Construindo a filosofia “clássica”: Cícero e o epicurismo

Claudia Beltrão

doi:10.14195/1984-249X_30_12

Autores

Claudia Beltrão Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2412-6313

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14195/1984-249X_30_12

Palavras-chave:

Cícero, História Intelectual, Filosofia romana, Classicismo, Epicurismo romano

Resumo

A obra filosófica de Cícero põe em cena debates intelectuais entre membros da elite romana, e suas figuras principais exibem uma combinação equilibrada de dotes intelectuais, excelência moral e expertise política. A filosofia grega emerge como um importante aliado no projeto intelectual de Cícero, mas não in toto. Este artigo lida com o modo pelo qual Cícero denigre uma multitudo de filósofos que produziam aquilo que ele considerava obras moralmente perigosas e estilisticamente inferiores, contribuindo para a criação de uma filosofia “clássica” que ainda configura o estudo moderno da filosofia.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Referências

ANNAS, J. (2016). Introduction. In: ANNAS, J.; BETEGH, G. (eds.). Cicero’s De Finibus. Philosophical Approaches. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 1-11.

AUVRAY-ASSAYAS, C. (2006). Cicéron. Paris, Les Belles Lettres.

BARAZ, Y. (2012). A Written Republic. Cicero’s Philosophical Politics. Princeton, Princeton University Press.

BASSETTO, B. F. (trad.) (2016). Cícero. A natureza dos deuses. Uberlândia, EdUFU.

BASSETTO, B. F. (trad.) (2018). Cícero. Os limites dos bens e dos males. Uberlândia, EdUFU.

BISHOP, C. (2019). Cicero, Greek Learning, and the Making of a Roman Classic. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

BRITTAIN, C. (2016). Cicero’s sceptical methods: the example of De Finibus. In: ANNAS, J.; BETEGH, G. (eds.). Cicero’s De Finibus. Philosophical Approaches. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 12-40.

BRITTAIN, C. (2001). Philo of Larissa. The Last of the Academic Sceptics. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

CITRONI, M. (2006). The Concept of the Classical and the Canons of Model Authors in Roman Literature. In: PORTER, J. I. (ed.). Classical Pasts: The Classical Tradition of Ancient Greece and Rome. Princeton, Princeton University Press, p. 204-235.

CLASSEN, C. J. (2010). Teaching Philosophy, a form or function of Roman oratory. In: BERRY, D. H.; ERSKINE, A. (eds.). Form and Function in Roman Oratory. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 195-297.

DIHLE, A. (2011). Greek Classicism. In: SCHMITZ, T. A.; WIATER, N. (eds.). The Struggle for Identity: Greeks and their Past in the First Century BCE. Stuttgart, Franz Steiner Verlag, p. 47-60.

DUGAN, J. (2005). Making a New Man: Ciceronian Self-fashioning in the Rhetorical Works. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

FANTHAM, E. (2004). The Roman World of Cicero’s De Oratore. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

FEENEY, D. (1999). Literature and Religion in Rome. Cultures, Contexts and Beliefs. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

FOX, M. (2007). Cicero’s Philosophy of History. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

GILDENHARD, I. (2007). Paideia romana. Cicero’s ‘Tusculans Disputations’. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society, Sup. 30. Cambridge, Cambridge Philological Society.

GLUCKER, J. (1988). Cicero’s Philosophical Affiliations. In: DILLON, J. M.; LONG, A. A. (eds.). The Question of “Eclecticism”. Studies in Late Greek Philosophy. Berkeley, University of California Press, p. 34-69.

GÖRLER, W. (1995). Silencing the Troublemaker: De Legibus 1.39 and the Continuity of Cicero’s Scepticism. In: POWELL, J. G. F. (ed.). Cicero the Philosopher. Oxford, Oxford University Press, p. 85-113.

GRIFFIN, M. (2001). Piso, Cicero and their Audience. In: AUVRAY-ASSAYAS, C.; DELATTRES, D. (eds.). Cicéron et Philodème. La polémique en philosophie. Paris, Presses de l’École normale supérieure, p. 85-99.

GUNDERSON, E. (2016). Cicero’s Studied Passions: The Letters of 46 BCE. Arethusa 49, n. 3, p. 525-547.

HATZIMICHALI, M. (2013). The Texts of Plato and Aristotle in the First Century BC. In: SCHOFIELD, M. (ed.). Aristotle, Plato and Pythagoreanism in the First Century BC. New Directions for Philosophy. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 1-27.

HINE, H. (2016). Philosophy and philosophi: From Cicero to Apuleius. In: WILLIAMS, G. D.; VOLK, K. (eds.). Roman Reflections. Studies in Latin Philosophy. Oxford, Oxford University Press, p. 13-29.

HOUSTON, G. W. (2014). Inside Roman Libraries: Book Collections and their Management in Antiquity. Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina Press.

HUTCHINSON, G. O. (2013). Greek into Latin: Frameworks and Contexts for Intertextuality. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

KENNEDY, G. A. (1972). The Art of Rhetoric in the Roman World. Princeton, Princeton University Press.

KROSTENKO, B. A. (2001). Cicero, Catullus and the Language of Social Performance. Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.

LA BUA, G. (2019). Cicero and Roman Education. The Reception of the Speeches and Ancient Scholarship. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

LEACH, E. W. (1999). Ciceronian ‘Bi-Marcus’: Correspondence with M. Terentius Varro and L. Papirius Paetus in 46 BCE. Transactions of the American Philological Association 129, p. 139-179.

LÉVY, C. (1992). Cicero Academicus. Recherches sur les “Academiques” et sur la philosophie cicéronienne. Rome, École Française de Rome.

LÉVY, C. (2001). Cicéron et l’épicurism: la problématique de l’éloge paradoxal. In: AUVRAY-ASSAYAS, C.; DELATTRES, D. (eds.). Cicéron et Philodème. La polémique en philosophie. Paris, Presses de l’École normale supérieure, p. 61-75.

LÉVY, C. (2002). Supplément Ã l’Introduction. In: Des termes extrêmes des biens et des maux. Livre 1. Paris, Les Belles Lettres, p. xxxii-xlvi.

LÉVY, C. (2017). Cicéron était-il un ‘Roman sceptic’? Ciceroniana online 1, p. 9-24.

MANSFELD, J. (1999). Theology. In: ALGRA, K.; BARNES, J.; MANSFELD, J.; SCHOFIELD, M. (eds.). The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 452-478.

MASO, S. (2015). Grasp and Dissent. Cicero and Epicurean Philosophy. Turnhout, Brepols.

MAY, J. M. (1988). Trials of Characters: The Eloquence of Ciceronian Ethos. Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina Press.

MOATTI, C. (1997). La raison de Rome. Naissance de l’esprit critique Ã la fin de la République. Paris, Ed. du Seuil.

MOREL, P.-M. (2016). Cicero and Epicurean Virtues (De Finibus 1-2). In: ANNAS, J.; BETEGH, G. (eds.). Cicero’s De Finibus. Philosophical Approaches. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 77-95.

MOST, G. W. (2006). Athens as the School of Greece. In: PORTER, J. I. (ed.). Classical Pasts: The Classical Tradition of Ancient Greece and Rome. Princeton, Princeton University Press, p. 377-388.

POWELL, J. G. F. (ed.) (1995). Cicero the Philosopher. Twelve Papers. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

PROST, F. (2003). Aspects de la critique cicéronienne de l’épicurisme en De finibus 2. Quaderni del dipertimento di filologia linguistica e tradizione classica 2, p. 87-111.

RÜPKE, J. (2012). Religion in Republican Rome. Rationalization and Ritual Change. Philadelphia, The University of Pennsylvania Press.

SCHOFIELD, M. (2008). Ciceronian Dialogue. In: GOLDHILL, S. (ed.). The End of the Dialogue in Antiquity. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 63-84.

SEDLEY, D. (1989). Philosophical Allegiance in the Graeco-Roman World. In: GRIFFIN, M.; BARNES, J. (eds.). Philosophia Togata. Oxford, Oxford University Press, p. 97-119.

SEDLEY, D. (1997). Plato’s Auctoritas and the Rebirth of the Commentary Tradition. In: GRIFFIN, M.; BARNES, J. (eds.), Philosophia Togata II: Plato and Aristotle at Rome. Oxford, Oxford University Press, p. 110-129.

SKVIRSKY, A. (2019). Doubt and Dogmatism in Cicero’s Academica. Archai 27, e02705.

STEEL, C. (2005). Reading Cicero: Genre and Performance in Late Republic. London, Duckworth.

STROUP, S. C. (2010). Catullus, Cicero and a Society of Patrons: The Generation of the Text. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

TARRANT, H. (1985). Scepticism or Platonism? The Philosophy of the Fourth Academy. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

VAN DER BLOM, H. (2010). Cicero’s Role Models. The Political Strategy of a Newcomer. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

VAN NUFFELEN, P. (2011). Rethinking the Gods. Philosophical Readings of Religion in the Post-Hellenistic Period. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

VARDI, A. D. (2003). Canons of Literary Texts at Rome. In: FINKELBERG, M.; STROUMSA, G. (eds.). Homer, the Bible and Beyond: Literary and Religious Canons in the Ancient World. Leiden, Brill, p. 131-152.

WARREN, J. (2016). Epicurean Pleasures in Cicero’s De Finibus. In: ANNAS, J.; BETEGH, G. (eds.). Cicero’s De Finibus. Philosophical Approaches. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 41-76.

WISEMAN, T. P. (2009). Remembering the Roman People: Essays on Late-Republican Politics and Literature. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

WISSE, J. (1995). Greeks, Romans and the Rise of Atticism. In: ABBENES, J. G. J.; SLINGS, S. R.; SLUITER, I. (eds.). Greek Literary Theory after Aristotle. A collection of papers in honour of D. M. Schenkeveld. Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Press, p. 65-82.

WOOLF, R. (2015). Cicero: The Philosophy of a Roman Sceptic. London, Routledge.

ZETZEL, J. E. (2003). Plato with Pillows: Cicero on the Uses of Greek Culture. In: BRAUND, D.; GILL, C. (eds.). Myth, History and Culture in Republican Rome. Studies in Honour of T. P. Wiseman. Exeter, The University of Exeter Press, p. 119-138.

ZETZEL, J. E. (2013). Philosophy Is in the Streets. In: WILLIAMS, G. D.; VOLK, K. (eds.). Roman Reflections. Studies in Latin Philosophy. Oxford, Oxford University Press, p. 50-82.

Construindo a filosofia “clássica”

Cícero e o epicurismo

Autores

DOI:

Palavras-chave:

Resumo

Downloads

Referências

Downloads

Publicado

Como Citar

Edição

Seção

Licença

Idioma