What do you think?
Rate this book
The Heirs of Plato: A Study of the Old Academy
The Heirs of Plato is the first book exclusively devoted to an in-depth study of the various directions in philosophy taken by Plato's followers in the first seventy years or so following his death in 347 BC--the period generally known as 'The Old Academy'. Speusippus, Xenocrates, and Polemon, the three successive heads of the Academy in this period, though personally devoted to the memory of Plato, were independent philosophers in their own right, and felt free to develop his heritage in individual directions. Dillon's clear and accessible book fills a significant gap in our understanding of Plato's immediate philosophical influence, and will be of great value to scholars and historians of ancient philosophy.
- GenresPhilosophyHistory
252 pages, Paperback
First published January 30, 2003
About the author
John M. Dillon
46 books14 followersJohn Myles Dillon (/ˈdɪlən/; born 15 September 1939) is an Irish classicist and philosopher who was Regius Professor of Greek in Trinity College, Dublin between 1980 and 2006. Prior to that he taught at the University of California, Berkeley. He was elected a corresponding member of the Academy of Athens on 15 June 2010. Dillon's area of research lies in the history of Platonism from the Old Academy to the Renaissance, and also Early Christianity.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
October 9, 2017
A Study Of Plato's Early Successors
I studied Plato long ago in college and graduate school and have returned to him frequently over the years. I recently saw the movie "Agora" which tells the story of the Neoplatonic philosopher Hypatia of Alexandria. I didn't like the movie, but it prompted me to think again about Plato and Neoplatonism. Thus, I found my way to this book "The Heirs of Plato: A Study of the Old Academy (347 -- 274 BC)" (2005)by John Dillon. A scholar of the history of Platonism, Dillon is Regius Professor of Greek, Trinity College, Dublin. His best-known book probably remains his study "The Middle Platonists".
Any study of Plato's successors and their importance must be predicated on the author's understanding of Plato's own thought. As Dillon observes at the outset in his Preface: "When Plato died, full of years, in 347 BC, he left behind him, not only a body of philosophical writings the like of which had never been seen before (or indeed, in respect of the peculiar quality, since) but also a remarkable organization, the 'Academy' .... and a devoted, though independent-minded body of disciples. Dillon's book begins with an explanation of how he views Plato's own difficult and fluid teaching.
When I studied years ago, Plato was taught almost exclusively by reading closely a select group of the Dialogues. The claim that Plato had a doctrine that he hinted at but did not state explicitly in the Dialogues was generally rejected and at best downplayed. This remains the more common approach today in interpreting Plato, but Dillon takes a different approach based on the Neoplatonic understanding of Plato. Dillon argues that Plato had, especially in his late years, a doctrine that he taught orally that does not appear fully in his writings. One reason for this position is the strictures of Aristotle against Plato in Aristotle's writings. Much of Aristotle's criticism is difficult to reconcile with the apparent teachings of Plato in the Dialogues. Aristotle studied with Plato for 20 years and according to Dillon must be presumed to have understood the rudiments of his master's teachings. Aristotle's criticisms reflect, Dillon argues, Plato's developed thought as it was presented outside the writings. The late dialogues that come closest to presenting Plato's teachings are the Timaeus, Philebus, and Laws X. Plato there developed the concept of the "demiurge" or "soul" of the universe. Plato's latter thought was also heavily mathematical and was influenced greatly by the legendary figure of Pythagoras. The Timaeus was the most influential of Plato's Dialogues in the years after his death even though it does not enjoy that status among most current scholars. For Dillon, Plato's understanding of soul and of the mathematical structure of reality was central to his thought and the basis for the manner in which his thought was developed by his immediate heirs.
The book's focus is on three individuals, Speusippus, Xenocrates, and Polemo, who served as the head of the Academy Plato founded in the 70 years following his death. Each of these individuals wrote prolifically, but none of their writings have survived. In order to reach an understanding of their thought, Dillon engages in informed re-creation. He takes the discussion of these writers that appears in other ancient sources to try to create a coherent statement of their likely philosophical contributions. The primary source for the doctrines of these thinkers is Aristotle who, of course, was strongly inclined to criticize them from the perspective of his own thought. Dillon also uses the writings of Diogenes Laertius, Plutarch, and Cicero, among others.
For each of his three primary subjects, Dillon gives a short summary of their lives and writings and then attempts from the surviving sources to tease out their doctrines in the areas of metaphysics, ethics, and logic. He tries to show that each of these thinkers expanded upon and developed Plato's teachings in creative and interesting ways. Thus, Plato's nephew Speusippus emerges as an early predecessor of Plotinus with his focus on the abstract nature of "the One" as the source of all being. Speusippus also seemed to naturalize Plato's concept of the "world soul" and to teach an ethics that gave more of a place to pleasure than did the teachings of Plato. Xenocrates is described as a systematizer who was the forerunner of the synthesis between Plato and Aristotle that became Neoplatonism. His thought was dualistic and made heavy use of Pythagorean allegory. Ptolemo, the third head of the Old Academy after Plato, was less systematic and more practical-minded than his predecessors. His teachings focused on ethics and led the way to the school of Stoicism.
Dillon also takes a shorter look at five minor historical figures from the early days of Platonism. The most interesting of these are Philippus, who served as Plato's scribe during the latter years of Plato's life and who is the author of an extant dialogue called "Epinomis" which was long attributed to Plato, and Crantor, who wrote the first commentary on a Platonic dialogue and who wrote an ethical tract "On Grief" that was highly regarded in antiquity. (It has been lost.) The book concludes with a short look at the turn of the Academy from doctrinal expositions of Plato's teachings to the skepticism and free-thinking that is also a hallmark of Plato's thought that came to dominate the Academy shortly after the figures described in Dillon's book.
In its development and critique of philosophical positions related to Plato, Dillon's book is both a history and a philosophical study in its own right. The book is learned, closely documented, and lucidly written. This book will appeal to scholars in classics and philosophy. But it will also appeal to lay readers with a strong background in and love for Plato and the philosophical mind.
Robin Friedman
I studied Plato long ago in college and graduate school and have returned to him frequently over the years. I recently saw the movie "Agora" which tells the story of the Neoplatonic philosopher Hypatia of Alexandria. I didn't like the movie, but it prompted me to think again about Plato and Neoplatonism. Thus, I found my way to this book "The Heirs of Plato: A Study of the Old Academy (347 -- 274 BC)" (2005)by John Dillon. A scholar of the history of Platonism, Dillon is Regius Professor of Greek, Trinity College, Dublin. His best-known book probably remains his study "The Middle Platonists".
Any study of Plato's successors and their importance must be predicated on the author's understanding of Plato's own thought. As Dillon observes at the outset in his Preface: "When Plato died, full of years, in 347 BC, he left behind him, not only a body of philosophical writings the like of which had never been seen before (or indeed, in respect of the peculiar quality, since) but also a remarkable organization, the 'Academy' .... and a devoted, though independent-minded body of disciples. Dillon's book begins with an explanation of how he views Plato's own difficult and fluid teaching.
When I studied years ago, Plato was taught almost exclusively by reading closely a select group of the Dialogues. The claim that Plato had a doctrine that he hinted at but did not state explicitly in the Dialogues was generally rejected and at best downplayed. This remains the more common approach today in interpreting Plato, but Dillon takes a different approach based on the Neoplatonic understanding of Plato. Dillon argues that Plato had, especially in his late years, a doctrine that he taught orally that does not appear fully in his writings. One reason for this position is the strictures of Aristotle against Plato in Aristotle's writings. Much of Aristotle's criticism is difficult to reconcile with the apparent teachings of Plato in the Dialogues. Aristotle studied with Plato for 20 years and according to Dillon must be presumed to have understood the rudiments of his master's teachings. Aristotle's criticisms reflect, Dillon argues, Plato's developed thought as it was presented outside the writings. The late dialogues that come closest to presenting Plato's teachings are the Timaeus, Philebus, and Laws X. Plato there developed the concept of the "demiurge" or "soul" of the universe. Plato's latter thought was also heavily mathematical and was influenced greatly by the legendary figure of Pythagoras. The Timaeus was the most influential of Plato's Dialogues in the years after his death even though it does not enjoy that status among most current scholars. For Dillon, Plato's understanding of soul and of the mathematical structure of reality was central to his thought and the basis for the manner in which his thought was developed by his immediate heirs.
The book's focus is on three individuals, Speusippus, Xenocrates, and Polemo, who served as the head of the Academy Plato founded in the 70 years following his death. Each of these individuals wrote prolifically, but none of their writings have survived. In order to reach an understanding of their thought, Dillon engages in informed re-creation. He takes the discussion of these writers that appears in other ancient sources to try to create a coherent statement of their likely philosophical contributions. The primary source for the doctrines of these thinkers is Aristotle who, of course, was strongly inclined to criticize them from the perspective of his own thought. Dillon also uses the writings of Diogenes Laertius, Plutarch, and Cicero, among others.
For each of his three primary subjects, Dillon gives a short summary of their lives and writings and then attempts from the surviving sources to tease out their doctrines in the areas of metaphysics, ethics, and logic. He tries to show that each of these thinkers expanded upon and developed Plato's teachings in creative and interesting ways. Thus, Plato's nephew Speusippus emerges as an early predecessor of Plotinus with his focus on the abstract nature of "the One" as the source of all being. Speusippus also seemed to naturalize Plato's concept of the "world soul" and to teach an ethics that gave more of a place to pleasure than did the teachings of Plato. Xenocrates is described as a systematizer who was the forerunner of the synthesis between Plato and Aristotle that became Neoplatonism. His thought was dualistic and made heavy use of Pythagorean allegory. Ptolemo, the third head of the Old Academy after Plato, was less systematic and more practical-minded than his predecessors. His teachings focused on ethics and led the way to the school of Stoicism.
Dillon also takes a shorter look at five minor historical figures from the early days of Platonism. The most interesting of these are Philippus, who served as Plato's scribe during the latter years of Plato's life and who is the author of an extant dialogue called "Epinomis" which was long attributed to Plato, and Crantor, who wrote the first commentary on a Platonic dialogue and who wrote an ethical tract "On Grief" that was highly regarded in antiquity. (It has been lost.) The book concludes with a short look at the turn of the Academy from doctrinal expositions of Plato's teachings to the skepticism and free-thinking that is also a hallmark of Plato's thought that came to dominate the Academy shortly after the figures described in Dillon's book.
In its development and critique of philosophical positions related to Plato, Dillon's book is both a history and a philosophical study in its own right. The book is learned, closely documented, and lucidly written. This book will appeal to scholars in classics and philosophy. But it will also appeal to lay readers with a strong background in and love for Plato and the philosophical mind.
Robin Friedman
February 20, 2024
This book is an history of the philosophers who led Plato's academy in the decades after his death, which amount mainly to two fellows named Speusippus and Xenocrates. There really are no extant writings by them, or particularly much information about them at all, and so Dillon spends most of the book attempting to square comments by writers like Aristotle, Sextus Empiricus and Plutarch with a philosophical system plausibly held by a student of Plato, particularly as the ideas compare to those presented in the Timaeus, which Dillon holds as the ultimate statement of Plato's philosophy (along with, in some other cases, the Laws). A few other interesting figures are discussed, such as Plato's scribe Phillipus who was the author of an actually extant epilogue to the Laws entitled the Epinomis.
This book is well written and deeply thought out, but rather unsatisfying to read. Probably all of the concrete information about the philosophers discussed could be compressed into fifty pages or fewer, and the particularly neoplatonic-tinged (although Dillon is rigorous enough to clearly distinguish between the overly ontological reading of Plato I mean in this case from the proper interpretation of the neoplatonists) identification of Plato with the opinions of Timaeus. This causes the author to avoid analyzing whether the Old Platonists partook in any of the constant irony, paradox, and subtle argumentation frequent in Plato's dialogues, but rather instead presumes that putting forth an argument in writing means that it was an official 'doctrine' -- the same ancient sources cited here tend to oversimplify Plato, so I think it's particularly important to at least question whether they might have done the same to Plato's students. Indeed, if one were to take five or eight quotations from Plato by some Roman writer in the same way, I think you would invent a radically different image of Plato than the dialogues paint.
All the same, this book is very intelligently written and the effort at reconstructing plausible theories, even if I don't think they are necessarily true of what these philosophers held, is really marvellous and stimulating in its own way, even if there's simply not enough information to really cast light on the sort of philosophy that Plato had intended to foster with his academy. I rate this book three stars for its bona-fide Trinity Irish Excellence
This book is well written and deeply thought out, but rather unsatisfying to read. Probably all of the concrete information about the philosophers discussed could be compressed into fifty pages or fewer, and the particularly neoplatonic-tinged (although Dillon is rigorous enough to clearly distinguish between the overly ontological reading of Plato I mean in this case from the proper interpretation of the neoplatonists) identification of Plato with the opinions of Timaeus. This causes the author to avoid analyzing whether the Old Platonists partook in any of the constant irony, paradox, and subtle argumentation frequent in Plato's dialogues, but rather instead presumes that putting forth an argument in writing means that it was an official 'doctrine' -- the same ancient sources cited here tend to oversimplify Plato, so I think it's particularly important to at least question whether they might have done the same to Plato's students. Indeed, if one were to take five or eight quotations from Plato by some Roman writer in the same way, I think you would invent a radically different image of Plato than the dialogues paint.
All the same, this book is very intelligently written and the effort at reconstructing plausible theories, even if I don't think they are necessarily true of what these philosophers held, is really marvellous and stimulating in its own way, even if there's simply not enough information to really cast light on the sort of philosophy that Plato had intended to foster with his academy. I rate this book three stars for its bona-fide Trinity Irish Excellence
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews