Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2 results

  • Chapter 2 - Courtroom Rhetoric in Imperial and Late Antique Philosophical Dialogues

  • from Part II - Genres of Literary Resistance
  • Edited by Daniel Jolowicz, Downing College, Cambridge, Jaś Elsner, Corpus Christi College, Oxford
  • Book:
    Articulating Resistance under the Roman Empire
    Published online:
    23 December 2022
    Print publication:
    05 January 2023, pp 51-70

  • Summary

    Because dialogue represents philosophy happening in the context of interpersonal relationships, it is a natural place to investigate power dynamics, both displays of power and displays of resistance. But in literature, unlike in life, the power dynamics are completely within the control of one person, the author, who can script the situation as he chooses. In this chapter, I argue that there was a change in the rules of comportment found in literary dialogues between the first and fourth centuries CE that can be traced through paying close attention first to the appearance and then to the development of a new character in these discussions – a judge. A shared embrace of forensic rhetoric to express philosophical antagonism existed across changing modes of judgement in the Roman Empire. I argue that this forensic dialogic mode was introduced as a mode of sublimation of political energy, as a rerouting of resistance into a safer domain of scholastic antagonism.

  • Chapter 12 - Pythagoreanism in the Academic tradition: the Early Academy to Numenius

  • Edited by Carl A. Huffman, DePauw University, Indiana
  • Book:
    A History of Pythagoreanism
    Published online:
    05 May 2014
    Print publication:
    24 April 2014, pp 250-273

  • Summary

    The influence of Pythagoreanism of one form or another on Platonists from Speusippus in the Old Academy to Numenius of Apamea in the later second century AD can be seen to be pervasive, though never forming more than one element in the mix, along with Aristotelianism and Stoicism. If Speusippus and Xenocrates of Chalcedon established the doctrinal parameters of later Pythagoreanism, it is to another, rather idiosyncratic, member of the Old Academy that must go the honor of contributing significantly to the later life-myth of Pythagoras, namely Heraclides of Pontus. Philo of Alexandria shows in every aspect of philosophy how pervasive Pythagorean influence had become in the emerging amalgam that is Middle Platonism. To see how this influence develops further, one may turn to the major figure in the Platonist tradition from the later part of the first century AD, Plutarch of Chaeronea.