Robert Wardy

This chapter attempts to show that Virgil's _Aeneid_ is influenced by Plato's _Symposium_. It then considers what Virgil does to incorporate his Platonic material. Virgil, most learned and allusive of authors, never superficially tosses in a citation or generates an echo for its own sake: for him, writing is rewriting, as he harmoniously or polemically engages with the multiple traditions which he so spectacularly enriches. It is argued that the Nisus and Euryalus episode in _Aeneid_ IX draws curious inspiration from Phaedrus' speech in Plato's _Symposium_. The writing of _Aeneid_ IX is informed by a reading of Phaedrus' speech: this bald causal hypothesis is readily defensible.

Ancient Greek and Roman philosophy is often characterised in terms of competitive individuals debating orally with one another in public arenas. But it also developed over its long history a sense in which philosophers might acknowledge some other particular philosopher or group of philosophers as an authority and offer to that authority explicit intellectual allegiance. This is most obvious in the development after the classical period of the philosophical 'schools' with agreed founders and, most importantly, canonical founding texts. There also developed a tradition of commentary, interpretation, and discussion of texts which itself became a mode of philosophical debate. As time went on, the weight of a growing tradition of reading and appealing to a certain corpus of foundational texts began to shape how later antiquity viewed its philosophical past and also how philosophical debate and inquiry was conducted. In this book leading scholars explore aspects of these important developments.

Comment le Banquet (ne) tient-il (pas) ensemble? La réponse de loin la plus populaire est que le Banquet a une structure téléologique, culminant dans le discours de Socrate/Diotime, qui incorpore ou écarte de diverses manières les affirmations dignes d’attention faites dans les discours précédents à propos d’ erōs. Tout ce qui survit d’une source non-philosophique le fait non pas dans sa forme originale, mais plutôt en vertu de l’alchimie platonicienne qu’il a subie, en tant que celle-ci traduit, retravaille et raffine les opinions ordinaires en une puissante théorie philosophique. Le présent article propose une alternative radicale. Il soutient que nous devrions systématiquement renverser les jugements réducteurs d’Éryximaque concernant Héraclite sur l’harmonisation et appliquer les résultats au Banquet lui-même. Il y a une harmonie discordante incorporée dans un logos complexe et polyphonique. Un tel logos prospère grâce à la dissension, puisque son existence même comme tout unifié dépend de l’opposition maintenue sans affaiblissement entre des éléments qui acceptent de différer. Le Banquet consiste en de multiples voix unifiées, mais sans entraves. L’article conclut que, afin d’éviter une pétition de principe fondamentale, le Banquet promeut une sorte de contextualisme épistémologique qui est anathème dans d’autres contextes platoniciens. Et que ce n’est pas un dialogue.

This book considers the relation between language and thought. Robert Wardy explores this huge topic by analyzing linguistic relativism with reference to a Chinese translation of Aristotle's Categories. He addresses some key questions, such as, do the basic structures of language shape the major thought patterns of its native speakers? Could philosophy be guided and constrained by the language in which it is done? And does Aristotle survive rendition into Chinese intact? Wardy's answers will fascinate philosophers, Sinologists, classicists, linguists and anthropologists, and make a major contribution to the scholarly literature.

The Chain of Change, first published in 1990, is a philosophical commentary devoted to Aristotle's Physics VII, in which Aristotle argues for the existence of a first, unmoved cosmic mover. This study systematically considers the major issues of the book, and argues for the fundamental importance of Physics VII in our understanding of Aristotelian cosmology and natural science. Physics VII is extant in two versions, and therefore poses special editorial problems. For this reason one of the features of Dr Wardy's study is the provision of an improved text and translation in both versions. The author's comprehensive comparison of their merits, philosophical and philological, has a significant bearing on our understanding of the nature and evolution of the Aristotelian corpus. The second part of the book is devoted to critical examination of the argument, including one of the most elaborate and challenging in the entire Aristotelian corpus.

Argument How well does Aristotle's abstract definition of nature in the Physics cope with some significant agricultural facts? Are its implications in tension with the workings of artificial teleology? How Aristotle might categorize domesticated plants is problematic: they are neither obviously natural nor obviously artificial. That artificial things generally retain an intrinsic source of change does not help us to settle the status of “living quasi-artefacts.” A survey of Theophrastus reveals that many agricultural techniques go against nature, rather than collaborating with it; and, moving from the practical to the theoretical, the Mechanica might suggest a scientific program at odds with the Aristotelian tradition of passive observation. Reflection on the Historia Animalium exposes difficulties in specifying natural and artificial environments which exacerbate the puzzle, and reinforce the rationale for Aristotelians to adopt an active stance when investigating nature. The Aristotelian olive remains mysterious.