Historians Of Philosophy From Italy

"Plotinus devoted himself to the methodical task of transforming the direction of studies so that it corresponded to the greatness of the empire and its current problems. To this end, he started again from Plato and the interpretation of Plato; instead, he proposed Aristotle and his method as a subject of study and discussion. When Gallienus, who had recognised him as Caesar, rose to supreme power, he also had the authority and character of official teacher of the empire's philosophy. ('La vita e l'opera di Plotino, “'The Life and Work of Plotinus”', V, p. 37)"

"The historical position of Iamblichus was constantly debated: to some of his judges he seemed greater than his time and his academic position; to others, including Zeller, he appeared inferior to his fame. His originality lies in having believed that the religious inspiration of the Neoplatonic school was of decisive or fundamental importance for the development of doctrine. Therefore, in having sought to innovate it by drawing on the tradition of syncretism, esoteric priesthood, and mystical passion. (La scuola di Giamblico, “'School of Iamblichus”', XXX, p. 186)"

"(Iamblichus) He is a priest before he is a philosopher, and he loves oracles, legends and revelations as an intuitive starting point for philosophical ideas. This gave him a character that was both mysterious and superstitious, which differs from that of the usual Greek philosophers, just as the importance given to the doctrines of the Chaldeans and Babylonian science differs from their method; while in this he is similar to the practice of the Gnostics. However, reading the treatises he composed reveals a very clear mind, a profound thinker, who in his exhortation to philosophy (composed in emulation of an early treatise by Aristotle) achieves a high level of awareness of the history of philosophy and poses and resolves concepts that are not insignificant in the context of Neoplatonism. (“'School of Iamblichus”', XXX, pp. 186-187)"

"Iamblichus set out to give a systematic and decisive character to Plotinus' dialectic at its most sublime but also most obscure moment, that of absolute unity and its forms, already dealt with by Amelius and Porphyry; that is, around the way of reconciling and harmonising the mystical theory of the One with the variety of unitary principles that are expected to preside over the various aspects of life: that is, the transcendent One and the immanent One, the unity of thought and being, thinking thought and thought thought, and finally thought as an intelligible world. (La Scuola di giamblico, “'School of Iamblichus”', XXX, p. 187)"

"The thought of Proclus towered over the entire philosophy of his time as the last great system of Greco-Roman speculation, and offers our thought the dual value of the most elaborate solution to all problems, not only of the Neoplatonic school but of classical philosophy and the form in which it communicated almost immediately to Christian thought in the Middle Ages and the modern age. (Le scuole neoplatoniche, “'The Neoplatonic Schools”', XXXVII, p. 222)"

"The dialectical method developed by Proclus triumphed in modern philosophy in the form of Hegelian dialectics. Proclus considers the world of thought in reality to be entirely dominated and interpretable by the process of the One as outlined in metaphysics; therefore, for him, metaphysics is logic. The fundamental categories and ideas are identified, and everything is continually reduced to a single thought, which is that of unity. (Le scuole neoplatoniche, “'The Neoplatonic Schools”', XXXVII, p. 222)"

"Neoplatonic philosophy finds in Proclus the satisfaction of a systematic need of an analytical and deductive nature, while the form of the systematisation proper to Plotinus's Enneads was instead methodical-didactic; therefore, in the history of Neoplatonism and the Alexandrian school, it must be admitted that the full historical awareness of the value and significance of the school came precisely from this philosopher. (Le scuole neoplatoniche, “'The Neoplatonic Schools”', XXXVIII, pp. 228-229)."