Institute of Sociology
of the Federal Center of Theoretical and Applied Sociology
of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Nogovitsin O.N. (2018) The question of the unity of Being in the treatise “On the difference between Plato and Aristotle” by George Gemistos Plethon. In: 26th International Conference “The universe of Platonic thought” Plato's Heritage from a Historical Perspective: Intellectual transformations and New Research Strategies. St. Petersburg, August 28–30, 2018. St. Petersburg: Platonovsky Philosophical Society, NGO, 2018. P. 245-258.



Nogovitsin O.N. (2018) The question of the unity of Being in the treatise “On the difference between Plato and Aristotle” by George Gemistos Plethon. In: 26th International Conference “The universe of Platonic thought” Plato`s Heritage from a Historical Perspective: Intellectual transformations and New Research Strategies. St. Petersburg, August 28–30, 2018. St. Petersburg: Platonovsky Philosophical Society, NGO, 2018. P. 245-258.
ISBN 978-5-9909527-3-7
DOI нет

Posted on site: 11.03.19

Текст статьи.


Abstract

The article is dedicated to analysis of the rationale George Gemistos Plethon puts forth in regard of the unity of the concept of being in his The article is dedicated to analysis of the rationale GeorgeGemistos Plethon puts forth in regard of the unity of the concept of being in histreatises “On the difference between Plato and Aristotle”. The arguments of Plethon from the treatise “Against the writing of Scholarios in defense of Aristotlle”, which was written in response to George Scholarios’ objections to the first Plethon’s treatise, are joined hereto as well. Plethon considers the key ontological issue on the basis of the difference between Aristotle’s position, who affirmed the being to be spoken out as a predicate in homonymic way (in different senses) and Plato’s view, whom Plethon reckons as the core supporter of the thesis on the unity of being, that the being is spoken out as a predicate in synonymic way (in a single sense). For Plethon, such synonymy appears a consequence of creationist directive that God is a creator of all being, thus the order of creation in its categorical ligaments contains principal unity of what is regularized within the design of all the created whole of parts. On the contrary, Aristotle proceeds from the concept of God as a principle of arranging the multitude of the self-substantiated being. And though he admits the synonymy in the case of determination by genera and species, i. e. under the category of “essence”, in the thought of Plethon, he does it only on an occasional basis. The Plethon’s own discourse is set on an attempt to criticize Aristotle by the conceptual means of the very Aristotle’s doctrine. This is determined by the scholarly tradition of Neo-Platonist comments on Aristotle which has prevailed in the philosophical school of Plethon. However, he does not accommodate the Aristotle’s notions to Plato’s teaching. He rather provides in his treatise a specimen of how to originally treat the conceptual content of some of them, which allows Plethon to apply these concepts in polemics with Aristotle himself and his followers among the learned Christians.

Content (in russ)


↑