Public engagement in science and technology has grown in importance as developments in science and technology make increasingly significant impacts on people's lives. Now, efforts to engage publics in social decision-making or consensus-building regarding science and technology involve participation, learning or deliberation opportunities, as well as interactive or coproductive efforts among various sectors in society based on the recognition of scientific activities as a part of social operations - even those performed by scientific communities. We have conducted a community engagement (...) program in the HapMap project, the international human genome program, in Japan since 2002. Consequent upon our various approaches to engage Japanese publics, a range of observations were made, such as that: public engagement is not yet recognized or institutionalized in Japan; there is a wide gap between science and society; and the implications of public engagement in a Japanese context have not been examined enthusiastically, especially from the perspectives of political decision making, social consensus-building or self-determination. In this paper, we provide an overview of public engagement in Japan, and discuss issues and challenges raised by the HapMap community engagement project. We also discuss the implications of public engagement for social decision-making and self-determination, and explore the prospects for public engagement in science and technology in Japan. (shrink)

Over the past decade, genetically modified organisms have come to be viewed as problematic in Japan, as evidenced by a large number of newspaper articles covering questions ranging from the unknown ecological impact of GMOs to uncertainty about food safety, and by the fact that a number of consumers’ groups have organized activities including demonstrations at the experiment stations and the submission of petitions to the government. Against this backdrop, this article attempts to understand the changing interpretation of the perceived (...) rational social order in the context of the Japanese GMO controversies. Drawing on the French Theory of Conventions, the article will shed light on the conventions that serve as templates enabling actors to interpret what it means to introduce GMOs and what constitutes a rational decision concerning GMOs. The article will argue that rationality is best viewed as an emergent and interpretive process involving interpretation and negotiation by and among actors, and that conventions which may be taken for granted are nevertheless unstable and mutable. (shrink)

Ethics and dhamma for life based on Buddhist principles.

This article discusses ethnoveterinary medical pluralism in Western Kenya. Qualitative methods of data collection such as key informant interviews, open-ended in-depth interviews, focus group discussions (FGDs), narratives, and participant and direct observations were applied. The study shows that farmers in Nyang’oma seek both curative and preventive medical services for their animals from the broad range of health care providers available to them within a pluralistic medical system. Kleinman’s model of medical pluralism, which describes the professional, folk, and popular sectors, informs (...) this discussion because of its relevance and appropriateness to the study. It is, however, important to note the overlap in the three sectors and to point out that livestock farmers engage in multiple “consultations” based on a combination of their own characteristics and the cost, availability and specialization of health care providers. The study concludes by recognizing the complexity of ethnoveterinary medical pluralism and calls for the integration of a pluralistic perspective into the planning and implementation of animal health care interventions and services. (shrink)

Social technology can improve the quality of older adults' social lives and mitigate negative mental and physical health outcomes associated with loneliness, but it should be designed collaboratively with this population. In this paper, we used participatory design methods to investigate how robots might be used as social facilitators for middle-aged and older adults in both the US and Japan. We conducted PD workshops in the US and Japan because both countries are concerned about the social isolation of these older (...) adults due to their rapidly aging populations. We developed a novel approach to participatory design of future technologies that spends 2/3 of the PD session asking participants about their own life experiences as a foundation. This grounds the conversation in reality, creates rapport among the participants, and engages them in creative critical thinking. Then, we build upon this foundation, pose an abstract topic, and ask participants to brainstorm on the topic based on their previous discussion. In both countries, participants were eager to actively discuss design ideas for socially facilitative robots and imagine how they might improve their social lives. US participants suggested design ideas for telepresence robots, social distancing robots, and social skills artificial intelligence programs, while Japanese participants suggested ideas for pet robots, robots for sharing experiences, and easy-to-operate instructor robots. Comparing these two countries, we found that US participants saw robots as tools to help facilitate their social connections, while Japanese participants envisioned robots to function as surrogate companions for their parents and distract them from loneliness when they were unavailable. With this paper, we contribute to the literature in two main ways, presenting: A novel approach to participatory design of future technologies that grounds participants in their everyday experience, and Results of the study indicating how middle-aged and older adults from the US and Japan wanted technologies to improve their social lives. Although we conducted the workshops during the COVID-19 pandemic, many findings generalized to other situations related to social isolation, such as older adults living alone. (shrink)

Sudaτ 134: Ταρσοὶ καλάμων. οἱ δὲ Λαζοὶ βόθρους ὀρύξαντες καὶ δόρατα τοῖς βόθροις ἐγκαταπήξαντες ταρσοῖς καλάμων καὶ ὕλῃ μὴ βεβαίαν ἐχούσῃ βάσιν, ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὸ ἐπιφερόμενον ἄχθος ὀλισθαινούσῃ, τὰ στόματα τῶν ὀρυγμάτων ἐκάλυψαν· καὶ χοῦν ἐπιβαλόντες τά τε παρ’ ἑκάτερα χωρία γεωργήσαντες καὶ πυροὺς σπείραντες ἐτροπώσαντο τοὺς Ῥωμαίους. Ταρσοὶ καλάμων παρ’ Ἡροδότῳ ἡ τρασιά (πρασιάmss), οὗ ἐξήραινον τὴν πλίνθον.Frames of reeds. ‘The Lazi, having dug pits and securely fixed spears within them, concealed the openings of the holes with frames of (...) reeds and material that has no firm foundation but would give way to any load placed upon it; and having thrown earth on top and tilled the ground to either side and sewn wheat, they put the Romans to flight.’ Frames of reeds in Herodotus are the drying-rack, where they used to dry bricks.This entry in theSudacomprises three elements. First, the lemma Ταρσοὶ καλάμων, compared with the usual format of the lexicon, is atypical (though not unparalleled) both in being a two-word phrase and in lacking an explanatory gloss. The word ταρσός most frequently denotes various artefacts with a flat and/or interwoven structure, such as screens, baskets and mats, and by extension is used figuratively of surfaces that resemble wickerwork or basketry. The phrase ταρσοὶ καλάμων or καλάμου is otherwise attested, with somewhat different meanings, in only three ancient authors: Herodotus, Thucydides and Aeneas Tacticus. Second, an anonymous extract from an unidentified historical work supplies a sample usage of the headword phrase, in this instance a military ruse in which wicker screens are instrumental in concealing pits dug by the Lazi prior to an engagement with the Romans. The historical setting, the style and language of the extract, along with the known sources and methodology of the compiler(s) of theSuda, indicate that the quotation belongs to a classicizing historian of Late Antiquity. These issues will be examined below. Third, as testimony to an alternative meaning of ταρσοὶ καλάμων, the compiler adduces a gloss on Herodotus’Histories, which he drew from an earlier glossary of Herodotean usages. Here two problems arise. The definition of a drying-rack for bricks indicates that the original glossarist (and in turn theSudacompiler) did not in fact understand Herodotus’ technical description. In any case, the reading πρασιά, transmitted in all codices of theSuda, and accepted by Adler, should undoubtedly read τρασιά. (shrink)

Der Suda-Eintrag über Palamedes enthält einen Cento mit poetischen Reminiszenzen. Ein Verspaar evoziert eine Situation, in der ein Sprecher aufgefordert wird, eine schmerzliche Geschichte zu erzählen. Einer der beiden Verse soll mit dem ersten Vers von Aristophanes' « Acharnern » identisch sein. Möglicherweise stammt das Verspaar aus Euripides « Telephos » und wird von Aristophanes zitiert.

Die Glosse Suda ε 1756 wird in der Forschung mit der von Damaskios von Damaskos verfaßten Vita des Philosophen Isidoros in Verbindung gebracht. Tatsächlich aber steht sie in engerem Zusammenhang mit der aus dem Werk des Johannes Antiocheus entnommenen Glosse Suda β 246 und ist daher aus dem Corpus des Damaskios zu streichen und Ioannes Antiocheus zuzuschreiben.

Histories of literature tend to treat Stesichorus as just one of the lyric poets, like Alcman or Anacreon. But the vast scale of his compositions puts him in a category of his own. It has always been known that his Oresteia was divided into more than one book; P. Oxy, 2360 gave us fragments of a narrative about Telemachus of a nearly Homeric amplitude; and from P. Oxy. 2617 it was learned that the Geryoneis contained at least 1,300 verses, the (...) total being perhaps closer to two thousand. Even allowing for the shorter lines, this was as long as many an epic poem. Indeed, these were epic poems, in subject and style as well as in length: epics to be sung instead of recited. What was behind them ? Who was this Stesichorus, and how did he come to be, in Quintilian's phrase, ‘sustaining on the lyre the weight of epic song’ ? The biographical problem must be tackled first. The question of Stesichorus’ historical setting and date is confused by legendary elements as well as by contradiction in the sources. On the whole scholars remain spellbound by the specious precision of the Suda's dates , although it has long been realized that they are founded on nothing but the assumption that Stesichorus was younger than Alcman and older than Simonides. There have been excellent discussions by Wilamowitz and Maas, but they seem to have had little influence. (shrink)

In the first part of this essay, the author discusses certain aspects of the Hindu and Buddhist philosophical and religious conceptions that could have made some impact on the European ethics before Schopenhauer. In the second part, he deals with various channels of possible Buddhist influence on Schopenhauer's ethical thought. Finally, in discussing Buddhist-Wittgenstein relationship, one is confronted with convergent, yet independent, responses to similar sets of problems. Independently, and less systematically than Buddhist philosophical schools, Wittgenstein indicates the way of (...) liberation that cures from the "metaphysical pain " emerging from inappropriate use of language. His own project, however, was not metaphysical, but meta-linguistic in a very specific sense. The philosophical "cure" from the language disease leads ultimately to the "purification " and "decontamination " of thought: in turn, the mind rests in peace and silence before the senseless, paradoxical questions of the moral, esthetical religious or metaphysical character. Ovaj esej se sastoji iz tri dela. U prvom delu autor razmatra izvesne aspekte hinduistickih i budistickih filozofskih i religijskih doktrina koje su mogle imati uticaja na evropsku etiku do Sopenhauera. Na primer, Pironov metod uzdrzavanja od suda ispoljava zapanjujucu slicnost s izvornim budistickim metodom meditacije. U evropskoj filozofiji slican metod je razvijen u Huserlovoj fenomenologiji, iako na jedan puno slozeniji teorijski nacin. Razmatranje postklasicnih, helenistickih moralnih doktrina vodi od problema izvora do nekih specificnih pitanja komparativne ili hermeneuticke prirode. Pa ipak, u povesti zapadne filozofije nije se jasno ukazalo na dug budistickoj etici sve dok Sopenhauer nije napisao Svet kao volja i predstava. U drugom delu rada autor se stoga bavi razlicitim tokovima moguceg budistickog uticaja na Sopenhauerovu eticku misao. Vrlo cesto Sopenhauerovi kljucni argumenti su pozajmljeni iz indijskih soterioloskih ucenja. S druge strane, on je u stanju da prilagodi ta orijentalna ucenja svojim vlastitim pojmovima i idejama. Izmedju njegove filozofije i indijskih filozofija moguce je uspostaviti odnos konvergentnosti. Iz toga je proizislo jedinstveno stapanje dveju perspektiva koje se ponekad oznacava i kao "evropski budizam". Za razliku od Sopenhauera Vitgenstajn ne upucuje ni na kakvo delo, ili odlomak iz hinduisticke ili budisticke literature. Stavise, tesko je braniti stav da je Sopenhauer imao ikakvu znacajniju posrednicku ulogu u budjenju Vitgenstajnovog interesovanja za budizam. Mnogo je, u stvari, lakse ukazati na vaznost Sopenhauerovog uticaja na "etickog" Vitgenstajna iz Tractatusa, nego utvrditi ikakvu slicnost izmedju sopenhauerovsko-budisticke i Vitgenstajnove eticke koncepcije. Raspravljajuci o odnosu izmedju Vitgenstajna i budizma, susrecemo se s konvergentnim, ali nezavisnim odgovorima na slicne vrste problema. Nezavisno, i manje sistematicno od budistickih filozofskih skola, Vitgenstajn ukazuje na put oslobodjenja sto leci od "metafizicke boli" zasnovane na nepravilnoj upotrebi jezika. Medjutim, njegov vlastiti projekat nije bio metafizicki, vec metalingvisticki u jednom vrlo specificnom smislu. Filozofsko "izlecenje" od bolesti jezika vodi, u krajnjoj liniji, do "ociscenja" i "dekontaminacije" misli. Kao rezultat toga, um nalazi spokoj i mir pred besmislenim, paradoksalnim pitanjima moralnog, estetickog religijskog ili metafizickog karaktera. (shrink)

IN C.Q. N.S. xiii , 1578ff., M. L. West discusses various non-Greek traditions which throw light on the interpretation of Pherecydes. Of course problems remain, but one of these the comparative material may yet solve. Is West correct in suggesting that we emend the Suda entry on Pherecydesand so reduce the seven recesses to five ? A convincing analogy can help us here. G. S. Kirk has already compared the seven gates which Ishtar has to penetrate when she descends (...) into the underworld. Despite all his reluctance to admit oriental influence on Pherecydes, he sees this as a possible source. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:American Journal of Philology 122.1 (2001) 87-106 [Access article in PDF] Homo Fandi Dulcissimus: The Role of Favorinus in the Attic Nights of Aulus Gellius Stephen M. Beall ONE OF THE INDIRECT BENEFITS of reading the Attic Nights of Aulus Gellius is that he offers us a glimpse of the "smart set" of Antonine Rome. Many chapters are cast as anecdotes featuring Gellius' mentors and acquaintances, among whom he (...) counted such illustrious figures as Herodes Atticus, Marcus Fronto, and the grammarian known as Domitius "the Insane." But the "star" of the work is clearly Favorinus of Arles, a flamboyant orator who described his life in three paradoxes: he was a native of Gaul who spoke Greek, a eunuch who was accused of adultery, 1 and a citizen who quarreled with an emperor and lived (Philostratus, VS 489). To Gellius, he was "Favorinus noster," and the twenty-seven anecdotes involving him indicate that the two were on fairly intimate terms. 2We are left to wonder, however, how someone as eccentric as Favorinus should have become the special friend and mentor of a "fairly conservative, practically minded Roman" such as Gellius. 3 Perhaps, following Polemo, we can attribute the attraction to Favorinus' skill in the black arts. 4 It is more likely, however, that he possessed qualities that could be adapted to Gellius' intellectual program but which have not been fully elucidated by scholarship. 5 These can best be expounded, I believe, as three additional paradoxes: Favorinus was a polymath who passed for a philosopher, a philhellene who studied Roman culture, and [End Page 87] a Greek "Asianist" with ties to Latin archaism. All three paradoxes, as we shall see, relate to thematic issues in the Attic Nights and may help us to account for the paradoxical nature of the work as a whole. 1. Favorinus: The Miscellaneous Philosopher Favorinus' professional status was open to question even in antiquity. Philostratus describes him as a "philosopher" who "was called a sophist" by dint of his charm as a speaker (VS 489). The Suda puts the case less charitably, saying that "he was full of philosophy, but more devoted to rhetoric" (Phi 4). Lucian's Demonax found him too effeminate in style and appearance to wear the mantle (Demonax 12-13). When Favorinus claimed a philosopher's exemption from public service, the emperor Hadrian was prepared to rule against him (Philostratus, VS 490). Favorinus averted this disaster by accepting the priesthood in question, claiming that he had been advised to do so in a dream.The question of Favorinus' calling is further complicated by the mixed character of his published work, little of which survives. 6 He wrote treatises on philosophical skepticism, including the celebrated Pyrrhonian Tropes (Phil. VS 491; cf. Gellius, 11.5.5). 7 He did not, however, restrict himself to writing of a technical kind. He also produced two miscellanies, the Memorabilia and Omnigena Historia, which seem to have combined philosophical anecdotes with other sorts of trivia, including etymologies and wonder tales. 8 His oratorical remains likewise indicate a versatile and playful intellect. Two speeches preserved in the corpus of Dio Chrysostom (37, 64), and a third on a recently discovered papyrus, are notable for their witty use of stock themes and exempla. He declaimed on "absurd" themes, such as the virtues of Thersites and the advantages of the quartan fever (Gellius, NA 17.12). Indeed, he was so adept at sophistic role-playing that Gellius could not tell when he was speaking in earnest (14.1.2). Philostratus reports that he drew crowds with a highly musical style of speaking, at times almost like singing, which won applause even from people who could not understand Greek (VS 491).In the anecdotes of the Attic Nights, we find a similarly ambiguous [End Page 88] characterization. Although Gellius regularly honors his mentor with the epithet philosophus, 9 he praises him chiefly for the "sweetness of his diction," which, he says, held him captive for entire days (16.3.1; cf. 14.1.32). Elsewhere he lauds him... (shrink)

En el mundo occidental, la primera figura que encarna el arquetipo del mediador sapiencial entre la comunidad humana y lo divino es, sin duda, Pitágoras de Samos. Las implicaciones de las doctrinas de este chamán en la historia de las ideas son enormes, pues sus invenciones abarcan todos los campos del saber: matemáticas, astronomía, filosofía, retórica, política, adivinación, medicina y religión. Nada escapa a este sabio griego, al que se atribuye un famoso teorema matemático, las escalas musicales y la idea (...) de la inmortalidad del alma. La primera parte del libro se ocupa de estudiar a Pitágoras como figura carismática y legendaria, la colección de sus enseñanzas, sus aspectos mánticos y políticos y, finalmente, la tradición pitagórica entre la realidad y la falsificación. En la segunda parte se presenta por primera vez, en una nueva traducción anotada, una recopilación de todas las biografías del filósofo: las escritas por Porfirio de Tiro, Jámblico de Calcis y Diógenes Laercio, y, como novedad, la más antigua que se conserva, redactada por el historiador griego Diodoro de Sicilia (s. I a.C.), y la del patriarca Focio de Constantinopla (s. IX). Todo ello, junto a la colección de máximas pitagóricas de origen tardío, llamada Versos de oro, así como el epítome de la enciclopedia bizantina Suda (s. X), forma el presente corpus biográfico-doctrinal de Pitágoras, que era una labor pendiente en el panorama bibliográfico español. David Hernández de la Fuente (Madrid, 1974) es escritor y profesor universitario, especializado en religión griega, antigüedad tardía e historia del platonismo. Doctor en filología clásica y sociología, es autor de los ensayos Oráculos griegos (Alianza) y Bakkhos Anax (CSIC), así como de numerosos artículos en revistas académicas y ediciones de autores clásicos, y ha coordinado la obra colectiva New Perspectives on Late Antiquity (Cambridge Scholars Pub.). Como autor de narrativa ha publicado Las puertas del sueño (Premio de Arte Joven 2005 de la Comunidad de Madrid), Continental (2007) y A cubierto (Premio Diputación de Valencia 2010). Memoria mundi 59 Isbn: 978-84-938466-6-4 440 páginas. (shrink)

Herennius Philo of Byblos is the subject of a notice in the Suda, which states that he was a grammarian born in Nero's time who lived to such an advanced age that he was still composing works in the reign of Hadrian. The titles listed include: On the Acquisition and Choice of Books; On Cities and their Eminent Citizens; and On the Reign of Hadrian . His name, like that of Flavius Josephus, could imply the patronage of a Roman (...) family; we may suppose that, like Porphyry and Maximus of Tyre, he was a Phoenicean by origin who had adopted the tongue and culture of the Greeks. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Apsines and Pseudo–ApsinesMalcolm HeathThis essay addresses a problem with the authorship of the rhetorical treatise traditionally attributed to Apsines,1 and explores the possibilities which open up if we reject that attribution. We know that a great deal of rhetorical literature was in circulation in late antiquity without reliable indication of authorship. Some texts, such as the Anonymus Seguerianus, have survived with no name attached. Others survive with the wrong (...) name: only two of the five parts of the Hermogenean canon are likely to be by Hermogenes himself.2 In some cases alternative attributions are found: as we shall see, one of the pseudo–Hermogenean texts (On Invention) was also attributed to Apsines. Sometimes alternative attributions are recorded in the manuscripts: the first of the two treatises on epideictic attributed to Menander Rhetor is ascribed in a supralinear variant in one manuscript to "Menander or Genethlius";3 neither attribution is likely to be correct. One manuscript of the short treatise on epicheiremes preserved under the name of Minucianus notes that it is ascribed in another source to Nicagoras;4 the confusion may have arisen from a patronymic, since the younger Minucianus was son and father of sophists named Nicagoras. In the case of the pseudo–Dionysian Art of Rhetoric we can see a false attribution coming into being: the anonymous author's references to his own On Imitation (364.24, 383.22 Usener/Radermacher) prompted a scholiast to identify him conjecturally with Dionysius of Halicarnassus.5 One of the sources used by [End Page 89] Georgius, a commentator on Hermogenes of (probably) the fifth century, was "an unascribed treatise, which they attribute to Aquila" ().6 Other examples of false or uncertain attribution could be cited. These facts do not warrant indiscriminate skepticism about the authorship of rhetorical texts; but caution is in order, and we should weigh seriously possible grounds for doubting a traditional attribution.Treatise AThe treatise traditionally attributed to Apsines (to avoid prejudging the question of authorship let us call it "Treatise A") discusses the parts of a speech: prologue, narrative, arguments, epilogue. This was a standard format; Syrianus refers to "a myriad others" who have written on the subject (2.11.6–10 Rabe; cf. PS 205.8–10 Rabe). Other extant examples include the epitome of Rufus, the Anonymus Seguerianus, and the pseudo–Hermogenean On Invention. In his work on stasis Hermogenes himself seems to look forward to such a text when he promises to return to one point in more detail in a discussion of the prologue (53.12–13 Rabe). This promise is not redeemed in any extant work of his; Syrianus inferred that Hermogenes had written "on the parts of the political speech" (2.3.2–7) but evidently had no firsthand knowledge of such a work.The Traditional AttributionThe Apsines to whom Treatise A is attributed is generally identified with Valerius Apsines of Gadara, a friend of Philostratus (VS 628). From the Suda (A4735) we gather that he studied with Heraclides of Lycia in Smyrna and with Basilicus in Nicomedia, held a sophistic chair in Athens, and was elevated to consular rank under Maximinus (A.D. 235–38).7 A complimentary reference to Basilicus in the introduction to [End Page 90] the treatise (331.7 = 217.5–6) encourages this identification. But we know of at least three other sophists with the same name. The Suda mentions two:1. Apsines of Athens, father of the sophist Onasimus (A4734).2. Apsines, son of the Athenian sophist Onasimus (A4736).From Eunapius we know of3. Apsines the Spartan, a rival of Julian of Cappadocia and a distinguished (482, with an entertaining anecdote about the rivalry at 483–85). Eunapius' Apsines the Spartan may well be identical with the Suda's Apsines son of Onasimus, since the Suda's entry on Onasimus (O327) describes him as "of Cyprus or Sparta" and lists a technical work (addressed, presumably, to his son) among his writings.8 An older theory which identified Apsines of Gadara with the father of Onasimus has generally been abandoned on chronological grounds, since the Suda gives the reign of Constantine as Onasimus' floruit.9 [End Page 91]A... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Interpreting a Classic: Demosthenes and His Ancient CommentatorsK. KapparisCraig A. Gibson. Interpreting a Classic: Demosthenes and His Ancient Commentators. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2002. xii + 261 pp. Cloth, $55.This book aims to provide a comprehensive account of the ancient scholarship on Demosthenes. Gibson points out that Demosthenes was widely read in later antiquity, and this created the need for linguistic and historical commentaries (...) on his speeches. Of these, some have partially survived on papyrus, while excerpts have also been preserved in later lexicographers and the Byzantine scholia found in the margins of Demosthenic manuscripts. The purpose of Gibson's study is to clarify some confusing and difficult issues related to the ancient scholarship on Demosthenes and to provide the text and commentary on the main sources. [End Page 481]Gibson's introduction includes an informative outline of key parameters in the debate, such as the accuracy of excerption from an ancient commentary, the significance of date and place, and the intended readership of these commentaries. The first chapter discusses the form and transmission of ancient commentaries, their relation with lexicographic works, and their impact on the Byzantine scholia. Gibson convincingly argues that the scholia do not reveal direct dependency upon the surviving ancient commentaries but were compiled from lexicographic works such as Harpocration or the Suda, and possibly other works lost for us. The second chapter deals with the sources, critical agenda, and readership of the ancient commentaries. Here, Gibson provides a clear account of the purposes and guiding principles behind the composition of these works. He concludes that ancient commentators were familiar with interpretative problems of the Demosthenic text and tried to explain allusions and references to specific events, people, and places and also provide semantic, etymological and textual explanations of difficult or unusual terms. In this and the third chapter, Gibson discusses in considerable detail the scholarship on Didymus. He rejects the view that Didymus was merely a filter for a "golden era" of Alexandrian scholarship and argues that his prominent position as a commentator is due to the vast quantity of his work and its impact on later scholars. In sum, the first part of the study offers an informative account of ancient Demosthenic scholarship written in a clear and accessible style.The second part of the book contains the texts of ancient commentators of Demosthenes, with English translations, and also linguistic and historical commentary. In the translation, Gibson chooses to leave out many lines from the papyrus texts where only single words or fragments of words are legible; he translates only the most extant sections of the text. This is a valid choice, but readers should be aware of the fact that many important details may be hiding in the leftovers and fragments that have been omitted. Gibson does not provide the readily available text of P.Berol.inv. 9780, the most extensive surviving work of Didymus, while he cites the rest of the texts from reliable modern editions. In the commentary there are interesting discussions on the Spartan mora, the building of the Parthenon, the Helliastic courts, and many other topics noted by the ancient commentators on Demosthenes. An appendix presents and discusses P.Lond.Lit. 179, a prologue and commentary on Dem. 21. The reader will probably find useful the indexes and rich bibliography provided in the last part of this study.Gibson's commentary is certainly thorough but contains a number of errors in detail, and important bibliography is missing on individual topics. For example:Page 113: Gibson adopts the text of Pearson-Stephens. The adjective is, or, as here (later Greek),. Therefore the text should be (see LSJ s.v.).Page 120: Gibson has missed several important contributions to the issue of the theoric fund in recent years (M. H. Hansen, GRBS 17 [1976] 235-46; E. M. [End Page 482] Harris in E. M. Harris and R. Wallace, eds., Transitions to Empire: Essays in Greco-Roman History 360-146 B.C., in Honor of E. Badian [Norman, Okla., 1996]; C. Carey, Apollodoros Against Neaira [Warminster, 1992] 152-57). As a result, his note on P.Berol. 9780, Col. 8.32-44 is... (shrink)

Zusammenfassung Anhand dreier wichtiger Fragen (Schlusspartien der Excerpta Constantini und die Bestimmung der Verfassungszeit, die Frage nach dem Status der Excerpta Cod. Par. 1630 und der Exc. Salmasiana) habe ich zunächst die in der byzantinistischen Forschung aufgedeckten Probleme und die erarbeiteten Vorschläge zu ihrer Lösung skizziert, um sie in einem zweiten Schritt mit den Lösungsvorschlägen und dem argumentativen Vorgang Robertos zu kontrastieren. Aus diesem Vergleich geht m. E. hervor, dass die „Johanneische Frage“ in der Edition von Roberto keine originelle und (...) unerwartete Lösung erfahren, sondern eine weitere Verwicklung erlitten hat. Die Fehlentscheidungen bezüglich dieser drei Komponenten führen zu weiteren Verzerrungen: Viele Glossen aus der Suda, die Texte der Wiener Troica und der Hypothesis zur Odyssee wurden in das Corpus in Folge von Übereinstimmungen mit den zu Unrecht für Johannes von Antiochien erklärten Texten aufgenommen. Es versteht sich von alleine, dass alle Beobachtungen über die Quellen, den literarischen Wert und das weitere Schicksal der Chronik, die Roberto auf der Basis des von ihm zusammengezimmerten Corpus anstellt, im gleichen Maße als wissenschaftlich zuverlässig zu betrachten sind, in welchem die Ausführungen und Theorien es sind, welche die Aufnahme des entsprechenden Materials in das Corpus rechtfertigen. Obwohl der interessierte Leser jetzt ein umfangreiches Dossier zur „Johanneischen Frage“ an die Hand bekommen hat, ist das Erscheinen dieses Bandes eher zu beklagen als zu begrüßen: Die allgemeine Verwirrung um Johannes von Antiochien ist damit nur größer geworden. (shrink)

Ovaj rad predstavlja studiju iz praktičke etike u kojoj se kritizira ne tako davna odluka njemačkog Federalnog ustavnog suda prema kojoj je protuzakonito oboriti oteti avion s taocima koji će se sigurno zabiti u zgradu punu civila. Strategija argumentacije jest da se prvo nabroje okolnosti u kojima se usmrćivanje nevinih ljudi čini opravdanim te da se zatim navedu konzekvencijalistička i deontološka načela koja takvo što pokušavaju opravdati. Nakon toga utvrđuje se u koju od tih vrsta slučajeva spada situacija koja (...) se u radu istražuje, te se analizira što bi o tome reklo svako od navedenih moralnih načela. Zaključak jest da bi se sve uvjerljive moralne teorije, bez obzira na njihova inače mnogobrojna neslaganja, složile oko toga da oteti avion s taocima u takvim okolnostima treba oboriti. Iako nema pokušaja da se izloži opća teorija o ubijanju nevinih, na temelju istraženog slučaja nudi se i ideja o tome kako bi prihvatljiva teorija tog tipa možda mogla izgledati.This work is an exercise in practical ethics that criticizes a decision of the German Federal Constitutional Court according to which it is unlawful to crush down a highjacked plan with hostages, which is certain to hit a building full of civilians. The argumentation strategy is to enumerate circumstances in which killing the innocent seems justified, and then to list consequentialist and deontological principles that try to show that doing this may be the right thing to do. After that it is investigated under which category does the case under the analysis belong and what would all of the listed moral principles say about it. The conclusion is that all convincing moral theories would, despite their otherwise numerous disagreements, agree that the highjacked plane with hostages should be destroyed before it hits the building. Although there is no attempt at a general theory on killing the innocent here, one hint at such a theory is offered on the basis of the present analysis. (shrink)

Le Vite dei filosofi di Diogene Laerzio ebbero una scarsa diffusione nel mondo tardo-antico e bizantino. Assenti dalla Biblioteca di Fozio (IX s.), le Vite riemergono a Bisanzio a partire dal X secolo, sotto forma di estratti, nella Antologia Palatina e nella Suda. È mia intenzione soffermarmi su queste due opere al fine di indagare i rapporti che intercorrono tra le loro tradizioni manoscritte e quella laerziana.

This paper considers the date and authorship of chapters 8-11 of the Art of Rhetoric‚ falsely attributed to Dionysius of Halicarnassus. Analysis of the two chapters on "figured speech" suggests that chapter 9 is an unfinished attempt by the author of chapter 8 to rework the material into a more radical (but, in fact, conceptually flawed) refutation of those who rejected the concept. Distinctive common features indicate that chapters 10-11, on declamation and criticism, are by the same author. The texts (...) probably date to the early second century A.D.; the author was perhaps the Aelius Sarapion attested in the Suda. (shrink)