Place, Void, and Eternity: Philoponus : Corollaries on Place and Void : Simplicius : Against Philoponus on the Eternity of the World

by John Philoponus, Simplicius

English (translation)Original Greek

Genres: Philosophy

160 pages, Hardcover

First published May 1, 1991

About the author

John Philoponus (/fᵻˈlɒpənəs/; Ἰωάννης ὁ Φιλόπονος; c. 490 – c. 570), also known as John the Grammarian or John of Alexandria, was an Alexandrian philologist, Aristotelian commentator and Christian theologian, author of a considerable number of philosophical treatises and theological works.

A rigorous, sometimes polemical writer and an original thinker who was controversial in his own time, John Philoponus broke from the Aristotelian–Neoplatonic tradition, questioning methodology and eventually leading to empiricism in the natural sciences. He was one of the first to propose a "theory of impetus" reminiscent of the modern concept of inertia over Aristotelian dynamics.

Later in life Philoponus turned to Christian apologetics, arguing against the eternity of the world, a theory which formed the basis of pagan attack of the Christian doctrine of Creation. He also wrote on Christology, and was posthumously condemned as a heretic by the Imperial Church in 680–81 because of what was perceived of as a tritheistic interpretation of the Trinity.

His by-name ὁ Φιλόπονος translates as "lover of toil", i.e. "diligent", in reference to a miaphysite confraternity in Alexandria, the philoponoi who were active in debating pagan (i.e. Neoplatonic) philosophers.

His posthumous condemnation limited the spread of his writing, but copies of his work did circulate in Greek or Latin versions in medieval Europe, influencing Bonaventure and Buridan. His work was also received in Arabic scholarly tradition, where he is known as Yaḥyā al-Naḥwī (i.e. "John the Grammarian"). His critique of Aristotle in the Physics commentary was a major influence on Giovanni Pico della Mirandola and Galileo Galilei, who cited Philoponus substantially in his works.

Reviews

[Erick · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was quite interesting. Philoponus’ criticisms of Aristotle’s arguments against the existence of a void are quite astute. Aristotle based most of his arguments against the existence of a void on the idea of resistance. He seemingly gave little to no attention to the impetus of the moving object. Aristotle observed correctly that air provides resistance as does water. He theorized that if no element existed to act against the moving object, that the object would move at an unlimited speed, which he saw as absurd. Philoponus rightly saw that resistance plays less of a factor in the speed of an object than power that first moves the object. Philoponus rightly points out that even if there were no surrounding elements to provide resistance, the object will still only move according to the underlying impetus, and that impetus cannot be unlimited. He pretty much destroys Aristotle’s argument. Of course, it was later discovered that outer space is indeed a void, although it may not be quite as void as Aristotle would have thought of a void as being. Certainly, gravity, light, and various particles are found in space, but the latter two in no way impede motion. Aristotle would not have considered the nature of gravity either. To him it would be simply a given. Of course, he would have been unaware of the affect it has on motion.

The work of Simplicius isn’t too terribly interesting. It basically was an attempt to refute Philoponus’ contention that the cosmos is corruptible, and thus, not eternal. I agree with the commentator that Simplicius seems to be engaging in straw man fallacies and misrepresenting Philoponus’ arguments. It would be good to read the work in question, which was specifically directed against Aristotle’s contention that the cosmos is eternal.

I am definitely interested in reading more of Philoponus in the not-too-distant future. This is a good introduction to him I think. Definitely worth recommending.