1. None, None, nan (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Cleomedes
Found in books: Bryan (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 207, 210; Wardy and Warren (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 207, 210
|
2. None, None, nan (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Cleomedes
Found in books: Bryan (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 206; Wardy and Warren (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 206
|
3. None, None, nan (1st cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Cleomedes
Found in books: Bryan (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 205; Wardy and Warren (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 205
|
4. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Cleomedes
Found in books: Bryan (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 210; Wardy and Warren (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 210
|
5. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Cleomedes
Found in books: Bryan (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 210, 215; Wardy and Warren (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 210, 215
|
6. Athenaeus, The Learned Banquet, None (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Cleomedes
Found in books: Bryan (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 206; Wardy and Warren (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 206
| 187e The reason why he has traduced the young men may be seen in Plato himself. In the case of Alcibiades, he says in the dialogue named from him that he did not begin to have converse with Socrates until he had passed out of his early bloom, when all who lusted for his body had deserted him. He tells us this at the beginning of the dialogue. The contradictory things which he says in the case of Charmides may be learned from the dialogue itself by anyone who wishes. For he represents him inconsistently'' None |
|
7. Diogenes Laertius, Lives of The Philosophers, 10.13, 10.136 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Cleomedes
Found in books: Bryan (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 206, 210; Wardy and Warren (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 206, 210
| sup>
10.13 Apollodorus in his Chronology tells us that our philosopher was a pupil of Nausiphanes and Praxiphanes; but in his letter to Eurylochus, Epicurus himself denies it and says that he was self-taught. Both Epicurus and Hermarchus deny the very existence of Leucippus the philosopher, though by some and by Apollodorus the Epicurean he is said to have been the teacher of Democritus. Demetrius the Magnesian affirms that Epicurus also attended the lectures of Xenocrates.The terms he used for things were the ordinary terms, and Aristophanes the grammarian credits him with a very characteristic style. He was so lucid a writer that in the work On Rhetoric he makes clearness the sole requisite.
10.136 He differs from the Cyrenaics with regard to pleasure. They do not include under the term the pleasure which is a state of rest, but only that which consists in motion. Epicurus admits both; also pleasure of mind as well as of body, as he states in his work On Choice and Avoidance and in that On the Ethical End, and in the first book of his work On Human Life and in the epistle to his philosopher friends in Mytilene. So also Diogenes in the seventeenth book of his Epilecta, and Metrodorus in his Timocrates, whose actual words are: Thus pleasure being conceived both as that species which consists in motion and that which is a state of rest. The words of Epicurus in his work On Choice are: Peace of mind and freedom from pain are pleasures which imply a state of rest; joy and delight are seen to consist in motion and activity.'' None |
|
8. Origen, Against Celsus, 3.80, 3.80.1, 3.80.26-3.80.27 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Cleomedes
Found in books: Bryan (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 207; Wardy and Warren (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 207
| sup>
3.80.27 Seeing, however, that Celsus alleges that Christians are won over by us through vain hopes, we thus reply to him when he finds fault with our doctrine of the blessed life, and of communion with God: As for you, good sir, they also are won over by vain hopes who have accepted the doctrine of Pythagoras and Plato regarding the soul, that it is its nature to ascend to the vault of heaven, and in the super-celestial space to behold the sights which are seen by the blessed spectators above. According to you, O Celsus, they also who have accepted the doctrine of the duration of the soul (after death), and who lead a life through which they become heroes, and make their abodes with the gods, are won over by vain hopes. Probably also they who are persuaded that the soul comes (into the body) from without, and that it will be withdrawn from the power of death, would be said by Celsus to be won over by empty hopes. Let him then come forth to the contest, no longer concealing the sect to which he belongs, but confessing himself to be an Epicurean, and let him meet the arguments, which are not lightly advanced among Greeks and Barbarians, regarding the immortality of the soul, or its duration (after death), or the immortality of the thinking principle; and let him prove that these are words which deceive with empty hopes those who give their assent to them; but that the adherents of his philosophical system are pure from empty hopes, and that they indeed lead to hopes of good, or - what is more in keeping with his opinions - give birth to no hope at all, on account of the immediate and complete destruction of the soul (after death). Unless, perhaps, Celsus and the Epicureans will deny that it is a vain hope which they entertain regarding their end - pleasure - which, according to them, is the supreme good, and which consists in the permanent health of the body, and the hope regarding it which is entertained by Epicurus. 3.80 Seeing, however, that Celsus alleges that Christians are won over by us through vain hopes, we thus reply to him when he finds fault with our doctrine of the blessed life, and of communion with God: As for you, good sir, they also are won over by vain hopes who have accepted the doctrine of Pythagoras and Plato regarding the soul, that it is its nature to ascend to the vault of heaven, and in the super-celestial space to behold the sights which are seen by the blessed spectators above. According to you, O Celsus, they also who have accepted the doctrine of the duration of the soul (after death), and who lead a life through which they become heroes, and make their abodes with the gods, are won over by vain hopes. Probably also they who are persuaded that the soul comes (into the body) from without, and that it will be withdrawn from the power of death, would be said by Celsus to be won over by empty hopes. Let him then come forth to the contest, no longer concealing the sect to which he belongs, but confessing himself to be an Epicurean, and let him meet the arguments, which are not lightly advanced among Greeks and Barbarians, regarding the immortality of the soul, or its duration (after death), or the immortality of the thinking principle; and let him prove that these are words which deceive with empty hopes those who give their assent to them; but that the adherents of his philosophical system are pure from empty hopes, and that they indeed lead to hopes of good, or - what is more in keeping with his opinions - give birth to no hope at all, on account of the immediate and complete destruction of the soul (after death). Unless, perhaps, Celsus and the Epicureans will deny that it is a vain hope which they entertain regarding their end - pleasure - which, according to them, is the supreme good, and which consists in the permanent health of the body, and the hope regarding it which is entertained by Epicurus. ' None |
|
9. None, None, nan
Tagged with subjects: • Cleomedes
Found in books: Bryan (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 215; Wardy and Warren (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 215
|
