is given to such topics as leadership and culture, leadership traits, power and influence, patterns of leadership (charismatic, transformational and servant leadership), and the effectiveness of leadership in organizational settings. Although there is an emphasis on political/organizational leadership, the course blends theory and practice and relies on an interdisciplinary approach drawing from relevant social and behavioral sciences including ethics, philosophy, psychology and sociology

Tommaso Campanella e l'eternità del mondo

Il presente studio prende in esame la discussione dell’eternità del mondo in Tommaso Campanella dalla Philosophia sensibus demonstrata, pubblicata nel 1591 a difesa di Telesio contro le critiche dell’aristotelico Giacomo Antonio Marta, alla Metaphysica, scritta da Campanella in varie redazioni e finalmente pubblicata a Parigi nel 1638. La posizione di Campanella presenta alcuni notevoli aspetti costanti lungo tutto il corso della sua attività, in particolare la critica dell’eternalismo aristotelico e il legame con la tradizione platonico-ficiniana della prisca theologia. A questo impianto, le cui origini devono ricondursi alla tradizione antica di dibattiti su Platone e Aristotele proseguita fino al XV secolo, si aggiunge, nelle opere più mature, il richiamo alla nuova astronomia che, come sottolinea Campanella, scardina definitivamente il quadro della cosmologia aristotelica. D’altra parte, l’Apologia pro Galileo (1616) dimostra che Campanella cercò di inserire la stessa astronomia di Galileo nel quadro della prisca theologia

The 'Pseudopythagorica' and their Philosophical Background. A discussion of Angela Ulacco, 'Pseudopythagorica Dorica'

This is a review article of Angela Ulacco's recent Italian translation, with introduction and commentary, of four pseudo-Pythagorean treatises. Part 1 focuses on the philosophical background of the Pseudopythagorica and, more precisely, on the connection between these treatises and first century BC philosophy. Part 2 focuses on Pseudo-Archytas's On opposites and discusses some parallels between this work and the early Peripatetic commentators (in particular Boethus of Sidon). Parts 3 and 4 focus on Pseudo-Archytas's On principles. This treatise contains echoes of Aristotle's theology and the same situation can be found in a famous fragment of Eudorus of Alexandria. It is argued that Plutarch's references to Aristotle's metaphysics and epoptics (see in particular Plutarch, Alex., 7) can shed some light on these issues

Analisi dinamiche in tensioni efficaci con il codice "SCOSSA"

L’incremento di pressioni interstiziali indotto da azioni sismiche in depositi sabbio-limosi determina la progressiva riduzione delle tensioni efficaci e di conseguenza della rigidezza e della resistenza dei terreni, fino a condurre alla completa liquefazione. Un metodo sviluppato per la stima di tale incremento si basa su un parametro semi-empirico, detto ‘parametro di danno’, che consente di applicare direttamente i risultati di prove cicliche di laboratorio per predire l’incremento di pressione interstiziale generato in sito dall’azione sismica. Tale procedura, implementata all’interno di un codice di calcolo non lineare, consente di effettuare analisi monodimensionali in tensioni efficaci senza adottare sofisticati modelli costitutivi del terreno. L’applicazione ad un argine danneggiato dal terremoto emiliano del 2012 ha consentito di evidenziare fenomeni di degradazione ciclica degli strati sabbiosi profondi che non sarebbe stato possibile osservare con le tradizionali analisi in tensioni totali

Aristotle’s Categories from Plotinus to Iamblichus

This article focuses on the reception of Aristotle’s Categories by the first three representatives of Greek Neoplatonism: Plotinus (204/205–270 CE), Porphyry (ca. 234–ca. 305 CE), Iamblichus (ca. 242–ca. 325 CE). The first section argues that Plotinus’ acquaintance with Aristotle’s treatises marked a fresh start vis-à-vis the previous Platonist tradition. Aristotle’s views, arguments and vocabulary are ubiquitous in Plotinus writings (the Enneads) and they must be considered an essential part of his philosophical project. Plotinus, however, does not share some of Aristotle’s key theories and is critical of them. The second section focuses on Plotinus’ discussion of Aristotle’s Categories in the tripartite treatise On the Genera of Being (6.1–3). There he rejects the Peripatetic division into ten categories as providing an incomplete account of the genera of being that unduly omits “those which are most authentically beings”, i.e. Plato’s separate Forms. While drawing on earlier Platonist objections to Aristotle, Plotinus’ approach is original insofar as he criticizes Aristotle and his followers not only for omitting intelligible beings in the division of categories, but also for being unable, for this very reason, to work out an adequate division of sensible beings themselves. The third section is devoted to Porphyry, a student of Plotinus’ and the editor of his works. Porphyry worked intensively on Aristotle’s Categories, which he regarded as an introduction not only to logic, but to philosophy as a whole. Unlike Plotinus, Porphyry aimed to integrate Aristotle into Platonism and his engagement with the Categories was a key part of his project after Plotinus’ in-depth criticism. Porphyry’s approach is connected to his view of the subject-matter of the Categories, which he sees as focusing on words insofar as they signify beings, and not on beings as such. The fourth section focuses on some parallels between Plotinus’ Genera of Beings and Porphyry’s works, which may reflect the debate within Plotinus’ school. The fifth section focuses on Iamblichus of Chalcis. Both in theology and in the interpretation of Aristotle’s Categories, Iamblichus aimed to both continue and supplant Porphyry’s work. While Plotinus criticizes Aristotle’s categories for omitting intelligible beings, and while Porphyry accepts Aristotle’s categories insofar as they focus on words signifying sensible things, Iamblichus incorporates his Neoplatonist and Pythagorizing metaphysics into the interpretation of the Categories