Plotinus the antipalamite
The synod of Constantinople of 1351 discussed six questions and answers concerning the Palamite doctrine of energies. Nikephoros Gregoras was condemned at the gathering and subsequently defended his position in his History of the Romans, where he indicated that the Neoplatonist Plotinus...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Bulgarian |
| Published: |
Institute for Byzantine Studies of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts
2022-01-01
|
| Series: | Zbornik Radova Vizantološkog Instituta |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0584-9888/2022/0584-98882259133L.pdf |
| _version_ | 1811155170097102848 |
|---|---|
| author | Lauritzen Frederick |
| author_facet | Lauritzen Frederick |
| author_sort | Lauritzen Frederick |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The synod of Constantinople of 1351 discussed six questions and answers
concerning the Palamite doctrine of energies. Nikephoros Gregoras was
condemned at the gathering and subsequently defended his position in his
History of the Romans, where he indicated that the Neoplatonist Plotinus
held the same views on the relation between the divine and its activities.
This would imply that Plotinus’ ideas were also condemned at the synod of
1351. On the other side of the debate, the Neoplatonist Proclus had
anticipated the same arguments as Gregory Palamas in his commentary on
Plato’s Parmenides. Indeed, the Palamite debate employed argumentative
strategies which had distinguished Plotinus from Proclus and therefore
revealed the brilliant dynamism of Byzantine Platonism in the fourteenth
century. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-10T04:29:38Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-9a1ae22e0e194ced96d857ce9a28baeb |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0584-9888 2406-0917 |
| language | Bulgarian |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-10T04:29:38Z |
| publishDate | 2022-01-01 |
| publisher | Institute for Byzantine Studies of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Zbornik Radova Vizantološkog Instituta |
| spelling | doaj.art-9a1ae22e0e194ced96d857ce9a28baeb2023-03-10T08:08:33ZbulInstitute for Byzantine Studies of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and ArtsZbornik Radova Vizantološkog Instituta0584-98882406-09172022-01-0120225913314510.2298/ZRVI2259133L0584-98882259133LPlotinus the antipalamiteLauritzen Frederick0Scuola grande di San Marco, VeneziaThe synod of Constantinople of 1351 discussed six questions and answers concerning the Palamite doctrine of energies. Nikephoros Gregoras was condemned at the gathering and subsequently defended his position in his History of the Romans, where he indicated that the Neoplatonist Plotinus held the same views on the relation between the divine and its activities. This would imply that Plotinus’ ideas were also condemned at the synod of 1351. On the other side of the debate, the Neoplatonist Proclus had anticipated the same arguments as Gregory Palamas in his commentary on Plato’s Parmenides. Indeed, the Palamite debate employed argumentative strategies which had distinguished Plotinus from Proclus and therefore revealed the brilliant dynamism of Byzantine Platonism in the fourteenth century.http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0584-9888/2022/0584-98882259133L.pdfplotinusproclusneoplatonismgregory palamasnikephoros gregorashesychasm |
| spellingShingle | Lauritzen Frederick Plotinus the antipalamite Zbornik Radova Vizantološkog Instituta plotinus proclus neoplatonism gregory palamas nikephoros gregoras hesychasm |
| title | Plotinus the antipalamite |
| title_full | Plotinus the antipalamite |
| title_fullStr | Plotinus the antipalamite |
| title_full_unstemmed | Plotinus the antipalamite |
| title_short | Plotinus the antipalamite |
| title_sort | plotinus the antipalamite |
| topic | plotinus proclus neoplatonism gregory palamas nikephoros gregoras hesychasm |
| url | http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0584-9888/2022/0584-98882259133L.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT lauritzenfrederick plotinustheantipalamite |