Previously, I discussed research institutions in general. I claimed that because they valued progress in knowledge more than knowledge, the purpose of research institutions undercuts the value that those institutions have. But this is not the only model for knowledge-seekers. The other model is the academy.

The academy values knowledge for the sake of knowledge. An academy may have libraries, students and teachers, but it will have them precisely because having these things is a part of loving knowledge. The entire organization of an academy is for the purpose of the love of knowledge. An academy does not care about such things as practical value, current societal needs or other sources of intrinsic value.

An academy will treat people differently depending on how they value knowledge. Someone who values knowledge for its own sake will always be treated better than someone who does not. This is true even if the person who values knowledge is a teen and the other person is a professor with a doctorate. In line with these goals, an academy will allow people to work for it only to the extent that their actions promote knowledge. They may do so by doing research, teaching students, organizing knowledge or contemplating the knowledge they have already gained.

The academy will permit students, but their primary goal is knowledge. Students who wish to gain a certificate, get a job or become cultured will be ignored. Only students who wish to learn will have their wishes granted. The primary goal is knowledge. It is for the same reason that political expediency, diplomacy and avoidance of sensitive topics are not likely to occur in such a setting. An academy does not care if everyone is offended as long everyone is offended for the sake of knowledge.

Students will be encouraged to love knowledge above all other things. An academy is a place where the world is changed. It is not a place to learn skills for the world or knowledge for a purpose other than learning. But some students do wish to learn these things. They may wish to become something other than a scholar. In that case, an academy is not the best place for these students. They are best suited for another form of learning.

Teachers are also encouraged to love knowledge above all other things. While teaching is compatible with goal, it is not compatible with teaching all kinds of students. Those students who are not scholars cannot be taught by such teachers. Such teachers may be knowledgeable in their subject areas, but they are not interested in explaining practical applications to students. They are especially uninterested in giving students the ability to find practical applications.

Platos’ Academy

Academy (‘Aκαδήμεια or’ Ακαδημία), Plato’s school, is the school of Plato, named after the public gymnasium, which probably existed from the time of Solon (early 6th century) in the north-western suburb of Athens in the place of the sanctuary in honor of the local hero Academ. Not far from the Academy, Plato, after the first Sicilian trip acquired a small estate (κηπίδιον) and conducted classes either at home or the gymnasium and here and there he set up sanctuaries in honor of the Muses. Apparently, the school of Plato – a self-initiated circle of like-minded people who formed a kind of unofficial political club and together honoring the memory of the teacher of Socrates, noted by the deity, was established in the 380s and began to write dialogues on her initiative and in the style of Plato with obligatory participation of Socrates), polemised with other Socratists, sophists and rhetoricians, conducted debates and engaged in mathematics. When Plato travels to Sicily for the second time, Evdoks replaces him (attempts to challenge it are inconclusive). At the same time, Aristotle appears in the Academy, under which the elements of disputes develop and the system of literary and lecture genres (dialogues with the participation of contemporaries, lectures, lecture courses, treatises) is expanding.

The sequence of the scholar’s scholars after Plato’s death is restored on the basis of, first of all, the “Acadernicorum index Herculanensis”, the 4th book of Diogenes Laertius and the articles Πλάτων from the Court: Spevesipp from Athens, nephew of Plato; Xenocrates from Chalcedon; Polemon from Athens; Cratet from the deme Frius in Athens; He reduced (probably the last one who taught not only in the Academy but also in the estate of Plato); Arkesilay of Pitana; Lakid from Cyrene, who was the first to give the leadership of Telekla and Evandru from Fokei, the successor of which was Gegesin from Pergamum. The ships between Lakid and Carneades of Cyrene call Evandra, Damon, Leonthey, Moshi-on, Evandra from Athens, Hegesin; “The list of academicians” refers to Leontheus, Demon of Cyrene, Demetrius, Polite from Fokei, two Eubools, Moschion, Agamestor, Evandra and Telekle, Euphorion; probably not all of them were scholars (Carneades was the fourth since Arkesilaus, since his teacher was Gegeesin, who himself listened to Evandra, disciple of Lakida), Carneades of Cyrene, Carneades the Younger, Kratet of Tarsus, Clitomachus, Philos of Larissa, who left Athens in 88 BC. Filon did not leave a successor, and on it, the chain of direct succession of the scholar’s scholars is interrupted.

Filon’s disciple Antiochus of Ascalonus breaks up with him during his lifetime and establishes his school, calling it the “Ancient Academy”, to which he included Plato and his closest followers, opposing her skepticism to Arkesilaus; In this double division, he was followed by Cicero.

The triple division of the Academy is represented in the “List of Academicians”: The average begins with Arkesilaus, Novaya – with Lakida; but a new meaningful stage in the development of the Academy begins with Carneades, whom the Sext Empiricus calls the founder of the New Academy. According to the latter, the circle of Philo and Harmid was the 4th Academy, and the school of Antiochus – the 5th.

The brother of Antiochus of Askalonian Aristus is mentioned by Cicero in Brutus, written in 46 BC, as the head – heres – of the “Ancient Academy”; but already in the autumn of 1945 he probably was not alive, since Cicero’s son listened only to the apprentice of Aristus Peripatetics Krahipp. Another pupil of the “Ancient Academy”, Ariston of Alexandria, also moved to Peripat. According to Plutarch, Mark Junius Brutus in August 44 listened in Athens to Kratippa and “academician Teomest.” This is the last philosopher who lived and taught in Athens, whom the sources call the “academician”: there is no reason to consider him to be Arist’s successor, although it can not be said that he continued the tradition of the skeptical Academy, which probably appealed to Pyrrhonism after Philo from Larisa. Thus, Ariste concludes the story of the ancient Academy founded by Antiochus of Askalon, the very name of which was a vivid testimony of that recurrent impulse of the philosophical thought of antiquity, which in the period of average Platonism sought identity with increasing attention to the texts of the founder of the school and gradually led to the emergence of several centers study and development of the Platonic heritage outside Athens. And yet, when the Athenian Platonists in the 4th-6th centuries considered themselves “Plato’s” diadochs “and spoke of the” golden chain “of his adepts, it was not only a” sentimental design “, but also a statement of the way in which ancient Platonism managed to fail the most impressive result of all the development of pagan thought and preserve its heritage for Byzantium, Arabs, and Western Europe.

Rate your experience with this philosophy study!

Discuss this Study