Klaudios Nikostratos

Klaudios Nikostratos ( Greek  Κλαύδιος Νικόστρατος ; also Nikostratos of Athens ) was an ancient Greek philosopher ( Middle Platonist ). He lived around the middle of the 2nd century.

life and work

An inscription from Delphi , which was created around the middle of the 2nd century, shows that a group of four Platonists, including Klaudios Nikostratos from Athens, and their descendants were granted Delphic citizenship and other honors and rights. In 1922 the historian of philosophy Karl Praechter was able to show that this Klaudios Nikostratos is identical to the author of an anti-Aristotelian polemic of the same name . The pamphlet has only survived in fragments; the late antique Neo-Platonist Simplikios passed on a number of arguments from the polemical work in his commentary on the categories of Aristotle . Probably not only the arguments expressly attributed to him come from Nikostratos, but also many others that Simplikios communicates without citing the source.

In the pamphlet, Nikostratos dealt critically with the categories of Aristotle. In doing so, he followed the example of an earlier Middle Platonist named Lukios , from whose also only fragmentary script against the categories he adopted some arguments. The two Middle Platonists cited aporias (unanswered questions, difficulties) as objections to the theory of categories . Her writings were probably not systematic commentaries on the categories , but only collections of relevant aporias. Assumptions about other sources used by Nikostratos can only be based on the similarity of thought processes. Praechter's assumption that he was referring to the Peripatetic Herminos has proven to be incorrect.

As part of his efforts to show the inadequacy and flawedness of the Aristotelian system, Nikostratos put together a wealth of different arguments. He proceeded systematically and also discussed the second part of the categories , the “post-predicaments”, the authenticity of which the Peripatetic Andronikos of Rhodes had denied. He found objections to almost all doctrinal statements in Aristotle's work. Among other things, he pointed out a contradiction between the categories and the physics of Aristotle: In physics , arising and ceasing are not counted among the movements, in the categories they are considered movements. The heterogeneous character of his collection of arguments of varying quality gave rise to the assumption in research that the compilation of possible, sometimes superficial objections to the categories was originally intended for training purposes in a school.

As a Platonist, Nikostratos was particularly offended by the fact that in the theory of categories no distinction is made between intelligible and sensually perceptible things and the particularities of the intelligible world are not taken into account. For him the question arose as to the validity of this teaching for the realm of the intelligible. His thought was: If there are intelligible genera that differ from those of the sense world, Aristotle neglected them, and then there are more than the ten categories he assumed. However, if the same ten categories are involved in both areas, the terms are used synonymously. This is inconsistent, since the intelligible belongs to a different ontological level than the sensible.

For his polemics against Aristotle, Nikostratus also used the ideas of the Stoics . From this it was wrongly inferred in older research that he was a stoic.

reception

As is evident from the information provided by Simplikios, Nikostratos had followers. It is possible that his pamphlet superseded that of his predecessor Lukios, so that later authors knew the argument of Lukios only from the description of Nicostratos. The Middle Platonist Attikos , an opponent of Aristotelian philosophy living in the second half of the 2nd century, made use of at least one of his arguments.

The Aristotle criticism of Nikostratus found attention in Neoplatonism. In the 3rd century Plotinus , the founder of Neoplatonism, used it for his analysis of the theory of categories, which he rejected, but did not name its source. His pupil Porphyrios was of a different opinion; he defended in his big categories , the theory of categories -Comment and contradicted as Simplicius reports, all the objections against them the Mittelplatoniker. The neo-Platonists of late antiquity followed his view, including the influential philosopher Iamblichus , who also wrote a commentary on the categories . It is unclear whether Iamblichus was able to consult the original text of Nikostratus or only knew his views from the quotations in Porphyrios.

At the beginning of the 5th century, Synesius of Cyrene asked in a letter to send a pamphlet by Nicostratus. He was probably referring to the Middle Platonist, whose work was therefore not yet lost at the time, but other authors of this name have also been considered in research.

In the 6th century Simplikios, one of the last known non-Christian Neo-Platonists, probably had no direct access to the pamphlet of Nikostratos. Probably he owed his relevant knowledge only to the category comments of Porphyry and Iamblichus. His judgment was mixed. He rebuked Nikostratos' fundamental opposition to the system of categories, which he considered rash, too polemical and largely unjustified in terms of content. Nevertheless, he credited him with the merit of having given the impetus to a fruitful discussion of the problems mentioned and thereby enabling valuable insights.

Modern research judges similarly to Simplikios. On the one hand, the poor quality of the arguments put forward against the categories out of “pure opposition” is pointed out; on the other hand, it is also recognized that Nikostratos uncovered real weaknesses in Aristotle's work.

Source collections

• Adriano Gioè: Filosofi medioplatonici del II secolo d. C. Testimonianze e frammenti . Bibliopolis, Napoli 2002, ISBN 88-7088-430-9 , pp. 155-219 (source texts with Italian translation and commentary).
• Marie-Luise Lakmann (Ed.): Platonici minores. 1st century BC - 2nd century AD. Prosopography, fragments and testimony with German translation (= Philosophia antiqua , volume 145). Brill, Leiden / Boston 2017, ISBN 978-90-04-31533-4 , pp. 200–208, 634–657 (critical edition)

literature

• Franco Ferrari: Lukios and Klaudios Nikostratos from Athens. In: Christoph Riedweg et al. (Hrsg.): Philosophy of the imperial era and late antiquity (= outline of the history of philosophy . The philosophy of antiquity. Volume 5/1). Schwabe, Basel 2018, ISBN 978-3-7965-3698-4 , pp. 587-590, 688
• Richard Goulet: Nicostratos d'Athènes . In: Richard Goulet (ed.): Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques . Vol. 4, CNRS Éditions, Paris 2005, ISBN 2-271-06386-8 , pp. 699-701.
• Paul Moraux : Aristotelianism among the Greeks from Andronikos to Alexander of Aphrodisias . Vol. 2, de Gruyter, Berlin 1984, ISBN 3-11-009919-5 , pp. 431 f., 528-563.
• Daniela Patrizia Taormina: Nicostrato contro Aristotle. "Aristotle contro Nicostrato" . In: Françoise Dastur, Carlos Lévy (ed.): Études de philosophie ancienne et de phenoménologie . L'Harmattan, Paris 1999, ISBN 2-7384-8230-9 , pp. 73-127.

Remarks

1. ^ Fouilles de Delphes III, 4, 94 . Greek text and German translation by Heinrich Dörrie , Matthias Baltes : Der Platonismus in der Antike , Vol. 3, Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1993, p. 14 f. (and commentary on p. 144 f.).
2. ^ Karl Praechter: Nikostratus the Platonist . In: Hermes 57, 1922, pp. 481–517, here: 485–492, also in: Karl Praechter: Kleine Schriften , Hildesheim 1973, pp. 101–137, here: 105–112; for later research see Adriano Gioè: Filosofi medioplatonici del II secolo d. C. Testimonianze e frammenti , Napoli 2002, p. 181 f.
3. ^ Paul Moraux: The Aristotelianism among the Greeks from Andronikos to Alexander von Aphrodisias , Vol. 2, Berlin 1984, p. 529.
4. ^ Adriano Gioè: Filosofi medioplatonici del II secolo d. C. Testimonianze e frammenti , Napoli 2002, p. 178 (text and translation), 216 f. (Comment).
5. ^ Kurt von Fritz : Claudius Nikostratos. In: Paulys Realencyclopadie der classischen Antiquity Science (RE). Volume XVII, 1, Stuttgart 1936, Sp. 547-551, here: 548 f.
6. ↑ Paul Moraux: Aristotelianism among the Greeks from Andronikos to Alexander von Aphrodisias , Vol. 2, Berlin 1984, p. 542 f.
7. ^ Karl Praechter: Nikostratus the Platonist . In: Hermes 57, 1922, pp. 481-517, here: 487-492.
8. ↑ On this argument see Kevin L. Flannery: The Synonymy of Homonyms . In: Archive for the history of philosophy 81, 1999, pp. 268–289.
9. ↑ Of the two categories - Comments by Porphyry, only the small one has survived; the great one dedicated to Gedaleios is lost.
10. ^ Synesios, Letter 129; Text from the relevant passage in Adriano Gioè: Filosofi medioplatonici del II secolo d. C. Testimonianze e frammenti , Napoli 2002, p. 180, commentary on p. 218 f.
11. ^ Richard Goulet: Nicostratos d'Athènes . In: Richard Goulet (ed.): Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques , Vol. 4, Paris 2005, pp. 699–701, here: 701.
12. ^ Adriano Gioè: Filosofi medioplatonici del II secolo d. C. Testimonianze e frammenti , Napoli 2002, p. 119 f. (Text of the Simplikios); Heinrich Dörrie, Matthias Baltes: Platonism in antiquity , vol. 3, Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1993, pp. 66 f., 258 f.
13. ^ For example, Matthias Baltes, Marie-Luise Lakmann: Klaudios Nikostratos . In: Der Neue Pauly , Vol. 8, Stuttgart 2000, Col. 941. Cf. Karl Praechter: Nikostratos der Platoniker . In: Hermes 57, 1922, pp. 481-517, here: 495-498 (with examples); Paul Moraux: Aristotelianism among the Greeks from Andronikos to Alexander von Aphrodisias , Vol. 2, Berlin 1984, pp. 528, 531, 563.