an idealistic trend in classical philosophy of the third to sixth centuries, the goal of which was the systematization of divergent elements of Plato’s philosophy in combination with a number of Aristotle’s ideas.
Basically, Neoplatonism is an elaboration of the dialectic of the Platonic triad: the One, the Intelligence (nous), and the Soul. To bridge the gap between the unknowable One and the knowable Intelligence, the triad’s ontological substance (hypostasis) was supplemented with teachings on numbers, which grew out of adaptations of Pythagoreanism. These numbers were interpreted as the first prequalitative division of the One. The second hypostasis is the Intelligence, to which Plato made only scattered allusions. The concept was developed by the Neoplatonists on the basis of Aristotle’s teachings on pure cosmic Intelligence (the prime mover) and its self-contemplation, as a result of which the Intelligence is simultaneously subject and object (“thinking of thinking”) and contains within itself its own intellectual material.
In Neoplatonism, teachings on the Soul based on Plato’s Timaeus and influenced by Aristotle, as well as by Pythagoreanism, became a doctrine of cosmic spheres. The latter were explained in great detail and provided a picture of the activity of the “universal soul” throughout the cosmos. Thus, Neoplatonism as an idealistic philosophical system engendered a doctrine of the hierarchical structure of being and the order of its levels, which emerged sequentially, as a result of the gradual weakening of the first and highest level, in descending order: the One, the Intelligence, the Soul, the Cosmos, and Matter.
Neoplatonism’s teachings on intracosmic bodies drew on Aristotle’s theories on substance and qualities, the eidos (forms of objects) and entelechies (actively developing principles of objects), and potentiality and energy. The Stoics’ doctrine of the identical character of the world formative power (fire) and man’s Ego also influenced Neoplatonic thought. However, Neoplatonism could not have emerged unless the vulgar, materialist aspects of Stoicism and the naturalistic, pantheistic tendencies in the Stoic interpretation of Plato’s legacy had been decisively overcome.
The Neoplatonists devoted considerable attention to logical deductions, definitions and classifications, and mathematical, astronomical, natural philosophical, and physical problems, as well as to philological, historical, and expository research. These characteristic emphases became more highly developed as Neoplatonism evolved, culminating in a scholastic systematization of all extant philosophical and scientific knowledge. In general, Neoplatonism was a final, extremely intensive attempt to bring together all the achievements of ancient philosophy for the struggle against Christian monotheism.
Plotinus (a student of Ammonius Saccas), whose teachings were continued by his disciples Amelius and Porphyry, founded the Neoplatonic school in the third century. Distinguished by its speculative, theoretical character, the Roman school of Neoplatonism concentrated on the development of the fundamental Platonic triad. The Syrian school of Neoplatonism (fourth century), which was founded by Iamblichus, developed a systematic interpretation of classical mythology and focused greater attention on religious magical practices, explaining the essence and methods of prophesying, miracles, witchcraft, oracles, mysteries, astrology, and ecstatic ascent to the supernatural world. Theodore of Asine, Sopater, and Dexippus also belonged to the Syrian school. The emperor Julian and Sallust were adherents of the school of Pergamum (fourth century), which was founded by Aedesius of Cappadocia.
From the fourth century, Neoplatonism became increasingly preoccupied with producing commentaries on Plato and Aristotle. The school of Athens (fifth to sixth centuries) was founded by Plutarch of Athens; its line of thought was continued by Syrianus of Alexandria and brought to its conclusion by Proclus. Among the leading representatives of the Athenian school were Marinus, Isidore, Damascius, and Simplicius. The Alexandrian school (fourth to fifth centuries), whose members included Hypatia, Synesius of Cyrene, and Hierocles, was involved even more than the other Neoplatonic schools in producing commentaries on Plato and Aristotle. The Latin Neoplatonists (for example, Marius Victorinus, a Christian, and Macrobrius, an opponent of Christianity) were active at the same time as the Greek Neoplatonists (fourth through sixth centuries). In 529, the emperor Justinian banned the study of pagan philosophy and dissolved the Platonic Academy in Athens, the last stronghold of pagan Neoplatonism.
The ideas of Neoplatonism did not perish with the destruction of classical society. In late antiquity Neoplatonism entered into a complex interaction with Christian (and later Islamic and Jewish) monotheism and greatly influenced the development of Arab philosophy (al-Kindi, al-Farabi, and Avicenna).
Christian Neoplatonism was most clearly expressed in the works of Dionysius the Areopagite, which were apparently based on the philosophy of Proclus. Owing to the work of representatives of the Cappadocian school (Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Gregory of Nyssa), who set out to Christianize Neoplatonism, the ideas of Neoplatonism became widespread in Byzantine philosophy even during the early patristic period (fourth century). Maximus the Confessor played an important role in the dissemination of Neoplatonic ideas. In the 11th century, Michael Psellus gave them a more secular, rationalistic form.
Augustine was profoundly influenced by Neoplatonic ideas. Certain aspects of Neoplatonism are also found in the works of orthodox Catholic philosophers such as Anselm of Canterbury. The Neoplatonic tradition acquired a pantheistic quality among philosophers of the school of Chartres. The philosophical system of John Scotus Erigena was sharply distinguished from the orthodox Catholic line of thought. Scotus Erigena translated the works of Dionysius the Areopagite into Latin, made extensive use of Neoplatonic ideas, and drifted toward pantheism. It is important to bear in mind that Neoplatonism was the basic theoretical source of pantheism, as well as of nonorthodox mysticism, in Western medieval philosophy (for example, the thought of Amaury of Chartres and David of Dinant).
By the end of the Middle Ages the powerful influence of Neoplatonism was felt in German mysticism of the 14th-15th centuries (Meister Eckhart, J. Tauler, H. Suso, J. van Ruysbroeck, and the anonymous treatise Theologica Germanica). Pantheistic and rationalistic tendencies in Neoplatonism were expressed in the works of a number of representatives of Renaissance philosophy, including Nicholas of Cusa, G. Pletho, and M. Ficino. An important step toward the secularization of Neoplatonism was made in Italo-German natural philosophy of the Renaissance (Paracelsus, G. Cardano, B. Telesio, F. Patrizi, T. Campanella, and G. Bruno).
The Cambridge Platonists (R. Cudworth, for example) are evidence of the influence of Neoplatonism in the 17th century and the early 18th. German idealism of the late 18th and early 19th centuries drew heavily on Neoplatonism. This was particularly true of F. W. von Schelling, as well as Hegel, who, in his History of Philosophy, was the first historian of philosophy to provide a satisfactory interpretation of Neoplatonism (Soch., vol. 11, Moscow-Leningrad, 1935, pp. 35–76). The impact of Neoplatonism on 19th- and 20th-century idealism may be observed primarily in the works of Russian philosophers such as V. S. Solov’ev, S. N. Bulgakov, S. L. Frank, and P. A. Florenskii. Neoplatonic elements and tendencies are also found in a number of diverse currents in contemporary bourgeois philosophy.
A. F. LOSEV