Atticus (philosopher)

Atticus was an ancient Greek philosopher in the tradition of Platonism. He lived in the second half of the 2nd century. His life coincided with the era of Mittelplatonismus to its renowned representatives he belonged.

From the fragmentary surviving writings of Atticus is evident that he was minded conservative and the original pure doctrine of Plato, of whose accuracy he was convinced wanted to clean of corruption. In particular, he turned against the intrusion of elements of Aristotelianism. As Plato boom Atticus thought philological and advocated a literal, not metaphorical interpretation of the doctrine of creation of the school 's founder. This resulted in him accepting that the world had a beginning in time. This, together with his understanding of the creator god and the idea of ​​teaching as well as his anti-Aristotelian attitude represented Attikos a dedicated counter-position to views which were part of the core of the body of thought of late antique Neoplatonism later.

Life

About the origin of the Attikos nothing is known about his life very little. In the late ancient chronicle of Eusebius of Caesarea, the Jerome translated into Latin, his philosophical activity is mentioned in a brief entry to the year 176. Since 176 was the year in which Emperor Marcus Aurelius in Athens einrichtete four philosophical chairs, year dates indicated may be a connection with this action; Atticus was perhaps the first holder of the chair of Platonic philosophy. Among his pupils was Harpocration of Argos.

Works

From the works of Atticus only fragments remain, which provides especially Eusebius of Caesarea in his Praeparatio evangelica. Some of them, however, are extensive and provide a detailed impression of its positions. Most fragments are from Atticus ' commentary on Plato's Timaeus; the longest, which occupy by far the most space in the critical edition, are his treatise Against those who wish to explain Plato's teachings by Aristotle removed. He also wrote a review of Plato's dialogue Phaedrus. Whether he commented on Plato's Phaedo and a treatise on the soul (or the soul of the world ) wrote, is uncertain. It is unlikely the hypothesis that he also commented on the categories of Aristotle. As a commentator Atticus was primarily a conscientious philologist; he held strictly to the terms of the annotated text to go out instead of own philosophical speculation.

Teaching

A concern of Atticus, on which he lays great stress, is a clear distinction between Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy. He strongly opposes attempts to interpret Plato's works from the Aristotelian point of view, and thus to construct a harmony between Plato and Aristotle. The teachings of Aristotle he considers wrong. He thinks that Aristotle had his philosophy systematically applied as a counter- concept to Platonism.

Theology and ontology

Atticus considers the demiurge ( creator of the world ) of the Timaeus as the supreme God. Ontologically he sees him as the supreme principle; he identifies it with the Platonic idea of ​​the Good, the Good itself, which appears as the supreme deity in Plato's Republic. He succeeds the represented by albinos conservative direction Mittelplatonismus and contradicts the view of the prominent Mittelplatonikers Numenios. Numenius had - regarded the Demiurge as ontologically separate, the subordinate " good in itself" instance - as well as the later Neoplatonists Plotinus and Proclus. According to the common opinion of the Mittelplatoniker the demiurge creates the world by looks of things on the archetypes (ideas), that is, they think, because his vision is a way of thinking and the ideas are his thoughts. Atticus shares this view, but taking in contrast to most Mittelplatonikern to not know that the world of ideas is in the mind ( nous ) of the Demiurge. Rather, he assigns it to a separate existence outside the Nous, at the level of the soul.

A feature of the Theology of Atticus is that he does not share the otherwise prevailing in the ancient Platonists believe that the supreme deity necessarily knows no change because of their perfection. The God of Atticus thinks, plans, waits decides and turns to the things created by Him in personal care to. He is not only the spirit, but the mind and soul. Thus, the idea of ​​God is this philosopher that of the folk religion ( and Christianity ) is closer than the traditional concept of God the Platonists. Divine Providence is one of the lessons that Atticus defends the particularly strongly.

Doctrine of creation

In the controversial question of whether the world of creation in Plato's Timaeus is to be understood in terms of a temporal beginning of the world, Atticus argues for the chronological beginning. He is, according to its general philological mindset a literal understanding of the text preference. With this interpretation, he opposes the position of many Platonists, which for philosophical reasons, the cosmos must be beginningless and therefore Plato's statements about creation are interpreted metaphorically. According to the metaphorical interpretation of Plato does not mean an act of creation at any given time, but want to express only one on time dependence of the existing eternally descriptive of the world is also eternal Godhead. Atticus, however, is of the view that there was a time after Plato's doctrine before the Demiurge created the world and was in being. In it, he sees no contradiction to his belief that the being of the Demiurge is the spawning. He thinks namely, the Demiurge did before he created the world as an image, already spawned their archetype ( paradigm ) and preserved. As a perpetual cause of archetypal ideas of the Demiurge had never been idle, which would be incompatible with its nature. The archetype writes Attikos not own, involved in the creation of the world forces; it has the function of a world plan of the Demiurge with him and does not belong to the domain of uncreated. Despite these relatively low ranking for a Platonist world of ideas but he sees it as more than just the means to the end of the generation of the cosmos; it has its value in itself.

According to the text of Plato's Timaeus, is holding Atticus to that already existing matter was the creator as he created the world, who are in irregular motion ( chaos) was located. Accordingly, the matter was not a part of creation. Therefore, it Attikos that takes a unique act of creation of the cosmos, from a uncreated, independent of the Demiurge matter ( hyle ) from. He is committed to a radical dualism: God and matter exist independently and originally nothing to do with each other.

There was in this model, the primordial matter before the origin of the world in motion, the question arises as to the cause of this movement. Atticus, who returns every movement on a soul as the author, the matter will assign its own soul. He considered the matter so as animate ( hylozoism ). Since the movement of vorkosmischen matter, according to the Timaeus was chaotic, is for Atticus as the cause of this movement is no perfect by nature soul into consideration, because a perfect or good soul could produce just fine. Concludes from Atticus, the soul of the original matter must have been even disordered and therefore " bad" ( Kake ). It is for him along with the bustling of her matter the cause of the bad in the world. Atticus uses the characteristic of his teaching technical term " übeltuende soul" ( psyche kakergétis ). Only through the act of creation of the Demiurge, the poor soul of matter have received a divine adjunct. Thus they have received interest in the world of ideas and the Nous and accepted reason. Since then, they lead from minor movements. Thus, the originally evil soul of the matter for good (though not perfect overall ) soul of the world has become. However, it was the " übeltuende soul " has not been fully converted, but there is a bad part of the soul continues in the cosmos and unfolding continue to a limited extent their effects. The inherent evil of matter will not remedied by the change in their soul, but limited; affects it only in the region between the moon and the ( center of the world as imagined) from Earth. This area is the only part of the cosmos, in which occur the Evil Plato's doctrine.

The idea that the soul of the world their reason and goodness owes the creative deity, Atticus tells in principle with other Platonists. But as he conceives the creation time, he takes as opposed to those who interpret it metaphorically, a real period in the past, where there were no good soul of the world, but only the poor soul of matter. Thus, in principle changeable for him the soul of the world. Just as in the doctrine of God is Atticus so applies also here from the traditional belief of the Platonists, are all cosmic causes because of their perfection necessarily beyond any change.

In contrast to the thinkers that hold the cosmos for no beginning and Plato's account of creation for metaphorically to Atticus is forced to deal with the paradox of a temporal origin of the time. According to the Timaeus the time came together with the cosmos. Atticus solves this problem by adopting two types of time: a pre-cosmic unordered and ordered the man confided that existed only since the creation. He says the timing of the act of creation was not chosen arbitrarily, but the creators have observed the changes of chaos until this had come in a range suitable for the creation of the world state.

With his doctrine of creation Attikos combats the Aristotelian view, everything that has become must inevitably perish. Although he assumes a world first, but not a world end. As something arisings and mutable the world is indeed actually their very nature ephemeral, but prevents the will of the Demiurge their resolution. There is no reason to deny the Creator, the ability to preserve his creation before the fall.

Doctrine of the soul

Strongly defended Attikos the Platonic doctrine of the immortality of the soul against Aristotle. He accuses Aristotle to represent a soul believes that it is tantamount to denying not only the activities of the soul, but also their intrinsic character and separate them from the mind ( nous ); to bring to the soul superfluous.

Atticus teaches human immortal rational soul ( psyche logiké ) should be understood as the union of a divine and an irrational soul. He considers the irrational soul as the substrate, the divine as the ordering principle and as a carrier of the Nous. In addition, he also holds a rational loose, transient life principle ( álogos zoe ). This principle he identifies with the mortal aspects of the soul in the Timaeus, which are the source of passionate desire. It is from his point of view not a real part of the soul, but only a temporary addition, the soul for the duration of their stay in the body receives. This addition comes from the " übeltuenden " soul of matter and returns at the death of man back to her. For the embryo Atticus apparently takes to revitalize and molding solely by the irrational principle of life; the embryo is for him no man, but becomes such when the rational soul should occur only later from the outside.

The World Soul assigns and permeates everything, because only when a single -souled energy that binds everything together and keeps them the universe can be managed efficiently and beautiful.

Ethics

In ethics Attikos occurs ' apparent rejection of Aristotelianism with particular sharpness. He defends the Platonic doctrine that virtue alone is sufficient for obtaining the eudaimonia, against the view of the Aristotelians. The Aristotelian doctrine states for eudaimonia also bodily and external goods would be required. Thus, it is necessary that the virtuous man, who strive for eudaimonia, will additionally benefited from favorable external circumstances, otherwise the eudaimonia was out of his reach. Atticus argues against the theory that the happiness of man depends also of noble origin, physical beauty and prosperity. In it, he sees a low and misguided thinking.

Reception

Antiquity

The effect of Atticus ' philosophy was considerable and persistent. With its cosmology and psychology, he influenced a famous contemporary, the physician Galen, however, who refused his views on the formation of the embryo. The prominent Peripatetic Alexander of Aphrodisias sat down with Atticus ' criticism apart from Aristotle. In the 3rd century Platonist Longinus was influenced by the metaphysics of Atticus.

In the Neo-Platonic school, founded Plotinus in the 3rd century in Rome, were Atticus ' Plato Comments on the curriculum. Plotinus' student Porphyry and his pupil and adversary Iamblichus used the Timaeus comment extensively. Other Neoplatonists such as Proclus, Syrianos, Damascius and Simplicius expressed - often critical - to teachings of Atticus. They, however, were based at least in part, to its original writings, but on the works of Porphyry and Iamblichus. Proclus became deeply involved with the views of Mittelplatonikers. He lifted - probably ironically - Atticus ' extraordinary diligence forth. Hierocles was probably that Plato and Aristotle constitute particularly Attikos in mind when he attacked philosophers as representatives of opposing positions. In Neoplatonic circles the polemic against Aristotle displeased; teacher Ammonius Sakkas already Plotinus had tried in the 3rd century to show a harmony of Plato and Aristotle. The opinion of Atticus that the ideas were outside the Nous, and his idea of ​​the Demiurge were wrong from the perspective of the Neoplatonists. His doctrine of the temporal origin of the world and from a time before the beginning of the world seemed to them absurd.

Strong attention was Atticus also among the Christians, since its conception of God is quite compatible with the Christian and comes to meet his interpretation of Plato's account of creation of the Christian doctrine of creation. Among the Christian writers who mention or quote him belong Eusebius of Caesarea, Theodoret, John Philoponus and Aeneas of Gaza. The late antique theologian Arius ( Arios ), after Arianism is named, shows in his theological thinking parallels to the ideas of Atticus, but for a direct influence, there is no concrete evidence.

Modern

In modern research is critically noted that the discussion of Atticus with Aristotelianism was marked by his polemical intention and that he had often drawn a superficial and distorted picture of the Aristotelian philosophy. Is also criticized that Atticus his own concerns, explain the authentic philosophy of Plato, was not done justice because he had an " in improper simplification " of Platonic ontology guilty. On the other hand, it is also acknowledged that he had managed to design a system that can be had in terms of its consistency with the then popular alternative models to measure and from today's perspective deserve attention.

Text editions and translations

• Édouard des Places (ed.): Atticus: Fragments. Les Belles Lettres, Paris 1977 ( critical edition of the Greek text with French translation )
• Olof Gigon (ed.): Atticus, about the contrast between Plato and Aristotle. In: Olof Gigon (ed.): Aristotle: Introduction writings. German Taschenbuch Verlag, Munich 1982, ISBN 3-423-06117-0, pp. 293-321 ( German translation only )