PHILOPONUS’ ACCOUNT OF “PARTICULAR NATURES”
Abstract
John Philoponus claimed that Chalcedonian teaching ultimately brought
about the negation of real and substantial unity of natures in Christ. In his opinion, if there
is one individual Christ, there ought to be one nature of Him. But this nature must to be a
compound of Divine and human natures. In order to explain how two natures can become
one compound nature of one individual, Philoponus developed an original conception of
common and proper natures. Common nature is the common intelligible content of
individual subjects. Proper, or specific, nature subsists in individuals, assuming a
particular existence in each of them, and differing from natures of all other individual
subjects, even from those that fall under the same common nature.
It seems that Philoponus turned from Neoplatonic teaching on nature and
universals to the view of Alexander of Aphrodisias. Yet in my opinion his account of proper
or specific nature significantly diverges from both Peripatetic and Neoplatonic doctrines. I
claim in the paper that Philoponus resolved to create a new conception of nature in order
to support philosophically his miaphysite theology
References
Benakis L., “The Problem of General Concepts in Neoplatonism and Byzantine Thought,” in Neoplatonism and Christian Thought, ed. D. J. O'Meara, Albany: State University of New York Press, 1982.
Blumenthal H.J., “John Philoponus: Alexandrian Platonist?,” Hermes 114 (1986), 314-335.
Booth E., “John Philoponos, Christian and Aristotelian Conversion,” Studia Patristica 17 (1982), 407-411.
Booth E., Aristotelian aporetic ontology in Islamic and Christian thinkers, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.
Bruns I., Alexandri Aphrodisiensis praeter commentaria scripta minora [Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca suppl. 2.1], Berlin: Reimer, 1887.
Busse A., Porphyrii isagoge et in Aristotelis categorias commentarium [Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 4.1], Berlin: Reimer, 1887.
Busse A., Ammonius in Aristotelis categorias commentarius [Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 4.4], Berlin: Reimer, 1895.
Busse A., Philoponi (olim Ammonii) in Aristotelis categorias commentarium [Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 13.1], Berlin: Reimer, 1898.
Busse A., Eliae in Porphyrii isagogen et Aristotelis categorias commentaria [Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 18.1], Berlin: Reimer, 1900.
Busse A., Olympiodori prolegomena et in categorias commentarium [Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 12.1], Berlin: Reimer, 1902.
Ebbesen S., Commentators and Commentaries on Aristotle's Sophistici Elenchi: a Study of Post-Aristotelian Ancient and Medieval Writings on Fallacies, (Thesis doctoralKøbenhavns Universitet 1981), Leiden: Brill, 1981.
Evrard E., “Les convictions religieuses de Jean Philopon et la date de son Commentaire aux ‘Météorologiques’,” Bulletin de l'Academie Royale des Sciences
Belgique 5.39 (1953), 299-357.
Furlani G., Sei scritti antitriteistici in lingua siriaca, Patrologia Orientalis, Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1920.
Grillmeier A. and Hainthaler T., Jesus der Christus im Glauben der Kirche, Band 2. 2: Die Kirche von Konstantinopel im 6. Jahrhundert, Freiburg; Basel; Wien: Herder, 1989.
Hermann T., “Johannes Philoponus als Monophysit,” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 29 (1930), 209-264.
Kalbfleisch K., Simplicii in Aristotelis categorias commentarium [Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 8], Berlin: Reimer, 1907.
Kotter B., Die Schriften des Johannes von Damaskos. 4, Liber de haeresibus. Opera polemica, Patristische Texte und Studien, Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1981.
Lang U.M., John Philoponus and the Controversies over Chalcedon in the Sixth Century: a Study and Translation of the Arbiter, Leuven: Peeters, 2001.
Lloyd C., The Anatomy of Neoplatonism, Oxford; New York: Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press, 1990.
Lucchetta G.A., “Aristotelismo e cristianesimo in Giovanni Filopono,” Studia Patavina 25 (1978), 573-593.
MacCoull L.S.B., “Dioscorus of Aphrodito and John Philoponus,” Studia Patristica 18 (1987), 163–168.
MacCoull L.S.B., “A New Look at the Career of John Philoponus,” Journal of Early Christian Studies 3 (1995), 47-60.
Martin H., “Jean Philopon et la controverse trithéite du VI e siècle,” Studia Patristica 5 (1962), 519-525.
Maspero J., Histoire des patriarches d'Alexandrie depuis la mort de l'empereur Anastase jusqu'à la réconciliation des églises jacobites: 518 – 616, Paris: Champion, 1923.
Meyerhof M., “Joannes Grammatikos (Philoponos) von Alexandrien und die arabische Medizin,” in Mitteilungen des Deutschen Instituts für Ägyptische Altertumskunde in Kairo 2, (1931), 1-20.
Minio-Paluello L., Aristotelis categoriae et liber de interpretatione, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1949.
Rijk L. M.d., Aristotle: Semantics and Ontology, vol. 2, [Philosophia antiqua, v. 91], Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2002.
Ross W. D., Aristotle's metaphysics, 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924.
Saffrey H. D., “Le chrétien Jean Philopon et la survivance de l’école d’Alexandrie au VIe siécle,” Revue des études grecques 67 (1954), 396-410;
Tweedale M. M., “Alexander of Aphrodisias’ Views on Universals,” Phronesis 29 (1984): 279-303.
Verrycken K., “The Development of Philoponus’ Thought and its Chronology,” in Aristotle transformed: the ancient commentators and their influence, ed. R. Sorabji, Ithaca N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1990, 233-74.
Vitelli H., Ioannis Philoponi in Aristotelis physicorum libros octo commentaria, vol. 1 [Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 16], Berlin: Reimer, 1887.
Wallies M., Ioannis Philoponi in Aristotelis analytica posteriora commentaria cum Anonymo in librum ii [Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 13.3], Berlin: Reimer, 1909.
Wilson N. G., Scholars of Byzantium, London: Duckworth, 1983.
Zachhuber J., Human Nature in Gregory of Nyssa: Philosophical Background and Theological Significance, [Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae], Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2000.
Zhyrkova A., “Porphyry’s Interpretation of Categories — the Neoplatonic Approach to Nominalism,” EOS 95 (2008), 253-267.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
c) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).