2015 – 2017: Self-Constitution and Discursive Mediation in Late Neoplatonism

ABSTRACT

The present project is focused on the history of Greek Neoplatonism, the tradition that dominated philosophical reflection during Late Antiquity (II–VI centuries CE). The aim of this project is to trace the evolution of the theories regarding the discursive soul, focusing on the idea of self-constitution, on a time span that stretches from Plotinus to Damascius. In this way, our project engages a thorough debate related to philosophy of language, but also approaches complex questions of epistemology concerning soul, consciousness and self-knowledge.

We will explore the doctrinal background of self-constitution (in the works of Plotinus and Porphyry), its emergence within the speculative horizon of philosophy (with Proclus), its evolution (in Damascius’ work) and the influence of this problem in the Christian tradition of Late Antiquity. Throughout our analysis – which joins translation and research objectives – self-constitution will be considered in strict connection with the problem of discursive mediation, to which it is essentially linked.

The problematic of self-constitution is of maximal scientific relevance: we will prove that it represents the solution given by Late Neoplatonism to the question of the discursive inadequacy to superior levels of reality. Thus, self-constitution offers the theoretical ground starting from which Late Neoplatonic philosophers conceive the return of the soul towards real being and towards the unitary origin of all things.

PROJECT INFO

  • Project director: Dr. Marilena VLAD
  • Project title: Self-Constitution and Discursive Mediation in Late Neoplatonism
  • Project code: PN-II-RU-TE-2014-4-0569
  • Contract no.: 325/ 01.10.2015
  • Program: “Tinere Echipe”
  • Financed by: CNCS-UEFISCDI
  • Period of Time: October 2015 – November 2017
  • Funding: 549.686 lei

EVENTS

Workshop “Medierea discursivă în neoplatonism”

Sâmbătă 17 decembrie 2016, 9.00-14.00 (ICUB, str. Dimitrie Brândză nr. 1, București)

Argument: Workshopul „Medierea discursivă în neoplatonism” face parte din proiectul de cercetare intitulat „Self-constitution and discursive mediation in Neoplatonism“ (PN-II-RU-TE-2014-4-0569). Problema de la care pornește această întâlnire de lucru este aceea că, atunci când încercăm să vorbim despre ceva (și în special atunci când ne referim la lumea ideilor, la formele directoare ale realității), discursul însuși pare să joace un dublu rol: nu numai acela de intermediere, de mijloc prin care expunem și înțelegem realitatea, ci și un rol mai degrabă negativ, împiedicând accesul la lucrurile însele, dedublând lucrurile și înlocuindu-le cu imaginea lor discursivă.

Această problemă este una pe care autorii neoplatonici au identificat-o și au încercat să o depășească în diverse maniere. Vom discuta sursele platonice ale acestei probleme, felul în care traversează ea tradiția neoplatonică (de la Plotin la Damascius), precum și preluarea ei în tradiția creștină (Dionisie Areopagitul și Maxim Mărturisitorul)

  • Andrei Timotin: “Câteva remarci despre natura limbajului la Plotin”
  • Daniela Tarbă: “Condiționarea discursivă a sensibilității în Timaios
  • Gheorghe Pașcalău: “Sensibilitate si intelect ca mediere a adevarului teologic in gandirea imparatului Iulian”
  • Marilena Vlad: “Damascius și travaliile gândirii”
  • Andrei Găitănaru: “Sensul doxologiei în corpusul dionisian, sau de ce nu putem vorbi despre o ‘a treia cale’”
  • Florin Crâșmăreanu: “Limitele discursivității și ‘cinstirea în tăcere’ la Maxim Mărturisitorul”

PANEL

“Self-constitution and self-knowledge in the Neoplatonic tradition” coordinated by Marilena Vlad at the 15th annual conference of the International Society for Neoplatonic Studies (ISNS), Olomouc, Czech Republic, 2017 June 14-17

Participants:

  • Andrei Timotin,  “The Causality of the First Principle and the Theory of Two Acts in Plotinus, Enn. V 4 (7)”
  • Daniela Elena Tarbǎ, “Self-constitution of the One in Plotinus’ view”
  • Gheorghe Pașcalău, „Time as a Self-Constituted Intellect in the Philosophy of Proclus“
  • Marilena Vlad, “The self-constituted being. Proclus and Damascius”
  • Chiara Militello, “Is self-knowledge one or multiple? Consciousness in ‘Simplicius’, Commentary on On the Soul”
  • François Lortie, “Philosophy and Philology in Proclus‘ Interpretation of Plato”

Talk: Marilena Vlad: “Parler de Dieu et parler à Dieu: Damascius et Denys l’Aréopagite sur le rôle de la discursivité”, Université de Fribourg, Suisse, 21 March 2016.

In this conference, I discuss an issue that equally concerns Damascius and Dionysius the Areopagite, but that the two thinkers address in a different way. The first principle is inexpressible in itself. However, we are to address it in some way, if only to describe it as inaccessible. In this regard, in my conference, I show that there is a common theme linking the perspectives of the two authors, namely the idea that the first principle (God) is “marvelous” (thaumastos), just because he cannot accept any name and cannot be caught in any discursive description. However, I show that, if for Damascius this means we should refrain from using any name, however, for Dionysius, the absence of the name is itself already a name, which makes us able to call God through all possible divine names, despite the fact that he remains essentially indescribable. I expanded this conference and later turned it into a journal article that I submitted for publication in the journal Revue philosophique et théologique de Fribourg (BDI).

Talk: Marilena Vlad: “L’être premier chez Proclus et Denys l’Aréopagite”Les Eléments de théologie et le Livre des causes du Ve au XVIIe siècle, le 14-15-16 avril, à Paris (en Sorbonne).

I exposed the difficulties inherent in trying to capture being first through discourse in Proclus’ perspective. I discussed the problem of the first being, as it appears in Proclus’ treatise Elements of Theology and in Dionysius’ Divine Names. The aim was to identify the common doctrinal points, as well as the radical difference between the two perspectives. I have shown that Proclus explains being by referring to the non-being of the One, who remains unparticipated, above the henads and above being. Instead, Dionysius explains being without passing through successive levels of causality. In this regard, for him, the cause of being is precisely the One who says being, and who, by saying it, gives being. This is what Dionysius paradoxically calls “the being above being”. In the next period of the project, I will develop this conference into a scientific paper that will be submitted for publication in a collective volume.

Journal Article: Marilena Vlad, “Stepping into the Void: Proclus and Damascius on Approaching the First Principle”, in: International Journal of the Platonic Tradition, 2017 (ISI, accepted for publication)

In this article, I analyze how the attempt to grasp the first principle affects our discourse. More precisely, I concentrate on a phenomenon that Proclus and Damascius call “stepping into the void” but that the two philosophers understand differently. The idea of “stepping into the void” (κενεμβατεῖν), which can be traced back to Plotinus, radically differentiates the philosophical perspectives of Damascius and Proclus. Thus, Proclus warns that, talking about the first principle, taking him as an object of thought, is actually a negative way of “stepping into the void”, which should be avoided. On the contrary, Damascius begins his approach from this warning of Proclus, and tries to show that the only appropriate manner to uncover the absolute principle is precisely through this “stepping into the void”, this time, in a positive sense, namely through a constant attempt to understand that the first principle is precisely that which overturns our speech.

Journal Article: Marilena Vlad, “Defying words: Damascius and the travail of the unsayable”, in: Chôra – Revue d’Études Anciennes et Médiévales: Discursive Mediation in Neoplatonism, 2017 (BDI, accepted for publication);

I focused on the theme of the first principle in Damascius’ perspective. The problem is to know to what extent discursiveness – the fact of speaking about this principle – affects the problem itself and our manner of access to it. Any attempt to refine our view on the principle only leads us further away from it. What is Damascius’ solution? What is the role of the discourse in our attempt to grasp the principle? I analyzed the manner in which Damascius understands his own discourse and how he turns this inevitably inadequate discourse into a manner of producing the consciousness of the principle. The principle is not described, but rather made manifest through an intellective “birth labor” (ὠδίς). I have demonstrated that this “labor” is not the sign of an inability to grasp the principle. On the contrary, it represents an indirect, non-descriptive, but very rigorous manner of grasping the presence of the principle in the discourse and through the discourse.

Journal Article: Andrei Timotin, “Langage discursif et non discursif chez Plotin. A propos d’Enn. IV, 3 [27], 18”, in: Marilena Vlad (ed.), Chôra – Revue d’Études Anciennes et Médiévales: Discursive Mediation in Neoplatonism, 2017 (BDI, accepted for publication);

In this study, A. Timotin showed that, in the first instance, the standard Plotinian position is that both discursive λογισμός and discursive language are inappropriate to the intelligible realm; they characterize precisely that part of the soul that does not remain within the intelligible and is turned toward the sensible world. The study shows that Plotinus considers, however, that a non-discursive λογισμός is not incompatible with the condition of the soul remained within intelligible. Starting from an analysis of Ennead V 8 [31] and V, 1 [10], the study demonstrates that Plotinus considers the existence of a kind of non-discursive language, on the one hand, with reference to the Egyptian symbolic writing, and, on the other hand, in relation to the topic of prayer. A. Timotin also shows that a similar approach is already attested in Plutarch‘s works, especially in De Genio Socratis, in an exegetical context providing different explanations for the manner in which Socrates could communicate with his daimôn, a traditional Middle-Platonic theme.

Edition of the Journal Chora on “Discursive Mediation in Neoplatonism” (coordinated by Marilena Vlad)

I collected the material for a special volume dedicated to the theme of our project: the problem of discursive mediation in neoplatonism. I conducted the editorial work of this volume and submitted it for publication in a special issue of Chora. Revue d’études anciennes et médiévales dedicated to this theme. Contents: Marilena Vlad, Présentation du dossier; Dominic O’Meara (Université de Fribourg), Souls and Cities in late ancient Platonic Philosophy; Pauliina Remes (Uppsala University), Plotinus on Starting Points of Reasoning; Anca Vasiliu (Centre Léon Robin de recherche sur la pensée antique, CNRS / Université Paris-Sorbonne), La pensée de l’Un ou la limite de la médiation selon Plotin; David Ellis (Boston College), Living a Double Life: Intellect, Soul, and Language in Plotinus; Francis Lacroix (Université de Laval), Logismos et dianoia chez Plotin; Andrei Timotin (Institut de Philosophie “Alexandru Dragomir”, Bucarest), Langage discursif et non-discursif chez Plotin. A propos d’Enn. IV, 3 [27], 18; Alain Lernould (CNRS/Univ. de Lille), La dianoia chez Proclus : pensée et discursivité; David Vachon (Université de Montréal), Contemplation et théurgie : les modalités au-delà de la pensée discursive chez Proclus; Lela Alexidze (Institut de philosophie, Tbilissi), Dianoia in Ioane Petritsi’s Commentary on Proclus’ Elements of Theology; Carolle Metry-Tresson (Université de Fribourg), Le « dépassement de l’apophasis » chez Damascius; Marilena Vlad (Institut de Philosophie “Alexandru Dragomir”, Bucarest), Defying words: Damascius and the travail of the unsayable.

Journal Article: Daniela Tarba, “Plotinus: Self-awareness and The Ascension on The Ladder of Truth” (submitted)

This article details the role of the individual soul in Plotinian hierarchy, as well as the possibility of self-awareness in this chain-like hypostatic procession. The analysis begins with the detailed exposure of the three Plotinian hypostases, emphasizing the two inherent movements of this system: the downward movement, by with the Divine Mind generates the whole reality, and the upward movement through which each level of existence participates in the good (first principle). Finally, Daniela Tarbǎ investigates the possibility of self-awakening of the individual soul considering this complementary movements, highlighting the double structure of the individual soul and how each of these two parts of the soul is caught up in this motion.

Translation: Simplicius’ Corollary on Time (tr. Gheorghe Pascalau).

Gheorghe Pascalau main activity was the translation of Simplicius’ Corollary on Time. This work, which is part of a vast commentary on Aristotle’s Physics, summarises the entire Neoplatonic philosophy of time. Time is for the Neoplatonists not merely the “number of motion”, but an intermediate hypostasis between eternity and the world of generation, between ideas and nature. Gheorghe Pascalau also translated Julian’s Hymn to the King Helios, in which the emperor exposes the principles of a solar henotheism. Helios, the god of the sun, is for Julian an intermediate being, which assures the communication of the intelligible to the sensible. The two translations will possibly appear at Humanitas, Bucharest.

Talk: Andrei Timotin, “Câteva remarci despre natura limbajului la Plotin”, Workshop: Medierea discursivă în neoplatonism, 17 decembrie 2016 (Bucharest)

Talk: Daniela Tarbă, “Condiționarea discursivă a sensibilității în Timaios”, Workshop: Medierea discursivă în neoplatonism, 17 decembrie 2016 (Bucharest)

Talk: Gheorghe Pașcalău, “Sensibilitate si intelect ca mediere a adevarului teologic in gandirea imparatului Iulian”, Workshop: Medierea discursivă în neoplatonism, 17 decembrie 2016 (Bucharest)

Talk: Marilena Vlad, “Damascius și travaliile gândirii”, Workshop: Medierea discursivă în neoplatonism, 17 decembrie 2016 (Bucharest)

Books

  • Marilena Vlad, Damascius et l’aporétique de l’ineffable: récit de l’impossible discours, Vrin, 2019 (forthcoming)

Editions

Journal articles

  • Marilena Vlad, “Parler de Dieu et parler à Dieu: Damascius et Denys l’Aréopagite sur le rôle de la discursivité“, in Freiburger Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Theologie 64.2 (2017), pp. 395–412.
  • Marilena Vlad, „Denys l’Aréopagite et le principe donateur de bien“, in:  Chôra – Revue d’Études Anciennes et Médiévales, vol. 15 / 2017 (BDI);
  • Marilena Vlad, “Dionysius the Areopagite on Angels Self-Constitution versus Constituting Gifts”, Neoplatonic Demons and Angels, Brill, 2018.
  • Andrei Timotin, “A Hymn to God assigned to Gregory of Nazianzus and its Neoplatonic context“, International Journal for Neoplatonic Studies Vol. 12.1 (2018), 39-50 (Web of Science);
  • Daniela Tarba, “Plotinus: Self-awareness and The Ascension on The Ladder of Truth”, in: Romanian Journal of Social Science, vol. II, issue no. 4 (forthcoming);
  • Gheorghe Pașcalău, Time as a Self-Constituted Intellect in the Philosophy of Proclus, International Journal of the Platonic Tradition (submitted for evaluation);
  • Andrei Timotin, „The Causality of the First Principle and the Theory of Two Activities in Plotinus, Enn. V 4 [7]”, in: John Finamore and Tomáš Nejeschleba (eds.), Proceedings of ISNS Olomouc Conference, Prometheus Trust, 2018;
  • Marilena Vlad, “Stepping into the Void: Proclus and Damascius on Approaching the First Principle“, in: International Journal of the Platonic Tradition, Volume 11 (2017), Issue 1, pp. 44–68, DOI: 10.1163/18725473-12341364 (Web of Science);
  • Marilena Vlad, “L’être premier chez Proclus et Denys l’Aréopagite”, in: D. Calma, M. Geoffroy (ed.), Les Éléments de théologie et le Livre des causes du Ve au XVIIe siècle. Vol. 3. Être-Vie-Pensée / Cause-Causalité, Brepols, 2019 (forthcoming);
  • Andrei Timotin, „Hiérarchies théologiques, hiérarchies physiques. Lectures médio-platoniciennes du Timée“, in: Chiara Tommasi Moreschini, Luciana G. Soares Santoprete and Helmut Seng (eds.), Hierarchie und Ritual: Zur philosophischen Spiritualität der Spätantike, Heidelberg, Universitätsverlag Winter („Bibliotheca Chaldaica“ 7), 2017;
  • Marilena Vlad, “Defying words: Damascius and the travail of the unsayable”, in:  Chôra – Revue d’Études Anciennes et MédiévalesLa médiation discursive dans le néoplatonisme,  vol. 14 / 2016, pp. 223-250 (BDI);
  • Andrei Timotin, “Langage discursif et non discursif chez Plotin. A propos d’Enn. IV, 3 [27], 18”, in: Chôra – Revue d’Études Anciennes et MédiévalesLa médiation discursive dans le néoplatonisme,  vol. 14 / 2016 (BDI).

2017

2016

  • Marilena Vlad, Parler de Dieu et parler à Dieu: Damascius et Denys l’Aréopagite sur le rôle de la discursivité, Université de Fribourg, Switzerland, 21 March 2016;
  • Marilena Vlad, L’être premier chez Proclus et Denys l’Aréopagite, at the Conference Les Eléments de théologie et le Livre des causes du Ve au XVIIe siècle, Sorbonne, Paris, 14-16 April 2016;
  • Daniela Tarbă, Puterea de seducţie a frumosului la Plotin, at the Visual Culture conference series, Faculty of Philosophy, Bucharest, 28 June 2016;
  • Daniela Tarbă, Privind frumosul plotinian. Auto-constituire şi ascensiunea pe scara adevărului prin eros, at the International Interdisciplinary Doctoral ConferenceBucharest, 30 September – 1 October 2016.
  • Marilena Vlad, “Damascius și travaliile gândirii“, în cadrul workshopului „Medierea discursivă în neoplatonism“, ICUB, București, 17 decembrie, 2016;
  • Andrei Timotin, „Câteva remarci despre natura limbajului la Plotin“, în cadrul workshopului „Medierea discursivă în neoplatonism“, ICUB, București, 17 decembrie, 2016;
  • Daniela Tarbă, „Condiționarea discursivă a sensibilității în Timaios“, în cadrul workshopului “Medierea discursivă în neoplatonism”, ICUB, București, 17 decembrie, 2016;
  • Gheorghe Pașcalău, „Sensibilitate și intelect ca mediere a adevărului teologic în gândirea împăratului Iulian“, în cadrul workshopului „Medierea discursivă în neoplatonism“, ICUB, București, 17 decembrie, 2016.