Arthur Oosthout

I recall there being something in Damascius' theory of time with a similar slant, namely that past, present, and future reflect the relations of causal or logical priority and posteriority between intelligibles.

It is a bit funny, though, to see the gods (metaphorically) resigned to the past.

Nicholas of Methone, Reader of Proclus in Byzantium "Nicholas of Methone, Reader of Proclus in Byzantium" published on 19 May 2025 by Brill.

Now out! Immense thanks to our solid contributors. Anyone into Byzantine philosophy and Neoplatonism's legacy in the Eastern Christian world, this is the work for you! brill.com/display/titl...

Out today! Very pleased to see this work in the wild now—honored to have had the chance to contribute a ch. on the "bundle theory" of matter in Gregory's In hex. A must-read for late antique/early Christian philosophy readers: global.oup.com/academic/pro...

If you have excellent knowledge of Latin, and you'd like to get a 4-year job to work with medieval philosophy and manuscripts, there is a week left to apply! #philsky #medievalsky

PhD-candidate (4 years) for the project ‘Fluidity in the Medieval Aristotle. Readers and Readings of the Greek-Latin Translations’ (FitMA) Interested in Greek-Latin translations of Aristotle?

FitMA is hiring! We are looking for a motivated PhD-candidate in medieval Latin philosophy to join our team @kuleuvenuniversity.bsky.social! Deadline for applications: 24 April
www.kuleuven.be/personeel/jo...

Pleased to announce my project's highlight workshop coming up April 9-10 in Berlin, on the various visions of Greek philosophy, covering a wide swath from Plato and Aristotle to Nietzsche.

With 17 talks, a dense yet rich set of discussions ahead!

a man wearing a shirt that says flex glue on it is standing in a dark room ALT: a man wearing a shirt that says flex glue on it is standing in a dark room

Future me when the unwritten doctrines of dr. Greig are finally released:

Nicholas of Methone, Reader of Proclus in Byzantium "Nicholas of Methone, Reader of Proclus in Byzantium" published on 24 Jul 2025 by Brill.

Pleased to say, after 4 years, a vol. I co-edited w/ Dragos Calma/Joshua Robinson is finally seeing the light this July!

Anyone into the Byz. afterlife of Neoplatonism, the b/g to late Byz. theological disputes, and the sole Byz. commentary on Proclus' ET—this is for you!

brill.com/display/titl...

Call for applications: LECTIO Visiting Fellowships 2025–2026

Can't recommend the LECTIO visiting fellowships at KU Leuven enough. A warm and engaged scholarly community, intellectually stimulating conversation, @speccoll-kuleuven.bsky.social on your doorstep, digs in Leuven's Groot Begijnhof, and the city's best coffee downstairs from your office.

Front cover of "Proclus on Whole and Part" (Philosophia antiqua 172, Brill 2025)

Out now at Brill: my new book on mereology in Proclus! See
brill.com/display/titl... for details.

Are they perfect insofar as no essential component is missing from them?

For Eternity, on the other hand, this question cannot be raised because it has no distinct parts in actuality. Because of this, Proclus argues that it transcends the distinction between perfect and imperfect (ὑπερτέλειος).

Additionally, in the Timaeus-commentary, Proclus argues that Eternity is the first Whole because its internal distinction between one and being (as in Plato's Parmenides) exists only in a concealed manner (κρυφίως). So, for other, lesser wholes we can raise the question: ...

The eternal being is thus whole in an axiological sense because all of itself is present to it at once, and so cannot deviate from its natural state. In this respect, the whole for Proclus is not just a logical concept (as in, a given set of elements), but also always an axiological one.

These two kinds of beings are in turn linked to two instances of participated goodness: a) goodness which is stably possessed by its participant (= an eternal or perpetual being), and goodness which is inherent in a weaker, changeable participant (= a sensible particular).

There, he argues that the whole is something which never gives up ‘either its essence or its proper completeness’ (οὐδὲν γὰρ τῶν ὅλων ἢ τὴν οὐσίαν ἢ τὴν τελειότητα τὴν οἰκείαν ἀφίησιν). He then contrasts the true, eternal whole to the 'partial being' (μερικόν).

In the Platonic Theology (book, ch. 27), Proclus gives a similar explanation to your analysis of the Elements of Theology, but he also adds an axiological argument for why Eternity must the primal Whole. 1/?