| 000 | 02449 a2200349 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1315511479 | ||
| 005 | 20250317111623.0 | ||
| 008 | 250312042016GB eng | ||
| 020 | _a9781315511474 | ||
| 037 |
_bTaylor & Francis _cGBP 42.99 _fBB |
||
| 040 | _a01 | ||
| 041 | _aeng | ||
| 072 | 7 |
_aQRS _2thema |
|
| 072 | 7 |
_aQRAB _2thema |
|
| 072 | 7 |
_aQRAX _2thema |
|
| 072 | 7 |
_aQRM _2thema |
|
| 072 | 7 |
_aNHC _2thema |
|
| 072 | 7 |
_aHRKP _2bic |
|
| 072 | 7 |
_aHRAB _2bic |
|
| 072 | 7 |
_aHRAX _2bic |
|
| 072 | 7 |
_aHRC _2bic |
|
| 072 | 7 |
_aHBLA1 _2bic |
|
| 072 | 7 |
_aREL000000 _2bisac |
|
| 072 | 7 |
_aHIS002000 _2bisac |
|
| 072 | 7 |
_a241.092 _2bisac |
|
| 100 | 1 | _aKathleen Gibbons | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 |
_aMoral Psychology of Clement of Alexandria _bMosaic Philosophy |
| 250 | _a1 | ||
| 260 |
_aOxford _bRoutledge _c20161004 |
||
| 300 | _a208 p | ||
| 520 | _bIn The Moral Psychology of Clement of Alexandria , Kathleen Gibbons proposes a new approach to Clement’s moral philosophy and explores how his construction of Christianity’s relationship with Jewishness informed, and was informed by, his philosophical project. As one of the earliest Christian philosophers, Clement’s work has alternatively been treated as important for understanding the history of relations between Christianity and Judaism and between Christianity and pagan philosophy. This study argues that an adequate examination of his significance for the one requires an adequate examination of his significance for the other. While the ancient claim that the writings of Moses were read by the philosophical schools was found in Jewish, Christian, and pagan authors, Gibbons demonstrates that Clement’s use of this claim shapes not only his justification of his authorial project, but also his philosophical argumentation. In explaining what he took to be the cosmological, metaphysical, and ethical implications of the doctrine that the supreme God is a lawgiver, Clement provided the theoretical justifications for his views on a range of issues that included martyrdom, sexual asceticism, the status of the law of Moses, and the relationship between divine providence and human autonomy. By contextualizing Clement’s discussions of volition against wider Greco-Roman debates about self-determination, it becomes possible to reinterpret the invocation of “free will” in early Christian heresiological discourse as part of a larger dispute about what human autonomy requires. | ||
| 999 |
_c5955 _d5955 |
||