عناصر مشابهة
تصور الشر في مدرسة الإسكندرية: اللاهوتية والفلسفية
| العنوان بلغة أخرى: | Evil Perception in Alexandria School of Theological and Philosophical |
|---|---|
| المصدر: | مجلة أوراق كلاسيكية |
| الناشر: |
جامعة القاهرة - كلية الآداب - قسم الدراسات اليونانية واللاتينية
|
| المؤلف الرئيسي: | |
| المجلد/العدد: | ع17 |
| محكمة: | نعم |
| الدولة: | مصر |
| التاريخ الميلادي: | 2020 |
| الصفحات: | 467 - 535 |
| DOI: | 10.21608/acl.2020.130592 |
| ISSN: | 2314-7415 |
| رقم MD: | 1107806 |
| نوع المحتوى: | بحوث ومقالات |
| اللغة: | Arabic |
| قواعد المعلومات: | AraBase |
| مواضيع: | |
| رابط المحتوى: |
| المستخلص: | The issue of evil in the late School of Alexandria, which extended from the 4th until the beginning of the seventh centuries AD, has been an important focus of the search for how to save man from all that causes him tension and anxiety in his worldly situation, especially his other worldly destiny. This paper investigates the situation after the fusion of Greek thought with eastern intellectual currents and positive and heavenly religions from the first to the sixth centuries AD, especially with the closure of schools of pagan thought by Emperor Justinian in 529 AD. The main focus of this study is the perception of evil between John Philoponus and Simplicius, who were both disciples of Ammonius Son of Hermeias, who died in 517 AD and who was the head of the updated Platonic School in Alexandria at the end of the 5th century AD. The importance of John Philoponus is that he shows Porphyry‟ and Proclus' misunderstanding of Aristotle's philosophy, and the mistake of their attempt to integrate Aristotle's principles with their updated Platonic principles. They even made a mistake in trying to reconcile Aristotle with the theory of platonic ideals. Instead, they offered a Christian interpretation of the Aristotelian heritage. In explaining Aristotle's Book of Nature, Simplicius went on to explain: "Learning philosophy ή Φιλοσουία is the only way to free the human soul ή ψυχή, which was ignored by Christians, whom he described as ignorant, especially in their strange doctrine of salvation. Simplicius denounces the Christians‟ disbelief in the ascent of man to the divine world, and their belief in God's descent into man, which is a denial of Almighty and Divine Integrity." Although the philosophical idea of salvation formulated by the Plato's agrees with the Christian doctrines of redemption and the salvation of the world from the first sin, the philosophers and theologians have not accepted the foundations upon which the other is launched. Philosophers await salvation by a philosopher who saves them from the desecration of the material through knowledge ή επιστήμη and mental meditation; whereas theologians believe that their rescuer is the God ο θεος that embodies the forgiveness of sins and the spread of peace and love among human beings commanding humanity to eternal happiness through faith. I have come to the following conclusions: 1- The view of the old School of Alexandria to the source of evil in the world differs from that of the followers of the late School of Alexandria; the first blend evil and heuli ή ὕλη following the Platonic approach and distinguishing between the physical and the reasonable worlds; the second, Alexandria late school philosophers, differ in their approach as they believe in voluntary evil and thus violating Platonic vision and following Aristotelian idea of evil. 2- The establishment of Proclus in terms of his vision of the cause of self-awareness and his responsibility for good and evil to the visions of the late Alexandria school philosophers and their adoption of the idea of voluntary evil by man and not God. This led Simplicius for example to revive the stoic perception of evil, especially in Epictetus with the clarity of the idea of intent or intention as a source of good or evil. 3- At the hands of some Alexandria late school philosophers, the conflict between Plato and Aristotle turns to a preference for the Aristotelian scientific vision and their attempt to reconcile them by showing Plato's scientific side through the dialogue with Timaeus, especially their reconciliation between the Platonic manufacturer and the Aristotelian engine, which is manifested in their reconciliation between the power and the will of God and the freedom of human will. 4- The conflict between John Philoponus and Simplicius is represented by their attempt to distinguish between Christian theology and Greek philosophy, although they both emphasize the idea of voluntary evil and man's moral, cognitive and mental responsibility towards good and evil; the idea which confirms the agreement of Christian theology and Greek philosophy on the moral side. |
|---|
