@article {12945,
	title = {What Is That Which Is Always Becoming, and What Is That Which Always Is?},
	journal = {Filozofia},
	volume = {75},
	number = {3},
	year = {2020},
	pages = {237-250},
	type = {State},
	abstract = {This paper explores the Neoplatonic interpretations of the distinction that Plato draws at the beginning of <i>Timaeus</i> (27d6 {\textendash} 28a1) between {\textquotedblleft}that which always is and has no becoming{\textquotedblright} and {\textquotedblleft}that which is always becoming but never is{\textquotedblright}. Philoponus tries to show that Plato understands {\textquotedblleft}generated{\textquotedblright} in the sense of {\textquotedblleft}generated in time{\textquotedblright}, rejecting Aristotle{\textquoteright}s incompatible thesis. According to the Neoplatonic reading that Plotinus inaugurates, and Porphyry subsequently develops, {\textquotedblleft}generated{\textquotedblright} (γενητ{\'o}ν) has two meanings: to depend on a cause and to exist by virtue of a composition. The first meaning is assigned to the incorporeal {\textendash} the Intelligence and the Soul; the two meanings, on the other hand, are assigned to bodies. The Intelligence depends on a cause, the One-Good; and, in turn, the Soul depends on a cause, the Intelligence. These realities are not in the range of {\textquotedblleft}that which is always generated and never is{\textquotedblright}, but of {\textquotedblleft}that which always is and is not genera- ted{\textquotedblright}, i.e. of {\textquotedblleft}that which is without ceasing to be{\textquotedblright}.},
	keywords = {<i>Timaeus</i>, Becoming, Cosmology, Generated, Neoplatonism, Plato},
	url = {https://www.sav.sk/journals/uploads/03221537filozofia.2020.75.3.6.pdf},
	author = {Calvo, Jos{\'e} Mar{\'\i}a Zamora}
}
