Table Of Content

Created on 10 October 2017 at 9.30 hours page i OXFORD STUDIES IN ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY Created on 10 October 2017 at 9.30 hours page ii page-isblank Created on 10 October 2017 at 9.30 hours page iii OXFORD STUDIES IN ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY EDITOR: VICTOR CASTON VOLUME LIII   3 Created on 10 October 2017 at 9.30 hours page iv 3 GreatClarendonStreet,Oxford,, UnitedKingdom OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford. ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship, andeducationbypublishingworldwide.Oxfordisaregisteredtrademarkof OxfordUniversityPressintheUKandincertainothercountries ©Exceptwhereotherwisestated,OxfordUniversityPress, Themoralrightsoftheauthorshavebeenasserted FirstEditionpublishedin Impression: Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedin aretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,withoutthe priorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpresslypermitted bylaw,bylicence,orundertermsagreedwiththeappropriatereprographics rightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeofthe aboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,atthe addressabove Youmustnotcirculatethisbookinanyotherform andyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyOxfordUniversityPress MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NY,UnitedStatesofAmerica BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData Dataavailable LibraryofCongressCataloginginPublicationData Oxfordstudiesinancientphilosophy.— Vol.liii().—Oxford:ClarendonPress; NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,– v.;cm.Annual. .Philosophy,Ancient—Periodicals. B.O .′—dc. – AACR MARC-S ISBN––––(hbk.) ISBN––––(pbk.) PrintedandboundinGreatBritainbyCPIGroup(UK)Ltd,Croydon, LinkstothirdpartywebsitesareprovidedbyOxfordingoodfaithand forinformationonly.Oxforddisclaimsanyresponsibilityforthematerials containedinanythirdpartywebsitereferencedinthiswork Created on 10 October 2017 at 9.30 hours page v ADVISORY BOARD ProfessorJuliaAnnas,UniversityofArizona ProfessorRachelBarney,UniversityofToronto ProfessorSusanneBobzien,AllSoulsCollege,Oxford ProfessorRiccardoChiaradonna,UniversitàdegliStudiRomaTre ProfessorAlanCode,StanfordUniversity ProfessorDorotheaFrede,UniversitätHamburg ProfessorBradInwood,YaleUniversity ProfessorA.A.Long,UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley ProfessorMarthaNussbaum,UniversityofChicago ProfessorDavidSedley,UniversityofCambridge ProfessorRichardSorabji,King’sCollege,UniversityofLondon,and WolfsonCollege,Oxford ProfessorGiselaStriker,HarvardUniversity ProfessorChristopherTaylor,CorpusChristiCollege,Oxford Contributions and books for review should be sent to the Editor, ProfessorVictorCaston,DepartmentofPhilosophy,Universityof Michigan,  South State Street, Ann Arbor, MI -, USA([email protected]). Contributors are asked to observe the ‘Notes for Contributors to Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy’, printed at the end of this volume. Up-to-date contact details, the latest version of Notes for Con- tributors,andpublicationschedulescanbecheckedontheOxford StudiesinAncientPhilosophywebsite: www.oup.co.uk/philosophy/series/osap Created on 10 October 2017 at 9.30 hours page vi page-isblank Created on 10 October 2017 at 9.30 hours page vii CONTENTS ZenonianStrategies  DAVID SEDLEY TheCoherenceofThrasymachus  RALPH WEDGWOOD Plato on the Grades of Perception: Theaetetus – and thePhaedo  GAIL FINE ShameandVirtueinAristotle  CHRISTOPHER C. RAYMOND AristotleonPrinciplesasElements  MARKO MALINK Plato Systematized: Doing Philosophy in the Imperial Schools. A Discussion of Justin A. Stover (ed.), A New WorkbyApuleius  MAURO BONAZZI IndexLocorum  Created on 10 October 2017 at 9.30 hours page viii pageviiiisblank Created on 10 October 2017 at 9.30 hours page 1 ZENONIAN STRATEGIES DAVID SEDLEY H far did presuppositions about Zeno of Elea’s overall philo- sophicalpositionshapethewaysinwhichhisindividualparadoxes were understood in antiquity? I shall address this question by focusing in particular on one deviant interpreter, Aristotle’s pupil Eudemus, and on the two specific paradoxes to whose interpreta- tionhecanbeshowntohavecontributed.Thesearethesmall/large paradox, and the less well-known place paradox. Eudemus, it will emerge, sought to impose a consistently nihilist interpretation on the paradoxes. In all probability he was historically mistaken to attemptthis. Nevertheless, a careful reconstruction of the methods by which he extracted the nihilist reading from Zeno’s text can help us to- wardsrediscoveringdetailsofthattext.Thisinturn,asIshallargue inmyfinaltwosections,enablesustoappreciatetheplaceparadox asanexcellentspecimenofZeno’sdialecticalmethod. .Zeno’sphilosophicalpurpose In a celebrated encounter that takes place near the beginning of Plato’s Parmenides, dramatically dated to / , Zeno of Elea is found in conversation with a very young Socrates. Zeno, said to be aged around  at the time, tells Socrates how in his own ©DavidSedley For very helpful criticisms, queries, and suggestions, my warm thanks to Marko MalinkandJohnPalmer;toaudiencesattheBClub,Cambridge,February,at RoyalHollowayUniversityofLondon,February,atWashingtonUniversity inStLouis,March,attheUniversityofNotreDame,March,andatNew YorkUniversity,April;andtotwoanonymousreferees.Finally,asbotheditor andscholarVictorCastonhasbeenunfailinglyhelpfulandgenerouswithhisadvice. Needlesstosay,noneoftheaboveshouldbeassumedtoagreewitheverythingsaid inthepaper.  ForthedateseeJ.Mansfeld,‘Aristotle,PlatoandthePreplatonicDoxography andChronography’,inG.Cambiano(ed.),Storiografiaedossografianellafilosofia antica(Turin,),–;repr.inMansfeld,StudiesintheHistoriographyofGreek Philosophy(AssenandMaastricht,),–.