Heraclitus, the becoming and the Platonic-Aristotelian doxography
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14195/1984-249X_15_11Keywords:
Heraclitus, Plato, Aristotle, flow, Diels-Kranz, MarcovichAbstract
The purpose of this paper is to examine heraclitean fragments evoking the metaphor of rivers and waters flowing, usually associated by tradition to the image of reality in becoming and the conception of nature as a more or less disordered streaming. These fragments are certainly among the most celebrated and lucky fragments of the philosopher of Ephesus, which can be explained by the fact that they have been used since Plato and Aristotle, to represent in an exemplary way the philosophical perspective of Heraclitus. These are the three fragments which appear in the collection of Diels and Kranz under the numbers 12, 49a and 91, and correspond, in the edition of Marcovich to the numbers 40, 40c2 and 40c3. This mere indication brings out the problem that should be given priority review with regard to the three mentioned fragments, this is the one of their authenticity. Admitted by Diels and Kranz and by a certain number of scholars, among which stands out Mouraviev, it is rejected, with respect fragments 49a and 91 DK [40c2 and 40c3 Marcovich] by other commentators, and primarily by Marcovich for whom, as suggested by the numbering that adopted itself, should be considered as mere reminiscences of the fragments 12 DK [40 Marcovich], the only authentic
Downloads
References
ALLAN, D. J. (1954). The Problem of Cratylus. American Journal of Philology, 75, p. 271-287.DIANO, C. & SERRA, G. (1980). Eraclito. I frammenti e le testimonianze. Milano, Mondadori.FERRARI, F. (2011). Platone. Teeteto (trad.). Milano, BUR.FRONTEROTTA, F. (2012). Su Eraclito, frr. 12, 49A, 91 DK [40, 40c2, 40c3 Marcovich]. Antiquorum Philosophia, 6 , p. 71-90.HÜLSZ, E. (2009). Flujo y logos. La imagen de Heráclito en el Cratilo y el Teeteto de Platón. HÜLSZ, E. (ed.). Nuevos Ensayos sobre Heráclito. Actas del Segundo Symposium Heracliteum. Mexico, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, p. 361-390.________ (2013). Plato’s Ionian Muses: Sophist 242d-e. BOSSI, B. & ROBINSON, T. M. (eds.), Plato’s SophistRevisited. Berlin, Walter de Gruyter, p. 103-115.IRWIN, T. (1977), Plato’s Heracliteanism. The Philosophical Quarterly, 27, p. 1-13.KAHN, C. H. (1979). The Art and Thought of Heraclitus. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.__________ (1985). Plato and Heraclitus. Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy. Leiden, Brill, 1, p. 241-258.KIRK, G. S. (1951), The Problem of Cratylus. American Journal of Philology, 72, p. 225-253._________ (1962). Heraclitus. The Cosmic Fragments. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.MANSFELD, J. (1967). Heraclitus in the Psychology and Physiology of Sleep and on Rivers. Mnemosyne, 20, p. 1-29.MARCOVICH, M. (1978). Eraclito. Frammenti, introduzione, traduzione e commento. Firenze, La Nuova Italia, p. 310-11 (traduzione italiana, con alcune correzioni, della precedente versione inglese: Heraclitus. Greek text with a short commentary, Merida 1967; rist. Sankt Augustin, 2001).MONDOLFO, R. (1954). El problema de Cratilo y la interpretación de Heráclito. Anales de Filología Clásica, 6, p. 157-174.MOURAVIEV, S. (2006). Heraclitea. Recensio: Fragmenta, III.B: Libri reliquiae superstites, voll. I-III; I: Textus, versiones, apparatus, III: Ad lectiones adnotamenta. Sankt Augustin, Academia Verlag.PRADEAU, J.-F. (2002). Héraclite. Fragments [Citations et témoignages]. Paris, Flammarion.TARÁN, L. (1999). Heraclitus: the River Fragments and their Implications. Elenchos, 20, p. 9-52.VIANO, C. (2002). «Énésidème selon Héraclite»: la substance corporelle du temps. Revue Philosophique de la France et de l'Étranger, 192, p. 141-158
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Francesco Fronterotta
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Given the public access policy of the journal, the use of the published texts is free, with the obligation of recognizing the original authorship and the first publication in this journal. The authors of the published contributions are entirely and exclusively responsible for their contents.
1. The authors authorize the publication of the article in this journal.
2. The authors guarantee that the contribution is original, and take full responsibility for its content in case of impugnation by third parties.
3. The authors guarantee that the contribution is not under evaluation in another journal.
4. The authors keep the copyright and convey to the journal the right of first publication, the work being licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License-BY.
5. The authors are allowed and stimulated to publicize and distribute their work on-line after the publication in the journal.
6. The authors of the approved works authorize the journal to distribute their content, after publication, for reproduction in content indexes, virtual libraries and similars.
7. The editors reserve the right to make adjustments to the text and to adequate the article to the editorial rules of the journal.
