Stavros Kouloumentas - Profile on Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Uploads

Papers by Stavros Kouloumentas

Research paper thumbnail of “On Ancient Medicine and Aristotle on the Structure and Function of Bodily Parts”, in H. Bartoš and V. Linka (eds.), Aristotle Reads Hippocrates (Studies in Ancient Medicine 59). Leiden, Boston: Brill (2024), 100-125.

In this paper, we attempt a comparative discussion of some key themes in the Hippocratic treatise... more In this paper, we attempt a comparative discussion of some key themes in the Hippocratic treatise On Ancient Medicine concerning the bodily parts, their constitution, and the method for studying them, as well as Aristotle's contribution to these topics in his writings on natural philosophy. Although Aristotle never refers to On Ancient Medicine, some of the questions he himself raises seem to have strong affinities with the questions that the Hippocratic author (henceforth, the author) tries to resolve.2 Further, on the one hand, some of the Aristotelian answers to such questions are formulated through criticism and opposition to earlier thinkers, including Empedocles, who is castigated by the author, and significantly on similar grounds with Aristotle. On the other hand, some Aristotelian answers can be interpreted as supplementing or even revising the analysis of On Ancient Medicine. One instance of the former is that both Aristotle and the author criticise their predecessors for focusing on the origin of bodily parts rather than on how they are. One instance of the latter is Aris-1 Research on this topic was conducted as part of the research project 'Commented Editions of Aristotelian Texts' funded by the Greek Foundation for Research and Innovation (ELIDEK). 2 Despite the fact that Aristotle rarely mentions physicians by name, he examines the medical doctrines of his era, especially in the biological treatises, and regards the theoretical principles of his natural philosophy as the foundation of medicine: "Aristotle must have realized that the superiority of his own natural philosophy had implications for medicine as well. He must have regarded his own natural philosophy as being of vital importance and relevance to medicine, especially those parts that were concerned with the living world and with the health and disease of living beings" (van der Eijk 2022, 113). For the numerous parallels between the Hippocratic corpus and Aristotle's biological treatises, see , who excludes On Ancient Medicine from the medical writings with which Aristotle might have been familiar (Oser-Grote 2004, 294). On the other hand, Mihai (2016) 91 and Bartoš (2021) 54-56 argue that Aristotle is well acquainted with the methodological theses introduced in On Ancient Medicine. Although we agree with the thesis that Aristotle's position can be read as criticising the author's methodology, we will argue that it can also be interpreted as correcting and supplementing views expressed in that work.

Research paper thumbnail of “Της Αγάπης αίματα: αναζητώντας την ενότητα του εμπεδόκλειου έργου”, Φιλοσοφία 52 (2022), 335-358.

Research paper thumbnail of “Tracing the Origins of Beings: Cosmogony and Anthropogony in On Flesh”, in D. Manetti, L. Perilli and A. Roselli (eds.), Ippocrate e gli altri. Rome: Publications de l’École française de Rome (2022), 73-88.

Research paper thumbnail of “O Αλκμαίων και η εγκεφαλοκεντρική θεωρία στον Φαίδωνα”, Νεύσις 27-28 (2020), 45-65.

2Tav)po<; KouXoupevTaq* nepiXi]y>ti: O veapoc ZwKpdTn<; epqjaviCetai otov 0aiSu>va va peXexd 6id<... more 2Tav)po<; KouXoupevTaq* nepiXi]y>ti: O veapoc ZwKpdTn<; epqjaviCetai otov 0aiSu>va va peXexd 6id<popec 0ewpieq Jiou npooTO0ouv va npoeXeuon xqc Cwiic kgi xqc Yvcboii<; pe pdoji uXiKd aixio onux; to aipa. o aepac, n <P"'T'a koi o evK^cpaXcq. MoXov6ti o ScoKpdTn«; 6ev Karovopd^Ei doooq diarunwaav teTOiou £i6ou<; i6eE<;, apKEToi peXethte*; TtiaTEUouv oTi auToc JIOU Tovioe tov Ka0opiOTiK6 p6Xo tou EyKEipdXou oxq YVioaiaKj) 6ia-6iKaaia eivoi o AXKpaiwv Kai xou aJto6i6ouv pia JtoXunXoKn Oewpia Yia xo nux; ap-XiKd jtpooXapPdvovxai xa aia0nxnP»aKd SEfiopEva. ejieixo o^ioXoyouvtoi ae eva KEVxpiKO ouoxiipa Kai XEXiKd oxa0£pojioiodvxai. ZKondc; xou dp0pou Eivai va e^eto-OEi OE noio Pa0p6 n JtXaxwviKii 7t£piYP"9n P"opE' va ouvSeOei pE tk; undpxouoEc; papxupiEc Yia T^v EmaxnpoXoYia ^u AXxpaiiuva. OpoKEipEvou va anavTn0£i auxo xo Ep<bxr)pa XapPdvovxai UJioiJ'il xa £^n<< oxoix£io. (a) q StaXEKXiKr) JiXoKq xwv JiXa-xwviKwv 6iaX6Y(ov Kai q ouppoXq xou nXdxwva oxqv «iaxopia Tqq 9iXoaoipia(;..-(p) q 0Eu)pia oxExiKd pE tov poXo xou sYKEipa^o" Siaxinwaz o ouYYpa9ia<; xou Hepl iepfjc vovaov-Kai (y) oi owCdpEVEC papxupiEi; yio xqv EJiioxqpoXoYia xou AXxpaioiva. Av Kai q TtXaxioviKq jispiYpaipq ipaivExai va ajiqxEi opiopEVEq i6eec jiou 6iaxujm)aE o AXKpaiiov, Eivai oaipEi; 6xi ntpdx^^ Kai oxoiX£ia jiou jipoEpxovxai and xov i6io xov nXdxtuva.

Research paper thumbnail of “Heraclitus πεσσεύων: Fragment 52”, Philosophical Inquiry 25.3/4 (2003), 241-259.

Hippolytus was a theologian and bishop of Rome, who lived in the third century A.D. He wrote nine... more Hippolytus was a theologian and bishop of Rome, who lived in the third century A.D. He wrote nine books under the general title Refutation of All Heresies, where he attacked the Chrisdan heresies with severity, claiming that they were pagan revivals of the idolatrous philosophy. The doxographer thinks that Heraclitus of Ephesus identified "the all" (TO Jiav) with a range of different ideas: "Heraclitus says that the all is divisible, indivisible, created, uncreated, mortal, immortal, logos, aeon, father, son, god, just".' Following Hippolytus quotes Heraclitus' fragments (Bl, 50-53) in order to support his assertion." He cites B52 as a claim that for Heraclitus "the all" is a child (son): alcbv Jtalg 80TL Jtat^cov, Jteooencov jraiöog f] ^ao\Xy\ir\} Under this perspective the context in which Hippolytus places the Heraclitean dictum is interpretatively almost useless.^ It is notable that the rest of the significant paraphrases of the other doxographers (Lucian, Clement, Proclus) excessively attribute Chrisdan, Neoplatonic and Stoic doctrines to Heraclitus."^

Research paper thumbnail of “Heraclitus and the Medical Theorists on the Circle”, Dialogues d’histoire ancienne 44.2 (2018), 43-63.

Presses universitaires de Franche-Comté | « Dialogues d'histoire ancienne » 2018/2 44/2 | pages 4... more Presses universitaires de Franche-Comté | « Dialogues d'histoire ancienne » 2018/2 44/2 | pages 43 à 63 ISSN 0755-7256 ISBN 9782848676395 Article disponible en ligne à Distribution électronique Cairn.info pour Presses universitaires de Franche-Comté. © Presses universitaires de Franche-Comté. Tous droits réservés pour tous pays.

Research paper thumbnail of “Prodicus on the Rise of Civilization: Religion, Agriculture, and Culture Heroes”, Philosophie antique 18 (2018), 127-152.

Research paper thumbnail of “Aristotle on Alcmaeon in Relation to Pythagoras: an addendum in Metaphysics Alpha?”, in P. Golitsis and K. Ierodiakonou (eds.), Aristotle and His Commentators: Studies in Memory of Paraskevi Kotzia (Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca et Byzantina 7). Berlin: De Gruyter (2019), 49-67.

Research paper thumbnail of “The Pythagoreans on Medicine: Religion or Science?”, in A. B. Renger and A. Stavru (eds.), Pythagorean Knowledge from the Ancient to the Modern World: Askesis, Religion, Science (Episteme in Bewegung 4). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag (2016), 249-261.

Research paper thumbnail of “Alcmaeon and His Addressees: Revisiting the Incipit”, in P. Bouras-Vallianatos and S. Xenophontos (eds.), Greek Medical Literature and Its Readers: From Hippocrates to Islam and Byzantium. London, New York: Routledge (2018), 7-29.

Research paper thumbnail of “The Body and the Polis: Alcmaeon on Health and Disease”, British Journal for the History of Philosophy 22.5 (2014), 867-887.

Research paper thumbnail of “The Derveni Papyrus on Cosmic Justice”, Rhizai 4.1 (2007), 105-132.

Books by Stavros Kouloumentas

Research paper thumbnail of (With M. Alessandrelli and S. Kouloumentas), Stoic Presocratics – Presocratic Stoics: Studies in the Stoic Reception of Early Greek Philosophy (= Philosophie hellénistique et romaine / Hellenistic and Roman Philosophy), Turnhout: Brepols, 2024 (Open Access)

This volume provides for the first time in scholarship a comprehensive and in-depth analysis of t... more This volume provides for the first time in scholarship a comprehensive and in-depth analysis of the relationship between Stoicism and early Greek philosophy, from Orphism to the Monists and the Pluralists. Going beyond the common assumption that the Stoics refer exclusively to Heraclitus, it is shown that almost the entire Presocratic tradition (sometimes mediated decisively by Plato and Aristotle) has made a fundamental contribution to the foundation of Stoic thought, especially in the field of physics (i.e., cosmology, ontology, and theology).

Research paper thumbnail of D. Sedley, Ο δημιουργισμός και οι επικριτές του στην αρχαιότητα, μτφ. Σ. Κουλουμέντας, επιμ. Χ. Μπάλλα. Αθήνα: Μορφωτικό Ίδρυμα Εθνικής Τραπέζης (2023), 496 σελ. Τίτλος πρωτoτύπου: Creationism and Its Critics in Antiquity. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press (2007).

Research paper thumbnail of “On Ancient Medicine and Aristotle on the Structure and Function of Bodily Parts”, in H. Bartoš and V. Linka (eds.), Aristotle Reads Hippocrates (Studies in Ancient Medicine 59). Leiden, Boston: Brill (2024), 100-125.

In this paper, we attempt a comparative discussion of some key themes in the Hippocratic treatise... more In this paper, we attempt a comparative discussion of some key themes in the Hippocratic treatise On Ancient Medicine concerning the bodily parts, their constitution, and the method for studying them, as well as Aristotle's contribution to these topics in his writings on natural philosophy. Although Aristotle never refers to On Ancient Medicine, some of the questions he himself raises seem to have strong affinities with the questions that the Hippocratic author (henceforth, the author) tries to resolve.2 Further, on the one hand, some of the Aristotelian answers to such questions are formulated through criticism and opposition to earlier thinkers, including Empedocles, who is castigated by the author, and significantly on similar grounds with Aristotle. On the other hand, some Aristotelian answers can be interpreted as supplementing or even revising the analysis of On Ancient Medicine. One instance of the former is that both Aristotle and the author criticise their predecessors for focusing on the origin of bodily parts rather than on how they are. One instance of the latter is Aris-1 Research on this topic was conducted as part of the research project 'Commented Editions of Aristotelian Texts' funded by the Greek Foundation for Research and Innovation (ELIDEK). 2 Despite the fact that Aristotle rarely mentions physicians by name, he examines the medical doctrines of his era, especially in the biological treatises, and regards the theoretical principles of his natural philosophy as the foundation of medicine: "Aristotle must have realized that the superiority of his own natural philosophy had implications for medicine as well. He must have regarded his own natural philosophy as being of vital importance and relevance to medicine, especially those parts that were concerned with the living world and with the health and disease of living beings" (van der Eijk 2022, 113). For the numerous parallels between the Hippocratic corpus and Aristotle's biological treatises, see , who excludes On Ancient Medicine from the medical writings with which Aristotle might have been familiar (Oser-Grote 2004, 294). On the other hand, Mihai (2016) 91 and Bartoš (2021) 54-56 argue that Aristotle is well acquainted with the methodological theses introduced in On Ancient Medicine. Although we agree with the thesis that Aristotle's position can be read as criticising the author's methodology, we will argue that it can also be interpreted as correcting and supplementing views expressed in that work.

Research paper thumbnail of “Της Αγάπης αίματα: αναζητώντας την ενότητα του εμπεδόκλειου έργου”, Φιλοσοφία 52 (2022), 335-358.

Research paper thumbnail of “Tracing the Origins of Beings: Cosmogony and Anthropogony in On Flesh”, in D. Manetti, L. Perilli and A. Roselli (eds.), Ippocrate e gli altri. Rome: Publications de l’École française de Rome (2022), 73-88.

Research paper thumbnail of “O Αλκμαίων και η εγκεφαλοκεντρική θεωρία στον Φαίδωνα”, Νεύσις 27-28 (2020), 45-65.

2Tav)po<; KouXoupevTaq* nepiXi]y>ti: O veapoc ZwKpdTn<; epqjaviCetai otov 0aiSu>va va peXexd 6id<... more 2Tav)po<; KouXoupevTaq* nepiXi]y>ti: O veapoc ZwKpdTn<; epqjaviCetai otov 0aiSu>va va peXexd 6id<popec 0ewpieq Jiou npooTO0ouv va npoeXeuon xqc Cwiic kgi xqc Yvcboii<; pe pdoji uXiKd aixio onux; to aipa. o aepac, n <P"'T'a koi o evK^cpaXcq. MoXov6ti o ScoKpdTn«; 6ev Karovopd^Ei doooq diarunwaav teTOiou £i6ou<; i6eE<;, apKEToi peXethte*; TtiaTEUouv oTi auToc JIOU Tovioe tov Ka0opiOTiK6 p6Xo tou EyKEipdXou oxq YVioaiaKj) 6ia-6iKaaia eivoi o AXKpaiwv Kai xou aJto6i6ouv pia JtoXunXoKn Oewpia Yia xo nux; ap-XiKd jtpooXapPdvovxai xa aia0nxnP»aKd SEfiopEva. ejieixo o^ioXoyouvtoi ae eva KEVxpiKO ouoxiipa Kai XEXiKd oxa0£pojioiodvxai. ZKondc; xou dp0pou Eivai va e^eto-OEi OE noio Pa0p6 n JtXaxwviKii 7t£piYP"9n P"opE' va ouvSeOei pE tk; undpxouoEc; papxupiEc Yia T^v EmaxnpoXoYia ^u AXxpaiiuva. OpoKEipEvou va anavTn0£i auxo xo Ep<bxr)pa XapPdvovxai UJioiJ'il xa £^n<< oxoix£io. (a) q StaXEKXiKr) JiXoKq xwv JiXa-xwviKwv 6iaX6Y(ov Kai q ouppoXq xou nXdxwva oxqv «iaxopia Tqq 9iXoaoipia(;..-(p) q 0Eu)pia oxExiKd pE tov poXo xou sYKEipa^o" Siaxinwaz o ouYYpa9ia<; xou Hepl iepfjc vovaov-Kai (y) oi owCdpEVEC papxupiEi; yio xqv EJiioxqpoXoYia xou AXxpaioiva. Av Kai q TtXaxioviKq jispiYpaipq ipaivExai va ajiqxEi opiopEVEq i6eec jiou 6iaxujm)aE o AXKpaiiov, Eivai oaipEi; 6xi ntpdx^^ Kai oxoiX£ia jiou jipoEpxovxai and xov i6io xov nXdxtuva.

Research paper thumbnail of “Heraclitus πεσσεύων: Fragment 52”, Philosophical Inquiry 25.3/4 (2003), 241-259.

Hippolytus was a theologian and bishop of Rome, who lived in the third century A.D. He wrote nine... more Hippolytus was a theologian and bishop of Rome, who lived in the third century A.D. He wrote nine books under the general title Refutation of All Heresies, where he attacked the Chrisdan heresies with severity, claiming that they were pagan revivals of the idolatrous philosophy. The doxographer thinks that Heraclitus of Ephesus identified "the all" (TO Jiav) with a range of different ideas: "Heraclitus says that the all is divisible, indivisible, created, uncreated, mortal, immortal, logos, aeon, father, son, god, just".' Following Hippolytus quotes Heraclitus' fragments (Bl, 50-53) in order to support his assertion." He cites B52 as a claim that for Heraclitus "the all" is a child (son): alcbv Jtalg 80TL Jtat^cov, Jteooencov jraiöog f] ^ao\Xy\ir\} Under this perspective the context in which Hippolytus places the Heraclitean dictum is interpretatively almost useless.^ It is notable that the rest of the significant paraphrases of the other doxographers (Lucian, Clement, Proclus) excessively attribute Chrisdan, Neoplatonic and Stoic doctrines to Heraclitus."^

Research paper thumbnail of “Heraclitus and the Medical Theorists on the Circle”, Dialogues d’histoire ancienne 44.2 (2018), 43-63.

Presses universitaires de Franche-Comté | « Dialogues d'histoire ancienne » 2018/2 44/2 | pages 4... more Presses universitaires de Franche-Comté | « Dialogues d'histoire ancienne » 2018/2 44/2 | pages 43 à 63 ISSN 0755-7256 ISBN 9782848676395 Article disponible en ligne à Distribution électronique Cairn.info pour Presses universitaires de Franche-Comté. © Presses universitaires de Franche-Comté. Tous droits réservés pour tous pays.

Research paper thumbnail of “Prodicus on the Rise of Civilization: Religion, Agriculture, and Culture Heroes”, Philosophie antique 18 (2018), 127-152.

Research paper thumbnail of “Aristotle on Alcmaeon in Relation to Pythagoras: an addendum in Metaphysics Alpha?”, in P. Golitsis and K. Ierodiakonou (eds.), Aristotle and His Commentators: Studies in Memory of Paraskevi Kotzia (Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca et Byzantina 7). Berlin: De Gruyter (2019), 49-67.

Research paper thumbnail of “The Pythagoreans on Medicine: Religion or Science?”, in A. B. Renger and A. Stavru (eds.), Pythagorean Knowledge from the Ancient to the Modern World: Askesis, Religion, Science (Episteme in Bewegung 4). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag (2016), 249-261.

Research paper thumbnail of “Alcmaeon and His Addressees: Revisiting the Incipit”, in P. Bouras-Vallianatos and S. Xenophontos (eds.), Greek Medical Literature and Its Readers: From Hippocrates to Islam and Byzantium. London, New York: Routledge (2018), 7-29.

Research paper thumbnail of “The Body and the Polis: Alcmaeon on Health and Disease”, British Journal for the History of Philosophy 22.5 (2014), 867-887.

Research paper thumbnail of “The Derveni Papyrus on Cosmic Justice”, Rhizai 4.1 (2007), 105-132.

Research paper thumbnail of (With M. Alessandrelli and S. Kouloumentas), Stoic Presocratics – Presocratic Stoics: Studies in the Stoic Reception of Early Greek Philosophy (= Philosophie hellénistique et romaine / Hellenistic and Roman Philosophy), Turnhout: Brepols, 2024 (Open Access)

This volume provides for the first time in scholarship a comprehensive and in-depth analysis of t... more This volume provides for the first time in scholarship a comprehensive and in-depth analysis of the relationship between Stoicism and early Greek philosophy, from Orphism to the Monists and the Pluralists. Going beyond the common assumption that the Stoics refer exclusively to Heraclitus, it is shown that almost the entire Presocratic tradition (sometimes mediated decisively by Plato and Aristotle) has made a fundamental contribution to the foundation of Stoic thought, especially in the field of physics (i.e., cosmology, ontology, and theology).

Research paper thumbnail of D. Sedley, Ο δημιουργισμός και οι επικριτές του στην αρχαιότητα, μτφ. Σ. Κουλουμέντας, επιμ. Χ. Μπάλλα. Αθήνα: Μορφωτικό Ίδρυμα Εθνικής Τραπέζης (2023), 496 σελ. Τίτλος πρωτoτύπου: Creationism and Its Critics in Antiquity. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press (2007).