• Identifiant
    • DTL42QKu
  • Contenu de la note
  • Krämer suggests the possibility of more sources of the Superone-conception which could have inspired Ammonius and (indirectly via Ammonius) Plotinus : Eudorus, Moderatus, Philo, the Valentinians (note 63 : Although it is not unreasonable to consider Gnostic sources as important for the development of Plotinus’ theory of the position of the supranoetic One and his derivation-system, something in fact suggested by Jonas (Gnosis und spätantiker Geist, II, 161 passim), Krämer (Geistmetaphysik, 263) himself ultimately does not convert himself to this view : “Nicht, als ob Plotin etwa von Valentin abhängig wäre”. He sees the presence of a preplotinian ontological tradition as an independent source of both Gnosticism and Neoplatonism as well. See on Plotinus and Gnosticism below 332 ff., and Ammonius’ contemporaries like Clemens Alexandrinus, or Origenes, the Christian (note 64 : see Krämer, Geistmetaphysik, 294, n. 400). The expressions we come across e.g. in Philo and Origenes about the ineffability of the One (note 65 : See Krämer, Geistmetaphysik, 282, n. 342) and its position beyond its inferiors, however remarkable they may seem, are all to be seen as different ways of presenting the mind-character of the One, sometimes denying mind and sometimes ascribing mind to the One, which Krämer himself observes (note 66 : See Krämer, Geistmetaphysik, 287, n. 365).

  • Remarques de l'éditeur
  • Luciana Santoprete
    • Contexte
    • Introduction au Traité 9 (VI, 9), chapitre 1, partie « History of the one »
    • Page
    • 18-19
  • Sources modernes
  • +
  • Sources anciennes
  • + + + + + + +
  • Mots-clefs français
  • +
  • Liens
  • +
  • Appartenances
  • Traité 9 (VI, 9), 1