2010 ISNS Madrid Conference

LIST OF PANELS

1. Dionysius the Areopagite between Orthodoy and Herexy (Filip Ivanovic, filiwycat@yahoo.com, University of Aarhus, Denmark)

One of the most controversial characters in the history of philosophy and theology is beyond all doubt (Pseudo-) Dionysius the Areopagite. The only conclusion on which the modern scholarship agreed is that he was not the famous bishop of Athens, a pagan converted to Christianity by St. Paul.

The influence of Dionysian writings in the entire Middle Ages is astonishing, and he was considered as the highest authority, second only to Bible, since he was considered a contemporary of Apostles. Some of the main features of his doctrine, such as apophatic theology, deification, and hierarchies, greatly determined the ways of future Christian speculation.

His knowledge of the Christian tradition is proven by his good command of the notions of not only the theoretical foundations of Christianity, but also of the liturgical life and practical experience of the Church. On the other hand, the strong Neoplatonic character of his writings cannot be disregarded. Who was really Dionysius? Was he a Christian simply initiated into Neoplatonic doctrines, or was he a Neoplatonist whose intention was to cunningly introduce pagan elements into the Christian thought?

The aim of this panel is to reconsider the identity of Dionysius and his role in the formation of early Christianity. The main question would be whether he was a pagan philosopher or a Christian theologian. This question remains unresolved until today, and the panel would serve to allow participants to engage in an interaction of different opinions, which would hopefully shed some more light on the dark background of “divine Dionysius”.

2. Friendship in Various Traditions (Gary M. Gurtler, S.J., gary.gurtler@bc.edu, Boston College, USA, and Suzanne Stern-Gillet, s.stern-gillet@bolton.ac.uk, University of Bolton and University of Manchester, UK)

This panel is looking for a number of papers on the topic of friendship from across the ancient and early medieval traditions, Platonic, Aristotelian, Stoic, Epicurean, Neo-Platonic, and Christian authors.  Presentations can focus on one philosopher or can compare different philosophers and perspectives.  We hope the panel will bring new light or deeper understanding on this theme, so important for ancient, medieval and renaissance thinkers but somewhat neglected or seen as problematic in classical modern philosophers.

3. Neoplatonic Interpretation of the ‘Socratic’: Olympiodorus and Beyond (Harold Tarrant, Harold.Tarrant@newcastle.edu.au, University of Newcastle, Australia)

Any ancient philosophy that followed him had to be able to respond to the legacy of Socrates. How did the Neoplatonists respond to such features of Socrates as his erôs, his divine sign, his profession of ignorance, and his elenchus? And with those of Socrates’ arguments that may appear today as excessively ‘eristic’. And with his rejection of disciplines that do not force us to look within ourselves? The curriculum seems almost to have found a place for Socratic studies in between its Aristotelian endeavours and its treatment of the mature dialogues that it associated with the Pythagorean side of Plato. The commentaries of Olympiodorus on the Alcibiades and the Gorgias, together with Proclus on the Alcibiades, offer us the most extensive treatment of such themes, but there are plenty of clues elsewhere. I propose to temporarily to shift our focus from Neoplatonic system-building to an important part of Neoplatonic hermeneutics.

4. 4.Neoplatonism and Contemporary Science (Michael Chase, goya@vjf.cnrs.fr, CNRS, France)
   

Is Neoplatonism relevant to contemporary science ? In the past, the doctrines of Neoplatonism have often been considered so far-fetched as to be of interest only to authors of science fiction. Yet recent developments in various branches of contemporary science seem to display similarities to some of its doctrines. This panel encourages submission of papers exploring the comparison of Neoplatonism with any aspect of contemporary science, broadly construed (including the thought of Whitehead, for instance) : examples might include the philosophy of quantum physics (and its possible relevance to the mind-body relation according to Penrose or Stapp), complexity (S. Kauffman), theories of time (Prigogine), cosmology and the beginnings of life on earth.

5. Neoplatonism and Gnosticism (Dylan Burns, dylan.burns@yale.edu, Yale University, USA)

The panel "Neoplatonism and Gnosticism" invites papers that deal with the crucial and highly contested relationship between these two vital intellectual movements of the ancient world. "Gnosticism" here should be taken in the widest possible sense, so as to include related esoteric currents such as Hermetism and the Chaldean Oracles. Suggested topics include but are not limited to anti-Gnostic polemics in Neoplatonism, anti-philosophical polemics in Gnosticism, shared sources between Gnostic and Neoplatonic texts, potential Gnostic influence on Neoplatonism, Gnostic use of Neoplatonic ideas, the relationship between Gnostic and Neoplatonic ritual practices, and/or the importance of the "Gnostic debate" for the greater relationship between Neoplatonism and Christianity.

6. Platonism, Freedom, Providence, and Fate (Jean-Michel Charrue, jmcharrue@aol.com, France, and Marilynn Lawrence, pronoia@nni.com)

This panel will cover the relationships between freedom, providence and fate in Neoplatonism and in Platonism

Differences and similarities between fate or Providence in Platonism and others schools, such as Gnosticism, Hermeticism, and Peripatetism

The roles of divination and foreknowledge in Platonic philosophy

Platonism theology of divine providence

Treatment of human freedom in any particular Platonist

Platonic fatalism or determinism and responses thereto

The roles of the gods and daemons in Platonic fate and Providence

The panel  will concern the entire Platonic tradition about Freedom, Providence and Fate;

including Middle  Platonism (which contains multiple points of view and a rich tradition of studies), various Platonic dialogues such as the Laws, Timaeus, etc. and the confrontation between or agreement among schools such as Stoïcism, Gnosticism, Hermeticism, and Peripatetism,

Divination and foreknowledge are present in platonic philosophy, even if their place must be evaluated in each author. There is also The platonic theology of divine providence.

Nonetheless human freedom subsists, in spite of Platonic fatalism or determinism. Thus, panelists may wish to address this fatalism or determinism. It is also possible to consider

the role of gods and daemons in Platonic fate and Providence.

7. The Descent, Ascent, and Dual Nature of the Soul (John Finamore, john-finamore@uiowa.edu, University of Iowa, USA)

This panel will explore the soul's amphibious nature in the Platonic cosmos from its formation by the Demiurge, to its accretions in the descent to the realm of Nature, to the way it functions in both realms.   Possible areas of focus include the soul's composition, simplicity/complexity, interaction with the body, immortality, as well as the role of philosophy and theurgy in its salvation.

8. The Figure of Syrianus in the Athenian School of Platonism (Sarah Klitenic Wear, sklitenic@yahoo.com, Franciscan University of Steubenville, USA)

Syrianus, the sixth century teacher of Proclus, is a figure of vast importance in the Athenian Academy, and yet only recently has he gathered attention from modern scholarship.  This panel will explore the principles of Syrianus’ metaphysics as expounded in his commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics, as well as his writings on Plato’s Timaeus, Parmenides,Statesman, Symposium, and other dialogues.  Papers on Syrianus’ discussion of rhetoric, the historical figure of Syrianus, or the influence of Syrianus’ thought on Proclus, Damascius, and others, are welcome.  Other topics relating to Syrianus, but not mentioned above, are certainly welcome, as well. 

9. Platonic and Aristotelian Commentary in a Neoplatonic Register (Emilie Kutash, eeekut@optonline.net, Boston University, USA)

I propose a panel called “ Platonic and Aristotelian Commentary in a Neoplatonic Register”  Any paper on the Commentary Tradition will fit in this panel. One question the panel could  address is the question of what kind of project is the  Neoplatonic Commentary. Is it a faithful exegesis of a  Plato dialogue or Aristotelian text? What exactly does the genre “ Commentary” entail ?  Is the  Neoplatonic Commentator  using the Dialogue to showcase Neoplatonic agendas or is it a  much needed interpretation  of the original text, helpful to us today.

10. Neoplatonist Epistemology and the Limits of Reason (Cinzia Arruzza, cinzia_arruzza@yahoo.it, and Damian Caluori, dcaluori@trinity.edu, Trinity University, San Antonio, USA)
In this panel, all sorts of question concerning Platonist epistemologies shall be discussed: Platonist conceptions of our knowledge of the sensible world by means of sense perception; the epistemic role of memory and phantasia; the intellectual grasp of the highest principle(s) and the question whether they (or it) can or cannot be grasped and why so. Papers dealing with the limits of reason and the question of what it is that, according to some Platonists, makes it impossible for us to grasp the highest principle(s), are particularly welcome.

11. Neoplatonismo Medieval: sus fuentes y su posteridad (Oscar Federico Bauchwitz, neoplatonismo@bol.com.br, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, and Cicero C. Bezerra, cicerobezerra@hotmail.com, Universidade Federal de Sergipe, Brasil)

La Sociedad Iberoamericana de Estudios Neoplatonicos propone un Panel cuyo tema permite un enfoque del neoplatonismo medieval, considerando las fuentes, directas o no, que influenciaron los autores del periodo elegido. Por otra parte, la presencia del neoplatonismo medieval en el desarrollo de la filosofia moderna y contemporanea es también enfocada por este panel.

12. How is it possible for the individual soul to unite with the One in Neoplatonism?  And is it a mystical experience? / Comment l'âme humaine individuelle arrive-t-elle à s'unir à l'Un dans le Néoplatonisme? S'agit-il d'une expérience mystique? (Luc Brisson, lbrisson@agalma.net, CNRS, France)

In his Life of Plotinus, Porphyry speaks without ambiguity of a union with the One, which both he and Plotinus experienced. In them, this union took place through the intermediary of the intellect with which the human soul always remains in contact, and is a result of a philosophical life based on the practice of all the virtues. In addition, this experience does not involve feelings, at least at the moment of union with the One. Finally, the uses of the Greek terms formed from mystik- do not refer, in their writings, to the same experience as the one we qualify as “ mystical ”. Can we therefore speak of “ mysticism ” in Plotinus and Porphyry on the one hand, and in the later Neoplatonists on the other, particularly after Iamblichus, who no longer admits that the human soul always remains attached to the Intellect ?

Dans sa Vie de Plotin Porphyre parle sans ambiguïté d'union avec l'Un, expérience que firent et Plotin et lui-même. Chez eux, cette union se fait par l'intermédiaire de l'Intellect avec lequel l'âme humaine reste toujours en contact, et est le résultat d'une vie philosophique fondée sur la pratique de toutes les vertus. Par ailleurs, une telle expérience ne fait par intervenir le sentiment, au moment de l'union avec l'Un en tout cas. Enfin, les emplois des termes grecs formés à partir de mystik- ne renvoient pas, dans leurs écrits, à la même expérience que celle que nous qualifions de «mystique». Peut-on dès lors parlé de mystique» chez Plotin et Porphyre d'une part, et chez les néoplatoniciens postérieurs, notamment après Jamblique, qui n'admet plus que l'âme humaine reste toujours liée à l'Intellect ? 

13. Stromata. Neoplatonic Questions (José M. Zamora, jm.zamora@uam.es, UAM, Spain)

CALL FOR PANELS (deadline 26 January, 2010)

Anyone who is interested in organising a panel at the conference should send a brief description of the panel along with its title and the name(s) and email address(es) of the contact person(s) to the three organisers:

.John Finamore: john-finamore@uiowa.edu

.Gary M. Gurtler: gurtlerg@bc.edu             

.José M. Zamora: isns2010madrid@gmail.com

Panels’ abstracts are due on January 26. The list of panels proposed until now may be found at this page (see below). Panel organisers are responsible for collecting the abstracts and choosing those for inclusion in their panels. They should notify us of their decisions by March 1.