Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter August 7, 2019

Reconstructing Chrysippus’ Cosmological Hypothesis. On Plut. Stoic. rep. 1054c–d

  • Michele Alessandrelli EMAIL logo
From the journal Elenchos

Abstract

Two literal quotations from Chrysippus’ On Possibles, preserved in Plutarch’s On the Contradictions of the Stoics, seem to contradict the Stoic thesis of the isotropy of the void. According to this thesis the void is an infinite undifferentiated expanse (a wide continuous area) whose center is marked by, and coincides with, the position of the world. Since there is nothing else outside the world, the cohesive force that pervades it is sufficient on its own to guarantee the quasi–indestructibility of the trans–cyclical διακόσμησις (i.e the fact that in the new cosmic cycle the διακόσμησις returns in a form identical to the one it had in the previous cosmic cycle) and the eternity of the οὐσία. Conversely, in these two quotations Chrysippus maintains that there is a central διαφορά equipped with causal force. This seems to imply the anisotropy of the void. Chrysippus’s view here is also at odds with another official Stoic thesis, i.e. that the incorporeal is causally inert. In this paper it will be argued that there is in fact no contradiction, because, in those two quotations, Chrysippus consciously develops a cosmological hypothesis in order to resolve a difficulty concerning the role of fire during the universal conflagration. Chrysippus’ solution to this difficulty belongs to modal logic and consists in distinguishing between the actual universe and the possible ones.

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Francesco Ademollo, David Sedley and the two anonymous referees for their incisive observations.

References

Alessandrelli, M. 2014. “Aspects and Problems of Chrysippus’ Conception of Space”, in Space in Hellenistic Philosophy. Critical Studies in Ancient Physics, edited by G. Ranocchia, C. Helmig, C. Horn, Berlin–Boston, De Gruyter, 53–67.Search in Google Scholar

Algra, K. 1995. Concepts of Space in Greek Thought, Leiden, Brill.10.1163/9789004320871Search in Google Scholar

Babut, D. 2003. Plutarco e lo Stoicismo, Edizione italiana a cura di A. Bellanti, Milano, Vita e Pensiero.Search in Google Scholar

Baldassarri, M. 1976. Plutarco. Gli opuscoli contro gli Stoici. Vol. I: Delle contraddizioni degli Stoici; Gli Stoici dicono cose più assurde dei poeti, Traduzione, introduzione e commento con appendice critico–testuale a cura di M. Baldassarri, Trento, Pubblicazioni di Verifiche.Search in Google Scholar

Barnes, J. 2006. “La doctrine du retour éternel”, in Les stoïciens et leur logique, deux. éd., edited by J. Brunschwig, Paris, Vrin (éd. or. 1978), 421–437.Search in Google Scholar

Bobzien, S. 1998. Determinism and Freedom in Stoic Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Boeri, M., Salles, R. (eds.). 2014. Los Filósofos Estoicos: Ontología, Lógica, Física y Ética, Sankt Augustin, Academia Verlag.Search in Google Scholar

Boys–Stones, G. R. 1997. “Locating the Cosmos: an Academic Argument against Chrysippus”, Mnemosyne 50, 577–585.10.1163/1568525972662105Search in Google Scholar

Casevitz, M., Babut, D. 2004. Plutarque. Oeuvres morales. Traité 70: Sur les contradictions Stoïciennes; Traité 71: Synopsis du traité ‘Que les stoïciens tiennent des propos plus paradoxaux que les poètes’, Texte établi par M. Casevitz, traduit et commenté par D. Babut, Paris, Les Belles Lettres.Search in Google Scholar

Cherniss, H. 1976. Plutarch’s Moralia. Vol. XIII. Part 2: On Stoic Self–contradictions; The Stoics Talk More Paradoxically than the Poets; Against the Stoics on Common Conceptions, Cambridge Mass, London, Loeb.10.4159/DLCL.plutarch-moralia_stoics_talk_more_paradoxically_than_poets.1976Search in Google Scholar

Crivelli, P. 2007. “The Stoics on Definitions and Universals”, Documenti e Studi sulla Tradizione Filosofica Medievale 18, 89–122.Search in Google Scholar

Denniston, J. D. 1950. The Greek Particles, Oxford, Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Furley, D. J. 1966. “Lucretius and the Stoics”, Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 13, 13–33.10.1111/j.2041-5370.1966.tb00027.xSearch in Google Scholar

Goldschmidt, V. 19692. Le systéme stoicïen et l’idée de temps, Paris, Vrin.Search in Google Scholar

Goulet, R., 1994, “Chrysippe de Soles”, in Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques, Vol. II, edited by R. Goulet, Paris, CNRS Editions, 329–361.Search in Google Scholar

Hahm, D. 1977. The Origins of Stoic Cosmology, Ohio, Ohio State University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ioppolo, A. M. 2013. Il concetto di causa nella filosofia ellenistica e romana, in Ead., Dibattiti filosofici ellenistici. Dottrina delle cause, Stoicismo, Accademia scettica, a cura di B. Centrone, R. Chiaradonna, D. Quarantotto, E. Spinelli, Sankt Augustin, Academia Verlag, 17–68.Search in Google Scholar

Liddell, H. J.–Scott, R. 19969. A English Greek Lexicon, Oxford, Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Long, A. A. 1985. “The Stoics and World–conflagration and Everlasting Recurrence”, The Southern Journal of Philosophy 23 (suppl), 13–37.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199279128.003.0013Search in Google Scholar

Long, A. A., Sedley, D. N. 1987–1988. The Hellenistic Philosophers, 2 vols., Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511808050Search in Google Scholar

Mansfeld, J. 1979. “Providence and the Destruction of the Universe in Early Stoic Thought”, in Studies in Hellenistic Religions, edited by M. J. Vermaseren, Leiden, Brill, 129–188.10.1163/9789004295575_009Search in Google Scholar

Mansfeld, J. 1998. “Theology”, in The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, edited by K. Algra, J. Barnes, J. Mansfeld, M. Schofield, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 452–478.10.1017/CHOL9780521250283.014Search in Google Scholar

Meijer, P. A. 2007. Stoic Theology. Proofs for the Existence of the Cosmic God and of the Traditional Gods, Utrecht, Eburon.Search in Google Scholar

Pohlenz, M. 1959. Die Stoa: Geschichte einer geistigen Bewegung, Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Search in Google Scholar

Salles, R. 2003. “Determinism and Recurrence in Early Stoic Thought”, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 24, 253–272.Search in Google Scholar

Salles, R. 2005. “᾿Εκπύρωσις and the Goodness of God in Cleanthes”, Phronesis 50, 56–78.10.1163/1568528053066960Search in Google Scholar

Salles, R. 2009. “Chrysippus on Conflagration and the Indestructibility of the Cosmos”, in God & Cosmos in Stoicism, edited by Ricardo Salles, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 118–131.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199556144.003.0006Search in Google Scholar

Sambursky, S. 1959. The Physics of the Stoics, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.Search in Google Scholar

Sandbach, F. H. 1940. “Plutarch on the Stoics”, Classical Quarterly 34, 20–25.10.1017/S000983880000906XSearch in Google Scholar

Sedley, D. N. 1999. “Hellenistic Physics and Metaphysics”, in The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, edited by K. Algra, J. Barnes, J. Mansfeld, M. Schofield, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 355–411.10.1017/CHOL9780521250283.012Search in Google Scholar

Sedley, D. N. (online) “Stoicism”. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/stoicism/v-1/sections/cosmology-and-theologySearch in Google Scholar

Zeller, E. 1880. Stoics, Epicureans, and Sceptics, Trans. O. J. Reichel, London, Longmans, Green, and Co.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2019-08-07
Published in Print: 2019-08-06

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 19.3.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/elen-2019-0003/html
Scroll to top button