Narrow search

By category:

By publication type:

By language:

By journals:

By document type:

Displaying: 1-20 of 255 documents

0.309 sec

1. Chôra: Volume > 1
Ştefan Vianu La doctrine érigènienne des Causes primordiales
2. Chôra: Volume > 1
3. Chôra: Volume > 1
Bogdan Tătaru-Cazaban Contre Hermogène
4. Chôra: Volume > 1
Bogdan Tătaru-Cazaban Medievali e medievisti. Saggi su aspetti del Medioevo teologico e della sua interpretatione
5. Chôra: Volume > 1
Anca Vasiliu L'icône et le regard de Narcisse
6. Chôra: Volume > 1
Bogdan Tătaru-Cazaban Être et représentation. Une généalogie de la métaphysique moderne à l'époque de Duns Scot (XIIIᵉ-XIVᵉ siècle)
7. Chôra: Volume > 1
Alexander Baumgarten L'interpretation de la proposition 90 du liber de Causis chez Albert le Grand et saint Thomas d'Aquin
8. Chôra: Volume > 1
Miruna Tătaru-Cazaban Saint François d'Assise
9. Chôra: Volume > 1
Bogdan Tătaru-Cazaban La théologie du miracle selon Origène et saint Augustin
10. Chôra: Volume > 1
Sebastian Maxim L'homme et son propre selon Maître Eckhart
11. Chôra: Volume > 1
Miruna Tătaru-Cazaban Jean Gerson Apostle of Unity. His Church Politics and Ecclesiology
12. Chôra: Volume > 1
Andrei Timotin Le corps, les rites, les rêves, le temps. Essais d'anthropologie médiévale
13. Chôra: Volume > 1
Alin Tat Le Dieu d'Augustin
14. Chôra: Volume > 1
Miruna Tătaru-Cazaban Discours ascétique
15. Chôra: Volume > 11
Anca Vasiliu Note liminaire
16. Chôra: Volume > 11
Jean-Baptiste Gourinat Le discours intérieur de l’âme dans la philosophie stoicienne
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Plusieurs auteurs anciens attribuent aux stoïciens une distinction entre le logos endiathetos et le logos proféré (prophorikos), qui est souvent assimilée à l’opposition entre le langage proféré et la raison intérieure, et tend à confondre la position stoïcienne avec l’identification platonicienne de la pensée à un dialogue intérieur. Mais, tandis que le logos endiathetos est clairement identifié à la capacité humaine de raisonner, il n’est pas présenté comme un dialogue intérieur. Il réside d’abord dans une certaine disposition de l’homme à enchaîner des énoncés de manière logique, tandis que le langage proféré des hommes repose sur la capacité d’attacher un sens au mot, d’émettre le langage depuis la pensée. Par ailleurs, Chrysippe semble bien avoir reconnu un langage intérieur, mais celui-ci n’est pas identifiable au logos endiathetos ni à la pensée, dont il est nettement distingué, et il est encore moins un dialogue.
17. Chôra: Volume > 11
Maria Carmen De Vita Alcune variazioni sul mito di Socrate nella tarda antichita
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
In the rhetorical tradition of Late Antiquity, Socrates’ legend has a good fortune in the works of different rhetoricians and philosophers. In the following pages I am going to deal with some examples of this phaenomenon, through the works of Themistius and Julian the emperor : two intellectuals of the IV century who are, under many aspects, the exact opposites.They both try to ‘actualize’ Socrates’ figure, highlighting different aspects of the Athenian philosopher, on the grounds of their personal purposes of self-advertisement. So Themistius, a skilled politician working as princeps’ advisor, sees in Socrates a symbol of the ‘politikos philosophos’, who speaks plainly in public with people of all ranks, in a simple and direct way ; for Julian, emperor and philosopher of the new Hellenism, Socrates, instead, is mainly the saviour of the souls, addressing all men towards the true knowledge of themselves and the true faith in pagan gods. These portraits are complementary and both attest the ability of Late Antique intellectuals in their imitatio/aemulatio of figures and myths of Classical Antiquity.
18. Chôra: Volume > 11
Daniela Patrizia Taormina Il n’y a pas d’homme, lâche ou brave, qui ait échappé a sa Moira (Il. 6. 488‑9). Porphyre vs. les stoiciens sur l’autonomie individuelle et l’origine du mal
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
In an excerpt preserved by John Stobaeus in the chapter of the Anthologion entitled Peri tôn eph’hêmin (II 8. 42 pp. 172.9-173.2 Wachsmuth = fr. 271. 105-126 Smith), Porphyry addresses the issue of the origin of evil within the context of a broader investigation of individual autonomy : is it enough to envisage man as a subject with the freedom to act in order to make him responsible for evil and thus to free God of any responsibility with regard to the ills besetting individuals ? An answer to this question is provided on the basis of a comparative reading of the Myth of Er (Plato, Republic 617 E-620 E) and of Homer (Iliad 6.488-9 ; Odyssey I 32-4). The conclusion reached is that evil is not intrinsic to human nature, but rather concerns certain forms of existence which individuals opt for when they disregard the divine and forego rationality. Consequently, God is not responsible for evil.The exegetical and argumentative strategy adopted by Porphyry in order to support this answer suggests that his stance is a polemical one, targeting Stoics in particular. Against Chrysippus’ reading of the same verses from Homer, which leads to a deterministic perspective, or at any rate one likely to prove inconsistent (SVF II 925, 999), Porphyry offers an interpretation of Homer as a coherent thinker and a forerunner of Plato : Homer is seen to have proposed a kind of dichotomy between the self-determination and the necessity that characterise the life of the soul, and as having assigned individuals the faculty of choosing between virtue and vice, thus making them ultimately responsible with regard to evil.
19. Chôra: Volume > 11
Anne-Isabelle Bouton-Touboulic Les Confessions d’Augustin : une métamorphose de la parrhesia ?
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
This article intends to see to what extend Augustine’s Confessions may correspond to a kind of parrhesia, as analyzed by Michel Foucault about ancient christian writers in Le courage de la vérité. The classical parrhesia (freedom of speech possessed by a citizen) is actually subverted in the specific structure of the Confessions : the frankness of the parrhesia is supposed to have an effect on Augustine as author and on his readers, not on the omniscient God – whom Augustine precisely addresses. Furthermore, his trust in God – another manifestation of parrhesia that is expressed by the Latin word fiducia – has biblical roots, but is also renewed by the idea of grace. Nevertheless, we can say that the apologetical and religious aspect of parrhesia which appears in some passages of the Confessions reminds somehow the traditional political use of parrhesia.
20. Chôra: Volume > 11
Juvenal Savian Filho De nouveau sur la prescience et la causalité divines chez Boece
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Dans des travaux récents, l’aspect logique du thème de la prescience et de la causalité divines chez Boèce a été largement exploité, surtout dans les études vigoureuses de François Beets et John Marenbon. Cependant, si on considère l’ensemble des textes boéciens sans se borner à en privilégier quelques extraits, il apparaît que certains éléments de cette thématique peuvent encore être soulignés, principalement dans le sens du caractère négatif du discours sur la connaissance, la prescience et la causalité divines. Cela semble permettre, par conséquent, de continuer le débat au sujet de ce qu’on pourrait nommer l’épistémologie philosophico-théologique de Boèce.