L'intervention reprend les résultats de la recherche contemporaine sur Plotin. Sourtout sur l'attention aux rapports entre l'Un et l' l'Être. En partant en effet de l'identité ou de l'originaire distinction d'Un et Être il est possible retrouver une série d'influences des problématiques plotinian sur la pensée contemporaine qu'elles trouvent en Shelling, Hegel et Heidegger des interlocuteurs privilégiés. D'autre part, en suivant cette position critique, il y a une considérable fécondité de Plotin même en penseurs que, loins de sa impostation, déterminent autonomement des considerations critiques qui sont très voisins à cette costruction intellectuel. Telle position commence à fournir quelque intéressant approfondissement dans la pensée de Leibnitz mais même les lectures de la Critique de la Raison Pure de Kant, surtout ces de Luigi Scaravelli, peuvent être étudiées à la lumière des difficultés élaborées sur la pensée de Plotin.

The paper tackles the problem of Matter and evil in Plotinus' monistic metaphysics, especially in the perspective of the following apparent inconsistency: if there is no other principle but the Good, then the Good creates the Matter which is the absolute evil. It follows that the Good is bad, according to a certain axiom of Proclus, which states that the creator is to a higher degree all what the creature is. The author shows that, despite what Proclus and then many modern critics believed, Plotinus is consistent within his system. He relies on the axiom that the creature is not all what the creator is, i.e. that the creator also gives what he has not. Therefore, the One gives the Intellect multiplicity and thought which He is deprived of and also gives the Matter the evil which He is also deprived of. The paper also shows that Plotinus developed a logic of ontological procession which is not Aristotelian. This logic does not work by forming classes, but chains of partially intransitive resemblances. So, the Intellect resembles the One (the Good), the Soul resembles the Intellect and the Matter resembles the Soul; yet the Matter resembles the One no more. Yet, the unity of the world is assured, because of the continuity of the chain. The extreme terms are contrary, though not in the Aristotelian sense of sharing in the same genus. A certain similarity with Wittgenstein's logic of „family resemblances" is striking, which means that not only Wittgenstein, but Plotinus also went beyond the Platonic-Aristotelian Vulgata, even while he was sticking to its language.

Iamblichus has long lived under the shadow of Plotinus.  One can easily recognize this from the historiography of the Neoplatonic School starting, for example, with J. J. Brucker's Historia critica philosophiae (1742) and continuing with Hegel and 19th century historians like Simon and Vacherot in France, Kroll and Zeller in Germany.  But from Praechter on Iamblichus was acknowledged more and more as an original thinker and the real systematiser of the late Neoplatonic School.  We can see more clearly now that the inclusion of theurgy into Neoplatonism does not mean a simple abandonment of philosophy or rational discourse, and that the discipline of textual exegesis does not negate the originality of the commentator.  In Proclus, for one, these complementary strains are strongly present.  In rebuilding the whole Platonic system, Iamblichus - the Chrysippus of Neoplatonism - skilfully incorporated elements like the Chaldean triads which were unknown to Plotinus, and presented a completely new account of the nature of theology.  This feat shows a genius no less impressive, albeit of another type, than the one disclosed by Plotinus himself.

Plotinus represent a constant reference in all of Šestov's philosophy. For the Russian philosopher Plotinus is, on the one hand, the one who thought up the synthesis of Greek philosophy, on the other, the one who first broke with that same tradition precisely when it was at its peak. However, Šestov does lift from the Enneads certain passages which he marries - as if in a sort of contrapuntal rewriting exercise - to others in which Plotinus seems to contradict himself. What interests Šestov are precisely those discontinuities in the thought of the last great philosopher of old in an anti-Greek function. That of Šestov is once again a marked criticism of Rationalism as creator of an autonomous set of ethics that he judges according to an intellect which everything is subject to. Autonomous ethics affirms Šestov, is a fruit of Greek schools of thought to the extent that it shows distrust for what is mutable, unforeseen and arbitrary, of everything which, in short, is irrational, as it is not inserted in the One/All necessitating, justifying, regulating. In the alternative between Athens end Jerusalem, between the Rationalism and the bible, Šestov opts to assume a stance, in no uncertain terms, on the side Jerusalem, taking with him the Plotinus af the awakening and heading towards a greater reality capable of overturning the throne occupied for too long by reason. That Plotinus who at a certain point was obliged to say that in this other dimension 'the intellect before God represents a reckless, ungodly apostate' (VI.9.5). That Plotinus, who ultimately, in one of those most particular moments, realized that he was predestined for something loftier with respect to the world of evil and death.

L'article compare le motif de la contemplation de son propre image dans une surface reflétante chez Plotin avec des motifs semblables que l'on trouve non seulement dans les récits mythologiques, mais aussi dans les doctrines cosmologiques des systèmes philosophiques à la fois proches et concurrents à Plotin, gnostiques surtout. En même temps il veut souligner, en analysant deux metaphores mythologiques, dont une se sert du motif de la réflexion dans le mirroir (le mythe orphique du démembrement de Dionyse) et l'autre dans l'eau (le mythe de Narcisse), les différences qui séparent la doctrine plotinienne de la descente de l'âme et celle de sa chûte.

The author investigates the number and its nature in Plotinus' works trying to solve the following question: what number is considered intelligible - the number in general or the number in particular? Three answers are given over this study. Thus, if the number is generally defined as intelligible (as Plotinus sometimes does), than the number in general is an intelligible reality (a general intelligible number, therefore, exists). On the other hand, if we make a distinction between numbers (the plural) and number (the singular), it seems that, for Plotinus, only the particular number could be considered clearly intelligible, while the number as a generic reality is not so. Actually, the final solution comes out from the agreement between these two divergent theses. This agreement is based on the idea of the total number: a number that is in the same time particular and general, a number who is the object of the final part of the present study.

The religious spirit in Plotinus. Lots of studies from last 30 years have shown similar attitudes and spiritual tendencies in early christian and neoplatonic teachings. But we could not forget that we are dealing here with two major rivals on the intellectual scene of Late Antiquity. Despite commun aspects in plotinian and gnostic doctrines, there are some strong critics in Plotinus works, most of them in Enneads II,9, that let no doubt of the distance between the gnostic and neoplatonic positions on some key issues. This article points out four aspects of the plotinian doctrine that clearly break up with some of the main christian religious attitudes. Plotinus had a positive jugement on the sensible world, he had never expressed contempt towards nature, refused any presomption on religious metters and considered the philosophy as the only way to mistical union with the One.

In this article, I discuss Plotinus' critique of the peripatetic idea of the divine intellect as first principle. As I am trying to show, Plotinus accepts the unity of the intellect as self-thinking, and, even more than Aristotle, he emphasizes this unity. Yet, he insists on the necessity of a principle that is even higher and simpler than the intellect. Eventually, intellect proves to be the unity of a plurality, though it is the most unitary being. I discuss the dual nature of the intellect: both as thinking and as being, intellect is both unitary and plural. Starting from this, I analyze Plotinus' arguments of the absolute one as first principle, above intellect.

Le présent travail se veut avant tout une introduction bibliographique à l'étude de la codicologie et de la paléographie latine en Roumanie. Les quelques 150 études et volumes qui y sont recensés et commentés donnent un tableau des directions d'étude prises par les chercheurs roumains dans ces domaines. Dans l'introduction, les auteurs proposent une évaluation de la recherche paléographique et codicologique roumaine du XX^e siècle, tout en suggérant de nouvelles voies à explorer. Dans ce sens, la priorité devrait être donnée à un inventaire des manuscrits médiévaux en écriture latine conservés sur le territoire roumain, ce qui débouchera sur la rédaction d'un catalogue général de ces manuscrits. Parallèlement, la recherche codicologique devrait produire des études détaillées des reliures médiévales et modernes et des autres éléments structuraux du codex. La décoration des manuscrits, qui a déjà attiré l'attention des historiens d'art par le passé, se doit d'être étudiée de nouveau dans une perspective codicologique et d'histoire du livre manuscrit. Enfin, un autre but est d'imposer un vocabulaire codicologique roumain, conforme aux progrès et innovations terminologiques de la recherche européenne contemporaine.