"In addition to developing the
hypothetical syllogism, Stoic logic also elaborated categories, which
likewise stand in contrast to Aristotelian thought. The Stoics teach that
there are four categories: substance, quality, disposition, and relative
disposition.(140) Rather than being horizontal, signifying aspects of an
enduring substance which are accidental and which can be shorn from it
without destroying its essence, the Stoic categories are vertical. They move
from lesser to greater levels of concreteness. None is accidental; all must
be present in a given reality if that reality is to be grasped in all its
individuality. Substance denotes the materiality of a thing and is possessed
by everything except the incorporeals. Quality denotes the way in which
matter is organized to form an individual being. Disposition includes times,
places, actions, size, and color. It describes the particular situation and
attributes of the individual. All the features covered by the category of
disposition, including color,(141) are regarded by the Stoics as inherent in
the individual. This view harmonizes with the doctrine in Stoic physics that
bodies create their own extension and their own time and space, so to speak,
through their tonos and activity. Relative disposition denotes the way that
an individual thing is related to other phenomena. None of the four Stoic
categories can be removed from an individual being without that being
ceasing to be itself. At each level of specificity the categories refer to
something integral to the individual being's reality. The categories mirror
the physics of concrete individual events taught by the Stoa. Although
officially classified under logic, the Stoic categories are really pertinent
to physics since they are modes of expressing reality.(142)"
(142) Bochenski, Ancient Formal Logic,
p. 87; Bréhier, Chrysippe, pp. 132-33; Phillip De-Lacy, "The Stoic
Categories as Methodological Principles,"
Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, 76 (1945), 246-63;
Goldschmidt, Le système stoïcien, p. 23; Sambursky, Physics of the Stoics,
p. 18; Sandbach, The Stoics, pp. 93-94. On the other hand, A. C. Lloyd,
"Grammar and Metaphysics in the Stoa," in Problems in Stoicism, ed. Long, p.
65 and Rist, Stoic Philosophy, pp. 15260 argue that the categories should be
regarded entirely as lekta.
From: Marcia L. Colish - The Stoic
tradition from Antiquity to the early Middle Ages. I. Stoicism in Classical
Latin literature - Leiden, Brill 1985, pp. 55-56
BIBLIOGRAPHY: THE STOIC THEORY OF CATEGORIES
Barwick Karl. Probleme der Stoischen Sprachlehre und Rhetorik. Berlin: Akademie Verlag 1957.
Abhandlungen der sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaft zu Leipzig, phil.-hist. Klasse 49.3
Brunschwig Jacques. Metaphysics. In The Cambridge Companion to the Stoics. Edited by Inwood Brad. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2003. pp. 206-232
See in particular § 5.'First genera' (The so-called Stoic categories) pp. 227-232
de Lacy Phillip, "The Stoic Categories as methodological principles," Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 76: 246-263 (1945).
"The Stoics used the four categories, substance, quality, disposition, and relative disposition, as methodological principles in all three branches of their philosophy. Moreover, in each case the third and fourth categories, disposition and relative disposition, embraced the most important questions. To the extent that the categories supply a methodological framework common to all three departments of philosophy, they constitute a unifying element. Perhaps they cannot provide an instrument for resolving all the contradictions attributed to the Stoics, but at least they give a clue to that inner unity of which the Stoics themselves boasted."
Duhot Jean-Joël, "Y-a-t-il des catégories stoïciennes?," Revue Internationale de Philosophie 45: 220-244 (1991).
Evangeliou Christos, "Plotinus on the Stoic set of categories," Journal of Neoplatonic Studies 2: 21-36 (1994).
Graeser Andreas. The Stoic categories. In Les Stoïciens et leur logique. Edited by Brunschwig Jacques. Paris: Vrin 2006. pp. 347-367
Deuxième édition revue, augmentée et mise a jour (Première edition 1978, pp. 199-214).
Reprinted in: A. Graeser - Issues in the philosophy of language. Psst and present. Selected papers - Bern, Peter Lang, 1999, pp. 99-120.
Hadot Pierre. Sur divers sens du mot pragma dans la tradition philosophique grecque. In Concepts et Catégories dans la pensée antique. Edited by Aubenque Pierre. Paris: Vrin 1980. pp. 309-319
Imbert Claude. Pour une réinterpétation des catégories stoiciennes. In Philosophie du langage et grammaire dans l'Antiquité. Bruxelles: Éditions Ousia 1986. pp. 263-285
Isnardi Parente Margherita, "Simplicio, gli Stoici e le categorie," Rivista di Storia della Filosofia 41: 3-18 (1986).
Lacy Philip de, "The Stoic categories as methodological principles," Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 76: 246-263 (1945).
Mates Benson. Stoic logic. Berkeley: University of California Press 1953.
Second edition 1961.
Menn Stephen, "The Stoic theory of categories," Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 17: 215-247 (1999).
Pinborg Jan. Classical Antiquity: Greece. In Current trends in linguistics. Vol. 13: Historiography of linguistics. Edited by Sebeok Thomas A. The Hague: Mouton 1975. pp. 69-126
Reesor Margaret E., "The Stoic concept of quality," American Journal of Philology 78: 63-82 (1954).
Reesor Margaret E., "The Stoic categories," American Journal of Philology 75: 40-58 (1957).
Rist John Michael. Categories and their uses. In Stoic philosophy. Edited by Rist John M. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1969. pp. 152-172
Reprinted in A. A. Long (ed.) - Problems in Stoicism - London, Athlone Press, 1971, pp. 38-57.
Vamvoukakis Nicolas. La notion de ptôsis chez Aristote et les Stoïciens. In Concepts et Catégories dans la pensée antique. Edited by Aubenque Pierre. Paris: Vrin 1980. pp. 253-269
BIBLIOGRAPHY: PLOTINUS' CRITICISM OF THE THEORY OF CATEGORIES (ENNEADS
VI,1-3)
Aubenque Pierre. Plotin et Dexippe exégètes des Catégories. In
Aristotelica. Mélanges offerts à M. de Corte. Bruxelles: Ousia 1985. pp.
7-40
Baltzly Dirk C., "Porphyry and Plotinus on the reality of relations,"
Journal of Neoplatonic Studies 6: 49-75 (1998).
"Porphyry and Plotinus disagree over the question whether Aristotle was
successful in dividing the world at its joints in the Categories, with
Plotinus (Enn. VI, 1-3) arguing that he was not successful, Porphyry (in his
commentary on the Categories) arguing that he was. Porphyry, however,
has the clearer account of relations and relational properties and,
consequently, Plotinus' account does not adequately meet objections to the
autonomy of Aristotle's category of relation. This is a problem for Plotinus
because he retains the category of relation in his own five-fold scheme of
categories."
Chiaradonna Riccardo. The categories and the status of the physical
world: Plotinus and the Neo-Platonic commentators. In Philosophy, science
and exegesis in Greek, Arabic and Latin Commentaries (Vol. One). Edited
by Adamson Peter, Baltussen Han, and Stone M.W.F. London: Institute of
Classical Studies, University of London 2004. pp. 121-136
Corrigan Kevin and O'Cleirigh Padraigh. The course of Plotinian
Scholarship from 1971 to 1986. In Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen
Welt (ANRW). Geschichte und Kultur Roms in Spiegel der neueren Forschung.
Teil I: Principat. Edited by Haase Wolfgang. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter
1987. pp. 571-623
See in particular: The Categories and the genera of Being pp.
579-580.
De Haas Frans A.J., "Did Plotinus and Porphyry disagree on Aristotle's
Categories?," Phronesis.A Journal for Ancient Philosophy 46:
492-526 (2001).
"In this paper I propose a reading of Plotinus Enneads VI.1-3 [41-43] On the
genera of being which regards this treatise as a coherent whole in which
Aristotle's Categories is explored in a way that turns it into a decisive
contribution to Plotinus' Platonic ontology. In addition, I claim that
Porphyry's Isagoge and commentaries on the Categories start by adopting
Plotinus' point of view, including his notion of genus, and proceed by
explaining its consequences for a more detailed reading of the Categories.
After Plotinus' integration of the Categories into the Platonic frame of
thought Porphyry saw the possibilities of exploiting the Peripatetic
tradition both as a means to support the Platonic interpretation of the
Categories and as a source for solutions to traditional questions. His
allegiance to a division of being into ten, and his emphasis on semantics
rather than ontology can be explained from this orientation. In the light of
our investigation the alleged disagreement between Plotinus and Porphyry on
the Categories changes its appearance completely. There are differences, but
these can be best explained as confirmation and extension of Plotinus'
perspective on the Categories and its role in Platonism."
De Haas Frans A.J. Context and strategy of Plotinus' treatise on The
Genera of Being (Enn. VI 1-3 [42-44]). In Aristotle e i suoi
esegeti nepolatonici. Logica e ontologia nelle interpretazioni greche e
arabe. Edited by Celluprica Vincenza and D'Ancona Cristina. Napoli:
Biblipolis 2004. pp. 39-53
Atti del Convegno Internazionale. Roma 19-20 ottobre 2001.
Evangeliou Christos. The ontological basis of Plotinus' criticism of
Aristotle's theory of categories. In The structure of Being. A
neoplatonic approach. Edited by Harris Ramson Baine. Albany: State
University of New York Press 1982. pp. 73-82
Evangeliou Christos, "Aristotle's doctrine of predicables and Porphyry's
Isagoge," Journal of the History of Philosopy 23: 15-34 (1985).
"Porphyry's Isagoge was intended as an introductory study to the dialectical
methods by way of clarifying the meanings and logical functions of the five
predicable terms. To consider the Isagoge as an introduction to Aristotle's
Topics or Categories and to criticize Porphyry for failing to present
accurately the doctrines of Aristotle is therefore unfair and misleading."
Evangeliou Christos, "The Plotinian reduction of Aristotle's
Categories," Ancient Philosophy 7: 147-162 (1987).
Reprinted in: A. Preus, J. P. Antony (eds.) - Aristotle's ontology -
Albany, State University of New York Press, 1992, pp. 47-67
Evangeliou Christos. Aristotle's Categories and Porphyry. Leiden:
Brill 1988.
Evangeliou Christos, "Plotinus on the Stoic set of categories,"
Journal of Neoplatonic Studies 2 (1994).
"In Ennead VI, 1 Plotinus raises objections to what he regarded as a Stoic
set of categories comparable to Aristotle's. Both were unacceptable to
Plotinus because he wanted to revive the Platonic genera of being."
Evangeliou Christos. Plotinus' criticism of materialism. In
Neoplatonism and Indian philosophy. Edited by Gregorios Paulos. New
York: State of New York University Press 2001. pp. 199-209
Gerson Lloyd P. Plotinus. New York: Routledge 1994.
See in particular Chapter Five: Categories and the tradition pp.
79-103: 1. The criticism of Stoic categories 79; 2. The criticism of
Aristotle's categories 84; 3. Aristotelian essentialism 93, 4. The
Plotininan categories 96-103 (Notes to Chapter Five: 256-261).
Graeser Andreas. Plotinus and the Stoics: a preliminary study.
Leiden: Brill 1972.
See in particular Part II. Essays - Chapter IV: Plotinus on the Stoic
categories of Being 87-100.
Hadot Pierre. L'harmonie des philosophies de Plotin et d'Aristote selon
Prophyre dans le Commentaire de Dexippe sur les Catégories. In
Plotino e il neoplatonismo in Oriente e in Occidente. Edited by Cerulli
Enrico. Roma: Accademia nazionale dei Lincei 1974. pp. 31-47
Atti del Convegno internazionale. (Roma, 5-9 ottobre 1970)
Henry Paul. Trois apories orales de Plotin sur les Catégories d'Aristote.
In Zetesis. Festschrift für E. de Strycker. Antwerpen/Utrecht: De
Nederlandsche Boekhandel 1973. pp. 234-265
Henry Paul. Apories orales de Plotin sur les Catégories
d'Aristote. In Aristoteles. Werk und Wirkung. Paul Moraux zum 65
Geburtstag gewidmet - Band 2: Kommentierung, Uberlieferung, Nachleben.
Edited by Wiesner Jürgen. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter 1987. pp. 120-156
Nebel Gerhard. Plotins Kategorien der intelligiblen Welt. Ein Beitrag
zur Geschichte der Idee. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr 1929.
Rutten Christian. Les catégories du monde sensible dans les Ennéades
de Plotin. Paris: Les Belles Lettres 1961.
Strange Steven K. Plotinus, Porphyry, and the Neoplatonic interpretation
of the Categories. In Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt
(ANRW). Geschichte und Kultur Roms in Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Teil
II: Principat. Edited by Haase Wolfgang. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter 1987.
pp. 955-974
Band 36: Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. Teilband II: Philosophie (Platonismus
[Forts.]; Aristotelismus.
Wurm Klaus. Substanz und Qualitat. Ein Beitrag zur Interpretation der
Plotinischen Traktate VI 1, 2 und 3. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter 1973.
(click on the image to see the PDF file)