The Philosophical Review/Volume 1/Summary: Dräseke - Platon und Aristoteles bei Apollinarios
D. objects that it is one-sided to call Apollinarios of Laodicea a Platonist on the ground of his threefold division of man: σῶμα, φυχή, πνεῦμα. The custom in general of dividing philosophers into Platonists and Aristotelians he finds erroneous. This he finds particularly true in the case of Apollinarios, whose independence of thought forbids his being classified as a follower of this or that leader. D. then proceeds to give the evidences of both Platonic and Aristotelian influence in the writings of Apollinarios, which show him to have been well schooled in the philosophies of both philosophers, without being their dependent. In the writing falsely ascribed to Justin Martyr, Λόγος παραινετικὸς πρὸς Ἕλληνας, D. finds evidence of the close acquaintance of Apollinarios with the writings and doctrines of Plato. Apollinarios says (Cap. 20) that the teaching of Moses and the Prophets on God, which Plato learned in Egypt, was accepted by him, but that, intimidated by the fate of Sokrates, he explained the doctrine differently for believers and unbelievers. Timaios 27 D and 28 A are quoted by Apollinarios as proofs of Plato's belief in the downfall of the created gods. In Plato's words, ὁ μὲν δὴ θεός, ὥσπερ καὶ ὁ παλαιὸς λόγος, ἀρχὴν καὶ τελευτὴν καὶ μέσα τῶν πάντων ἔχων (De Legg. 715 E), he finds a direct reference to Moses (Cap. 25). Apollinarios finds that the Republic (330 D E, 331 A, 615 C D E, 616 A B) proves that Plato got not only the doctrine of the last judgment, but also of a resurrection in which the Hellenes did not believe, from the Prophets. Apollinarios also refers Plato's doctrine of ideas (Cap. 29) to Moses, and finds the myth of the winged wagon of Zeus in Ezekiel (10. 18, 19). He declares that Plato not only teaches the same doctrine of God as Moses, but that he follows him even in expression, e.g. θεοὶ θεῶν, ὧν ἐγὼ δημιουργός (Tim. 41 A), which he treats at length (Cohor. Cap. 20, n. 13; 22, n. 13; 24, n. 5). In Cap. 23-25 he points out the palpable contradictions involved in Timaios (27 D-28 A; 41 A B). In Κατὰ μέρος πίστις D. finds μέρος γὰρ ἅπαν ἀτελὲς τὸ [ἐκ] συνθέσεως ὑφιστάμενον (Lagarde, p. 107, 20 ff.) Aristotelian in conception and expression. With this he compares Eth. Nic. X, 3, 1174. 20, and de An. III, 6, 430 a 27. D. calls special attention to the passage preserved by Justinian (Mai, Script, vet. nov. coll. VII, p. 310) from the Syllogisms of Apollinarios to prove the thorough acquaintance of Apollinarios with Aristotle. With περὶ τριάδος (from the writing Ἔκθεσις πίστεως falsely ascribed to Justin) c. 14. p. 386 B, D. compares Arist. Phys. Auscult, II, c. 6.