Philosophisches Seminar

Die Studie rekonstruiert den Bildbegriff als Grundkonzept der Philosophie Platons. Sie erweist die Erscheinung des an sich Unsichtbaren, nicht aber die Abbildung des Sichtbaren als dessen einheitlichen Kern. Das Bild rückt so in die Nähe des Körpers und ist zuletzt in die Dimensionsfolge eingebunden. Dies impliziert weitreichende Neuinterpretationen des Linien- und Höhlengleichnisses sowie der Kunstkritik und stellt systematische Bezüge zur Ideenontologie, Sprachphilosophie und Gleichnislehre her. Platons Bildbegriff ist somit keine Denkfigur der Abwertung, sondern konstitutiv dialektisch: Er formuliert zwar die Differenzierung der Wirklichkeit, aber ebenso die Verbindung von Sinnlichem und Geistigem und so die Einheit der Wirklichkeit. Die sinnliche Welt als Bild zu verstehen heißt dann nicht, sie für sinn- oder wertlos zu erklären, sondern sie als solche erst wirklich zu begreifen.

The talk of Diotima in Plato’s Symposium is without a doubt one of the most crucial passages with regard to the ancient concept of love. The present talk defends the thesis that a strange remark of Diotima at Symp. 202e – according to which Eros ensures that “the all is bound together with itself” (to pan auto hautô syndedesthai) – forms the systematic core of this central passage. To support this claim, particularly the concept of logos is taken into account to explore the formula of “begetting in beauty” (tokos in kalô) on the different levels of Diotima’s speech.

In talking about the cosmos, both Plotinus and the Gnostics made use of the Platonic concept of the image. The present talks aims to first reconstruct Plotinus’ arguments against the Gnostics especially in II 9 [33], 8 to then, secondly, elaborate in detail on the different approaches to the image by both sides: While Gnosticism employs the image to primarily devaluate the physical cosmos and to formulate a disruption between the physical and its origin, Plotinus uses the concept in order to ensure the positive value of the cosmos, its beauty and its deictic capacities.

In the year 2005, R. Jasnow and K.-Th. Zauzich published the first edition of a demotic dialogue which they entitled the ‘Book of Thoth’. The significance and value of this contribution for Egyptology and our general knowledge of ancient Egypt is beyond any doubt. Unfortunately, further research on parallels with the Greek Corpus Hermeticum has only revealed similarities of a mostly very general and rather accidental character. Up to now, another parallel has not been taken into account yet: the critique of writing in Plato’s Phaedrus. The present article argues that both texts, the Book of Toth and the Phaedrus, stand in contact with one another. Its points out that the Book of Thoth very likely forms the source of Plato’s text, which reacts on the Egyptian text with a diametrically opposed criticism.

In book IX of the Republic, Socrates offers a strange mathematical calculation, which claims to prove that the tyrant lives exactly 729 times less pleasantly than the king. For the first time, a complete and detailed reconstruction of this difficult text and its underlying structure is offered in the present article. It thereby proves that the distinction between ‘pleasure’ and the ‘image of pleasure’ is one among the keys to understanding the passage. It is furthermore shown how the whole calculation is based on Plato’s ontology of dimensions and therefore proves that this theorem can be taken into account at least already for the time of the Republic.

Wonder (thaumazein) is the beginning of philosophy. This well-known formula can be grasped for the first time in Plato’s Theaetetus (155d). The standard interpretation of this passage takes wonder as a positively connoted, transitive starting point of the epistemic process insofar as wonder stimulates the will to investigate. The present article challenges this view by presenting an aspect of Theaetetus 155d that has been overlooked ever since. Via a reconstruction of the dialogue’s context, broader philological arguments and an implementation into Plato’s systematic approach, the article aims to show that the Platonic conception of thaumazein is to be understood first of all as a result of sophistry: Wonder isn’t a transitive starting point but a hermetic perplexity that remains gazing at the sophist in admiration (thaumazein) and that has to be overcome. Thus, wonder is also the beginning of philosophy because it is the result of sophistry and (Platonic) philosophy arises from opposition to the latter.

International conference in honour and commemoration of Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Jens Halfwassen (1958–2020)

At the core of Plato’s inner-academic teachings lies his metaphysic. The questions, however, how this metaphysic is to be understood in detail and how it relates to the Old Academy have been controversially disputed throughout the 20th and 21st century. Recently, there have been numerous seminal new publications concerned with these questions. The conference aims to concentrate and to openly discuss the current state of research, thereby letting different positions enter in dialogue with one another. The programme places Plato’s inner-academic teachings in a broad systematic and historic context. In particular, the relation of the Theory of Principles to ethics, political philosophy and mathematics are discussed, besides further selected philosophemes. Furthermore, the tradition of the Old Academy as well as crucial questions concerning sources will be addressed. Finally, the conference aims to identify future fields and questions of research regarding Plato’s inner-academic teachings.

What is the notorious second part of Plato’s Parmenides all about? How does this second part help to face the systematic problems raised in the first part of the dialogue? To answer these questions, Christoph Poetsch develops a fundamentally new approach to what is perhaps the most controversially discussed text in the history of philosophy. By adapting methods from statistical linguistics and data science, he is able to detect hitherto unnoticed conceptual patterns in the deductions of Parmenides’ exercise. These patterns provide crucial new perspectives on the scope of the dialogue’s second part and offer means to address the problems raised in the first. Ultimately, the patterns suggest a complex constellation of multiple subjects and produce new evidence concerning the second deduction’s corollary, Plato’s ontology in general, as well as his concept of participation.

Schleiermacher’s athetesis of the τι in Soph. 237e5 is nowadays considered as communis opinio. The present paper argues that this athetesis is not tenable and that restituting the τι has in fact consequences for the microstructure of the argument. Thus, an alternative constitution of Soph. 237e4–5 is presented, justified, and its consequences for the argument are explicated. Ultimately, the present proposal is demarcated against the position of some translators who likewise restituted – albeit with follow-up problems – the τι for other reasons.

The letter of Franz Rosenzweig to Rudolf Ehrenberg from 17/18 November 1917 is known as the ‘germ cell’ of The Star of Redemption. It contains the first systematic sketch of Rosenzweig’s major work. This letter is hence of the utmost importance with regard to the Star and its development. However, the available editions of the ‘germ cell’ are incomplete as well as flawed in many crucial respects. Among these flaws is the very important diagram, which was rendered incorrectly in the previous editions in two important aspects. The article presents for the first time the full ‘germ cell’ in a new critical edition. It provides, furthermore, comparisons to the previous editions. Ultimately, it provides evidence and develops an argument that perhaps Rosenzweig himself initially intended to publish the full letter.

In De li non aliud (On Not-Other), Nicolaus Cusanus develops the striking and unusual concept of God as Not-Other. With it, Cusanus creates one of the most spectacular ideas in the history of metaphysics: the negative self-reference of the Absolute. In the present work, Max Rohstock examines this concept systematically and historically. In doing so, he is able to redeem several research desiderata at once. First, he comprehensively clarifies the function of negative theology, which is controversial in Cusanus research. He shows that Cusanus interprets negative theology in an original way and drafts a "manifesto" for negative theology with his writing on the non-other. Moreover, the author proves that the Irish philosopher Johannes Scottus Eriugena (9th century) was the father of this Cusanian concept.

The henology of Proclus seems to be fragile: If the Absolute is transcendent,
how can it be the object of philosophical thought? The central thesis of this
article is that the concept of the One in ourselves is the foundation of the
Proclean henology. I argue that we need to awaken the One in ourselves, and
that this discovery is a genuine philosophical experience of evidence as
opposed to a mere and unreflected belief. This experience marks the point
where we conceive the transcendent Absolute undoubtedly as ‘what’ it ‘is’ –
as un-circumscribable – and are at the same time ‘thrown back’ upon our-
selves to recognize our own epistemological limits.

Nicolaus Cusanus' Schrift De non aliud 2 entstand in den letzten Lebensjahren des Kardinals im Frühjahr 1462. Cusanus entwirft darin seinen wohl markantesten Gottesbegriff: non aliud. Die Schrift ist als Vierergespräch konzipiert, an dem neben Cusanus selbst sein Arzt, Fernando Martins de Roriz, sein Sekretär, Abt Giovanni Andrea dei Bussi, und ein gewisser Petrus Balbus Pisanus teilnehmen. Letzterer ist besonders zu würdigen, da er auf Cusanus' Wunsch hin die Theologia Platonis des spätantiken Neuplatonikers Proklos übersetzte. Während Fernando als Vertreter des Aristotelismus dargestellt wird, bezeichnet Cusanus Giovanni und Petrus als Kenner des Neuplatonismus; und der Neuplatonismus ist fraglos der geistige Nährboden des Tetralogs. 3 Denn Cusanus selbst nennt Proklos und Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita als Quellen. 4 Überhaupt scheint die Schrift ihre Entstehung Cusanus' Lektüre der Theologia Platonis zu verdanken, deren Übersetzung Petrus spätestens im Frühjahr 1462 abgeschlossen haben dürfte. Cusanus' Marginalien zur Theologia Platonis zeigen, dass diese proklische Schrift unmittelbar in den Entstehungskontext des Nicht-Anderen gehört. 5 Seit Kurzem verdichten sich die Hinweise darauf, dass De non aliud seine Entstehung aber auch den metaphysischen Spekulationen des irischen Philosophen Johannes Scottus Eriugena und insbesondere dessen Konzept der "creatio ex nihilo" verdankt. Cusanus kannte dieses Konzept vor allem durch seine Rezeption der im 12.Jahrhundert von Honorius