Corporeality and Thickness: Back on Melissus’ Fragment B9

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Brémond, Mathilde
Data de Publicação: 2021
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista Archai (Online)
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/archai/article/view/41457
Resumo: Melissus’ fragment B9, where he claims that being has no body and no thickness, raises the question of how being can be extended and full and at the same time incorporeal. Most recent interpretations tried to avoid lending to “body” the meaning of “physical body”. My aim in this paper is to reconstruct Melissus’ notion of body, by examining its connection to “thickness”. I show that Melissus meant by “thick” something that has distinct parts and therefore supports in B9 the indivisibility of being. I then indicate that he relied on the contrast between soul and body for his conception of corporeality, by highlighting that by Presocratic thinkers, the soul was considered as “thin” and regarded as something that could be exempt of the division into parts. I conclude that even though Melissus’ notion of incorporeality is very different from the one Plato will develop, he made a huge step toward its conceptualization.
id UNB-18_1c604e1b39c4070240bcd83f6549ca73
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/41457
network_acronym_str UNB-18
network_name_str Revista Archai (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Corporeality and Thickness: Back on Melissus’ Fragment B9Corporeality and Thickness: Back on Melissus’ Fragment B9MelissusincorporealitydivisionbodysoulMelissusincorporealitydivisionbodysoulMelissus’ fragment B9, where he claims that being has no body and no thickness, raises the question of how being can be extended and full and at the same time incorporeal. Most recent interpretations tried to avoid lending to “body” the meaning of “physical body”. My aim in this paper is to reconstruct Melissus’ notion of body, by examining its connection to “thickness”. I show that Melissus meant by “thick” something that has distinct parts and therefore supports in B9 the indivisibility of being. I then indicate that he relied on the contrast between soul and body for his conception of corporeality, by highlighting that by Presocratic thinkers, the soul was considered as “thin” and regarded as something that could be exempt of the division into parts. I conclude that even though Melissus’ notion of incorporeality is very different from the one Plato will develop, he made a huge step toward its conceptualization. Melissus’ fragment B9, where he claims that being has no body and no thickness, raises the question of how being can be extended and full and at the same time incorporeal. Most recent interpretations tried to avoid lending to “body” the meaning of “physical body”. My aim in this paper is to reconstruct Melissus’ notion of body, by examining its connection to “thickness”. I show that Melissus meant by “thick” something that has distinct parts and therefore supports in B9 the indivisibility of being. I then indicate that he relied on the contrast between soul and body for his conception of corporeality, by highlighting that by Presocratic thinkers, the soul was considered as “thin” and regarded as something that could be exempt of the division into parts. I conclude that even though Melissus’ notion of incorporeality is very different from the one Plato will develop, he made a huge step toward its conceptualization. Cátedra UNESCO Archai (Universidade de Brasília); Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra, Portugal; Annablume Editora, São Paulo, Brasil2021-12-17info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/archai/article/view/4145710.14195/1984-249X_31_23Revista Archai; No. 31 (2021): Archai 31 (2021)Archai Journal; n. 31 (2021): Archai 31 (2021)1984-249X2179-496010.14195/1984-249X_31reponame:Revista Archai (Online)instname:Universidade de Brasília (UnB)instacron:UNBenghttps://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/archai/article/view/41457/32200Copyright (c) 2021 Mathilde Brémondhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBrémond, Mathilde2022-01-25T02:00:31Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/41457Revistahttps://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/archaiPUBhttps://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/archai/oai||archaijournal@unb.br|| cornelli@unb.br1984-249X1984-249Xopendoar:2022-01-25T02:00:31Revista Archai (Online) - Universidade de Brasília (UnB)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Corporeality and Thickness: Back on Melissus’ Fragment B9
Corporeality and Thickness: Back on Melissus’ Fragment B9
title Corporeality and Thickness: Back on Melissus’ Fragment B9
spellingShingle Corporeality and Thickness: Back on Melissus’ Fragment B9
Brémond, Mathilde
Melissus
incorporeality
division
body
soul
Melissus
incorporeality
division
body
soul
title_short Corporeality and Thickness: Back on Melissus’ Fragment B9
title_full Corporeality and Thickness: Back on Melissus’ Fragment B9
title_fullStr Corporeality and Thickness: Back on Melissus’ Fragment B9
title_full_unstemmed Corporeality and Thickness: Back on Melissus’ Fragment B9
title_sort Corporeality and Thickness: Back on Melissus’ Fragment B9
author Brémond, Mathilde
author_facet Brémond, Mathilde
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Brémond, Mathilde
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Melissus
incorporeality
division
body
soul
Melissus
incorporeality
division
body
soul
topic Melissus
incorporeality
division
body
soul
Melissus
incorporeality
division
body
soul
description Melissus’ fragment B9, where he claims that being has no body and no thickness, raises the question of how being can be extended and full and at the same time incorporeal. Most recent interpretations tried to avoid lending to “body” the meaning of “physical body”. My aim in this paper is to reconstruct Melissus’ notion of body, by examining its connection to “thickness”. I show that Melissus meant by “thick” something that has distinct parts and therefore supports in B9 the indivisibility of being. I then indicate that he relied on the contrast between soul and body for his conception of corporeality, by highlighting that by Presocratic thinkers, the soul was considered as “thin” and regarded as something that could be exempt of the division into parts. I conclude that even though Melissus’ notion of incorporeality is very different from the one Plato will develop, he made a huge step toward its conceptualization.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-12-17
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/archai/article/view/41457
10.14195/1984-249X_31_23
url https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/archai/article/view/41457
identifier_str_mv 10.14195/1984-249X_31_23
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/archai/article/view/41457/32200
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Mathilde Brémond
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Mathilde Brémond
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cátedra UNESCO Archai (Universidade de Brasília); Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra, Portugal; Annablume Editora, São Paulo, Brasil
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cátedra UNESCO Archai (Universidade de Brasília); Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra, Portugal; Annablume Editora, São Paulo, Brasil
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista Archai; No. 31 (2021): Archai 31 (2021)
Archai Journal; n. 31 (2021): Archai 31 (2021)
1984-249X
2179-4960
10.14195/1984-249X_31
reponame:Revista Archai (Online)
instname:Universidade de Brasília (UnB)
instacron:UNB
instname_str Universidade de Brasília (UnB)
instacron_str UNB
institution UNB
reponame_str Revista Archai (Online)
collection Revista Archai (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista Archai (Online) - Universidade de Brasília (UnB)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||archaijournal@unb.br|| cornelli@unb.br
_version_ 1798319945699819520