Riflessioni sul demiurgo in Plotino a partire dall’interpretazione del Timeo e dell’Epinomide
PDF

Keywords

Plotinus
Demiurge
Timaeus
Epinomis
Intellect
Soul

How to Cite

Volpe, E. (2024) “Riflessioni sul demiurgo in Plotino a partire dall’interpretazione del Timeo e dell’Epinomide”, Peitho. Examina Antiqua, 15(1), pp. 381–396. doi: 10.14746/pea.2024.1.21.

Abstract

The problem of the interpretation of the Timaeus represents one of the greatest exegetical challenges for Plotinus. For Plotinus the Timaeus is a problematic dialogue due to its mythical-allegorical language and the fact that some doctrines in the work seem incompatible with his hypostatic vision. The Plotinian conception of the demiurge is critical of the concept of “artisanal causality.” Plotinus does not agree that the cosmos could have been generated according to a plan, i.e., according to dianoetic and contingent reasoning. At the same time, he identifies the demiurge with the Intellect, but then, in other treatises, also equates the demiurge with the world soul and nature, i.e., the aspect of the third hypostasis that has the task of acting directly on matter. While this ambiguity of Plotinus is found in several places of his Enneads, it finds justification in a spurious dialogue of Plato, the Epinomis, in which the role of the demiurgic soul is central. In my opinion, Plotinus is likely to have taken his cue from the Epinomis as an endorsement for his doctrine of the demiurgic soul. Nevertheless, the fact remains that the identification of the demiurgic soul with a single hypostasis leads Plotinus to several aporias.

https://doi.org/10.14746/pea.2024.1.21
PDF

References

Abbate, M., 2016 “Die Verbindung zwischen Kosmos und Seele bei Plotin und Proklos”, in: Halfwassen, O’Brien, Dangel 2016, pp. 161–176.

Albrecht, F., Feldmeier, R. (eds.), 2014, The Divine Father. Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity, Leiden–Boston.

Alesse, F., Ferrari, F. (cur.), 2012, Epinomide. Studi sull’opera e la sua ricezione, Napoli.

Armstrong, A. H., 1940, The Architecture of the Intelligible Universe in the Philosophy of Plotinus. An Analytic and Historical Study, Cambridge.

Armstrong, A. H., 1960, “The Background of the Doctrine ‘that Intelligibles are not outside Intellect’”, Entretiens sur l’antiquité classique 5, pp. 393–425.

Aronadio, F., 2013, “Epinomide. Struttura compositiva e contenuti teorici”, in: Aronadio, Tulli, Petrucci 2013, pp. 13–178.

Aronadio, F., Tulli, M., Petrucci, F. M. (cur.), 2013, Plato, Epinomis. Introduzione, traduzione e commento di Francesco Aronadio. Edizione di Mauro Tulli. Note critiche di Federico M. Petrucci,, Napoli.

Baltes, M., 1976, Die Weltentstehung des platonischen Timaios nach den antiken Interpreten, vol. I–II, Leiden.

Blumenthal, H. J., Markus, R. A. (eds.), 1981, Neoplatonism and Early Christian Thought. Essays in honour of A. H. Armstrong, London.

Bonazzi, M., 2006, “Continuité et rupture entre l’Académie et le platonisme”, Études Platoniciennes 3, pp. 231–244.

Bonazzi, M., 2015, Il Platonismo, Torino.

Bonazzi, M., 2017, “Middle Platonists on the eternity of the Universe”, in: Roskam, Verheyden, 2017, pp. 3–15.

Bonazzi, M., 2023, “Plotino sull’Intelletto e il demiurgo. Qualche considerazione”, in: Maffi 2023, pp. 257–268.

Brancacci, A., Gastaldi, S., Maso, S. (cur.), 2016, Studi su Platone e il Platonismo, Roma.

Brisson, L., 1999, “Logos et logoi chez Plotin. Leur nature et leur rôle”, Les cahiers philosophiques de Strasbourg 8, pp. 87–108.

Cambiano, G., Canfora, L., Lanza, D. (cur.), 1994, Lo spazio letterario della Grecia antica, vol. I, t. III, Roma.

Casaglia, M., Guidelli, C., Linguiti, A., Moriani, F. (trad.), 1997, Plotino, Enneadi, Torino.

Celia, F., Ulacco, A., (cur.), 2012, Il Timeo. Esegesi grece, arabe, latine, Pisa.

Charrue, J.-M.,1978, Plotin lecteur de Platon, Paris.

Chiaradonna, R., 2010, “Esegesi e sistema in Plotino”, in: Neschke-Hentschke 2010, pp. 102–117.

Chiaradonna, R., 2014, “Causalité et hiérarchie métaphysique dans le néoplatonisme: Plotin, Porphyre, Jamblique”, Χώρα 12, pp. 67–85.

Chiaradonna, R., 2016, “Plotino, il Timeo e la tradizione esegetica”, in: Brancacci 2016, pp. 99–121.

D’Ancona, C., 1990, “Determinazione e indeterminazione del sovrasensibile in Plotino”, Rivista di storia della filosofia 3, pp. 437-474.

Dillon, J., 1969, “Plotinus, Enn. 3.9.1, and later views on the intelligible world”, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 100, pp. 63–70.

Dillon, J., 2010, I Medioplatonici. Uno studio sul Platonismo (80 a.C.–220 d.C.), trad. E. Vimercati, Milano (orig. Ithaca–New York 19962).

Dillon, J., 2011, “The Idea as Thoughs of God”, Ètudes platoniciennes 8, pp. 31–42.

Donini, P., 1982, Le scuole, l’anima, l’impero. La filosofia antica da Antioco a Plotino, Torino.

Donini, P., 1994, “Testi e commenti, manuali e insegnamento: la forma sistematica e i metodi della filosofia in età postellenistica”, Aufstieg

und Niedergang der Römischen Welt II.36.7, Berlin–New York, pp. 5027–5100.

Dufour, R., 2006, “Tradition et innovations: le Timée dans la pensée plotinienne”, Ètudes Platoniciennes 2, pp. 207–236.

Emilsson, E. K., 2007, Plotinus on Intellect, Oxford.

Ferrari, F., 2012, “L’esegesi medioplatonica del Timeo: metodi, finalità, risultati” in: Celia, Ulacco 2012, pp. 81–131.

Ferrari, F., 2012a, “Quando, come e perché nacque il Platonismo”, Athenaeum 100, pp. 71–92.

Ferrari, F., 2014, “Gott als Vater und Schöpfer. Zur Rezeption von Timaios 28c 3–5 bei einigen Platonikern”, in: Albrecht, Feldmeier 2014, pp. 57–69.

Fronterotta, F., 2014, “La critique plotinienne de la causalité finale dans le traité VI 7 (38) des Ennéades (chapitres 1–3 et 25)”, Χώρα 12, pp. 47–66.

Gerson, L. P., Wilberding, J. (eds.), 2022, The New Cambridge Companion to Plotinus, Cambridge.

Gritti, E., 2012, “La ricezione dell’Epinomide in Proclo”, in: Alesse, Ferrari 2012, pp. 425–468.

Hadot, P., 1981, “Ouranos, Kronos e Zeus in Plotinus’ treatise against Gnostics”, in: Blumenthal, Markus 1981, pp. 124–137.

Halfwassen, J., O’Brien, C. S., Dangel. T. (eds.), 2016, Seele und Materie im Neuplatonismus/Soul and Matter in Neoplatonismus, Heidelberg.

Helmig, C., 2012, Forms and Concepts. Concept Formation in the Platonic Tradition, Berlin–Boston.

Karfik, F., 2023–2024, “Plotin et la Lettre II, 312e attribuée à Platon”, Χώρα 21–22, pp. 17–36.

Leinkauf, T., Steel, C. (eds.), 2005, Platons Timaios als Grundtext der Kosmologie in Spätantike, Mittelalter und Reinaissance/Plato’s Timaeus and the Fundation of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance, Leuven.

Lo Casto, C., 2018, “Plotino e la triade divina Urano-Crono-Zeus”, Freiburger Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Theologie 2, pp. 465–480.

Maffi, E. (cur.), 2023, Paradigmi della demiurgia. Studi sul lessico demiurgico nel pensiero antico e tardo-antico, Napoli.

Maggi, C., 2012, “Il demiurgo e l’anima demiurgica. Platone, gli gnostici e Plotino”, in: Alesse, Ferrari 2012, pp. 395–424.

Männlein-Robert, I., 2017, “Philosophie als Philologie? Der Platoniker Longin und seine Kritiker”, in: Riedweg 2017, pp. 161–178.

Magris, A., 2007, “Il Timeo nell’interpretazione gnostica”, in: Napolitano Valditara 2007, pp. 405–429.

Magris, A., 2012, La logica del pensiero gnostico, Brescia.

Michalewski, A., 2014, La puissance de l’intelligible. La théorie plotinienne des formes au miroir de l’héritage médioplatonicien, Leuven.

Mohr, R. D., Sattler, B. M. (eds.), 2010, One book, the whole universe. Plato’s Timaeus today, Las Vegas.

Montet, D., 2000, “Le demiurge du Timée aux Ennéades: Question des causes et théorie des principes”, Kairos 16, pp. 209–226.

Napolitano Valditara, L. M. (cur.), 2007, La sapienza di Timeo. Riflessioni a margine del Timeo di Platone, Milano.

Neschke-Hentschke, A. (hrsg.), 2010, Argumenta in dialogos Platonis, Teil 1: Platonsinterpretation und Ihre Hermeneutik von der Antike bis zum Beginn des 19. Jahrunderts, Basel.

O’Brien, C. S., 2015, The Demiurge in Ancient Thought. Secondary Gods and divine Mediators, Cambridge.

Opsomer, J., 2005, “A Craftsman and his handmaiden. Demiurgy according to Plotinus”, in: Leinkauf, Steel 2005, pp. 67–102.

Petrucci, F. M., 2016, “L’esegeta e il cielo del Timeo. Riargomentazione ed esegesi κατὰ ζητήματα nel Medioplatonismo, Athenaeum 104, pp. 157–185.

Petrucci, F. M. (cur.), 2022, Platone, Timeo, Milano.

Rich, N. M., 1954, “The Platonic Ideas as Thoughts of God”, Mnemosyne 7, pp. 123–133.

Riedweg, C. (hrsg.), 2017, Philosophia in der Konkurrenz von Schulen, Wissenschaften und Religionen. Zur Pluralisierung des Philosophiebegriffs in Keiserzeit und Spätantike, Boston–Berlin.

Rist, J., Plotinus. The Road to Reality, Cambridge.

Romano, F., 1994, “La scuola filosofica e il commento”, in: Cambiano, Canfora, Lanza 1994, pp. 587–611.

Roskam, G., Verheyden, J. (eds.), 2017, Light on Creation. Commentatori antichi in dialogo e dibattito sull’origine del mondo, Tübingen.

Schutz, J., Wilberding, J. (eds.), 2022, Women and the Female in Neoplatonism, Leiden.

Soares Santoprete, L. G., 2022, “O mito de Urano, Crono e Zeus como argomento antignóstico em Plotino”, Perspectiva Filosófica 49, pp. 82–117.

Song, E., 2012, “Plotinus on the World Maker”, Horizons 3, pp. 81–102.

Volpe, E., 2023–2024, “La triade Ouranos-Kronos-Zeus chez Plotin et ses relations avec le Cratyle et le Timée. Entre problème éxégetique et philosophique”, Χώρα 21–22, pp. 71–93.

Vorwerk, M., 2010, “Maker or Father? The Demiurge from Plutarch to Plotinus”, in: Mohr, Sattler 2010, pp. 79–101.

Wilberding, J., 2022, “Women in Plotinus”, in: Schutz, Wilberding 2022, pp. 43–63.

Wilberding, J., 2022a, “Nature: Plotinus’ Fourth Hypostasis?, in: Gerson, Wilberding 2022, pp. 312–337.