7 ms·

I suggest you read this book: https://www.amazon.com/Aristotle-East-West-Metaphysics-Christendom/dp/0521035562/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8 https://www.a

by iorrus 9y ago

I suggest you read this book: https://www.amazon.com/Aristotle-East-West-Metaphysics-Christendom/dp/0521035562/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8 https://www.amazon.com/Aristotle-East-West-Metaphysics-Chris... It's simply not true that Aristotle died out in Byzantium. All these intellectual currents were absorbed into the Christian theology of Byzantium which is Orthodox and different from Western Christiandom. See also when released: http://www.cambridge.org/gb/academic/subjects/history/european-history-general-interest/cambridge-intellectual-history-byzantium http://www.cambridge.org/gb/academic/subjects/history/europe...

boomboomsubban 9y ago
The Orthodox split happened in 1054. Though there was a gradual shift apart before that they were very closely related. If your argument was that Orthodox Christianity moved towards Aristotle a century before the West, that seems to be well backed up. Your first book lists five people covered in the book, all of them outside the period being discussed. I have no idea why you think the second one will support your argument.
- iorrus 9y ago
  My argument is that Aristotle never dies out. See for instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliotheca_(Photius) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliotheca_(Photius) Lots of emperors were very learned: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_VII https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_VII And there were philosophers throughout that time period: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Psellos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Psellos What makes you think Aristotle was neglected?
  - boomboomsubban 9y ago
    The Bibliotheca shows my point, the Roman Christians largely kept knowledge they considered important, and this didn't include Aristotle. The table of contents is full of Christian and Roman subjects, with only a few ancient Greeks mentioned. Aristotle is absent. The neoplatonic views of Christianity during the period are well known, and several hundred years of that lead to Aristotle being neglected.
    - iorrus 9y ago
      If you read it Aristotle is frequently cited e.g codex 242 and 249. Having read Aristotle was basically assumed at the time and hardly worth mentioning in the TOC of a book of this sort. See: http://neoskosmos.com/news/en/photius-dr-nick-trakakis-2011 http://neoskosmos.com/news/en/photius-dr-nick-trakakis-2011 Interesting article: http://grbs.library.duke.edu/article/download/11951/4059 http://grbs.library.duke.edu/article/download/11951/4059 Also look at the works of Arethas who was active around this time. The works of Aristotle were frequently cited throughout Byzantine history. Lots of neoplatonists wrote commentaries on Aristotle so it's not like they're mutually exclusive.
      - boomboomsubban 9y ago
        2/3rds of the book has a public domain translation, "frequent" is a stretch. Your unsourced article says he was ignored for being in wide circulation, but there are multiple works discussing Plato. Did you read that article? Again, it agrees with everything I'm saying. Sixth century authors, five centuries with almost nothing, then a return. Even the sixth century mentions they were unfamiliar with Aristotle's actual works, except maybe reading "Categories," the only work I can find Photius or Aretha's commenting on. And it mentions repeatedly that Plato had dominance, even saying Aristotlean views were near heresy at times.
        iorrus 9y ago
        We are reading the same article and getting completely different readings. Both those links were written by professors in this exact area. One states the Aristotle was in wide circulation, the other states that photius likely wrote textbooks for use in schools on aristotle so he was hardly neglected. Did you read about Arethas? We even have knowledge of Photius's textbook on Aristotle's topics. There were no new commentaries on Aristotle for a long time but that doesn't mean he was forgotten. Notice also throughout all these links that it is unanimous that after Islamic invasion learning in general went into quick and rapid decline. Good article: http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/byzantine-philosophy http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanac...

by iorrus 9y ago

boomboomsubban 9y ago

The Orthodox split happened in 1054. Though there was a gradual shift apart before that they were very closely related. If your argument was that Orthodox Christianity moved towards Aristotle a century before the West, that seems to be well backed up. Your first book lists five people covered in the book, all of them outside the period being discussed. I have no idea why you think the second one will support your argument.

iorrus 9y ago
My argument is that Aristotle never dies out. See for instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliotheca_(Photius) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliotheca_(Photius) Lots of emperors were very learned: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_VII https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_VII And there were philosophers throughout that time period: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Psellos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Psellos What makes you think Aristotle was neglected?
- boomboomsubban 9y ago
  The Bibliotheca shows my point, the Roman Christians largely kept knowledge they considered important, and this didn't include Aristotle. The table of contents is full of Christian and Roman subjects, with only a few ancient Greeks mentioned. Aristotle is absent. The neoplatonic views of Christianity during the period are well known, and several hundred years of that lead to Aristotle being neglected.
  - iorrus 9y ago
    If you read it Aristotle is frequently cited e.g codex 242 and 249. Having read Aristotle was basically assumed at the time and hardly worth mentioning in the TOC of a book of this sort. See: http://neoskosmos.com/news/en/photius-dr-nick-trakakis-2011 http://neoskosmos.com/news/en/photius-dr-nick-trakakis-2011 Interesting article: http://grbs.library.duke.edu/article/download/11951/4059 http://grbs.library.duke.edu/article/download/11951/4059 Also look at the works of Arethas who was active around this time. The works of Aristotle were frequently cited throughout Byzantine history. Lots of neoplatonists wrote commentaries on Aristotle so it's not like they're mutually exclusive.
    - boomboomsubban 9y ago
      2/3rds of the book has a public domain translation, "frequent" is a stretch. Your unsourced article says he was ignored for being in wide circulation, but there are multiple works discussing Plato. Did you read that article? Again, it agrees with everything I'm saying. Sixth century authors, five centuries with almost nothing, then a return. Even the sixth century mentions they were unfamiliar with Aristotle's actual works, except maybe reading "Categories," the only work I can find Photius or Aretha's commenting on. And it mentions repeatedly that Plato had dominance, even saying Aristotlean views were near heresy at times.
      - iorrus 9y ago
        We are reading the same article and getting completely different readings. Both those links were written by professors in this exact area. One states the Aristotle was in wide circulation, the other states that photius likely wrote textbooks for use in schools on aristotle so he was hardly neglected. Did you read about Arethas? We even have knowledge of Photius's textbook on Aristotle's topics. There were no new commentaries on Aristotle for a long time but that doesn't mean he was forgotten. Notice also throughout all these links that it is unanimous that after Islamic invasion learning in general went into quick and rapid decline. Good article: http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/byzantine-philosophy http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanac...