Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T10:14:20.098Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Speusippus, teleology and the metaphysics of value: Theophrastus’ Metaphysics 11a18–26

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 December 2020

Wei Cheng
Wei Cheng*
Affiliation:
Peking University*
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

This paper re-examines Theophrastus’ Metaphysics 11a18–26, an obscure testimony about Speusippus, the second head of the Platonic Academy. As opposed to the traditional interpretation, which takes this passage as Theophrastus’ polemic against Speusippus’ doctrine of value, I argue that he here makes dialectical use of, rather than launching an attack on, the Platonist. Based on this new reading, I further propose a revision and a reassessment of the ‘gloomy metaphysics’ of Speusippus which will shed new light on his ethics.

Keywords

teleologySpeusippusTheophrastusAristotlevalue
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Hellenic Studies , Volume 140 , November 2020 , pp. 143 - 175
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

cheng.wei@pku.edu.cn. My gratitude goes to Tianqin Ge, Yiwen Zhan and Ruobing Xian for their helpful comments on earlier drafts, to Xiaohui Yu for editing the manuscript and especially to Rhodes Pinto, who has greatly helped me improve this article in many aspects. I would like to thank Stephen Menn for allowing me to quote his unpublished monograph and Lijuan Lin, Ruizhi Ma and Oliver Overwien for their support in understanding the Arabic tradition. I am also deeply indebted to Douglas Cairns and two anonymous referees for their insightful remarks, criticisms and advice. I acknowledge the support of the Institute of Foreign Philosophy and the Department of Philosophy at Peking University.