| 051101 |
The Deadly Styx River and the Death of
Alexander |
|
Adrienne Mayor, Stanford University and Antoinette
Hayes, Pfizer Pharmaceuticals |
 |
Abstract: Plutarch, Arrian, Diodorus,
Justin, and other ancient historians report that rumors
of poisoning arose after the death of Alexander in
Babylon in 323 B.C. Alexander’s close friends suspected
a legendary poison gathered from the River Styx in
Arcadia, so corrosive that only the hoof of a horse
could contain it. It’s impossible to know the real
cause of Alexander’s death, but a recent toxicological
discovery may help explain why some ancient observers
believed that Alexander was murdered with Styx poison.
We propose that the river harbored a killer bacterium
that can occur on limestone rock deposits. This paper
elaborates on our Poster presentation, Toxicological
History Room, XII International Congress of Toxicology,
Barcelona, 19-23 July 2010, and Society of Toxicology
Annual Meeting, Washington DC, March 2011. |
|
This paper replaces 091008 originally published in
September 2010 and 071001 originally published in July
2010. |
|
|
| 091008 |
The Deadly Styx River and the Death of
Alexander |
|
Adrienne Mayor, Stanford University |
|
Revised May 2011. See 051101 entry. |
|
|
| 071001 |
The Deadly Styx River and the Death of
Alexander |
|
Adrienne Mayor, Stanford University |
|
Revised September 2010. See 091010 entry. |
|
|
| 010702 |
Shock and Awe: The Performance Dimension of
Galen’s Anatomy Demonstrations |
|
Maud W. Gleason, Stanford University |
 |
Abstract: Galen’s anatomical demonstrations
on living animals constitute a justly famous chapter in
the history of scientific method. This essay, however,
examines them as a social phenomenon. Galen’s
demonstrations were competitive. Their visual,
cognitive and emotional impact (often expressed by
compounds of ѳαῦμα and ἔκπληξις) reduced onlookers
to gaping amazement. This impact enhanced the logical
force of Galen’s arguments, compelling competitors to
acknowlege his intellectual and technical preeminence.
Thus, on the interpersonal level, Galen’s
demonstrations functioned coercively. On the
philosophical level, Galen was using a rhetoric
traditional to Greek science, a way of arguing that
involved a unitary view of nature and an emphasis on
homology between animals and man. But he was also using
a rhetoric of power and status differentiation
articulated via the body. As played out in the flesh,
public vivisection resonated with other cultural
practices of the Roman empire: wonder-working
competitions, judicial trials, and ampitheater
entertainment. |
| This paper has now been published as "Galen's
Anatomical Performances" in C. Gill, T. Whitmarsh, J.
Wilkins, eds. Galen and the World of Knowledge
(Cambridge University Press, 2010). |
|
|
| 120602 |
Aristotle's Metaphysics M3: realism and the
philosophy of QUA |
|
Reviel Netz, Stanford University |
 |
Abstract - The article provides a new
translation and interpretation of Aristotle’s
Metaphysics M3, arguing that Aristotle uses
there the QUA as a perspective of intellectual
action: an operator on actions rather than a filter
on objects. Instead of Aristotle’s mathematics being a
science of “Objects QUA mathematical”, we should
consider it as a science whose manner of action is “QUA
mathematical”. A discussion follows as to Aristotle’s
view that his QUA account salvages a realist reading of
mathematics without invoking special mathematical
objects. This view depends on the deceptively
compelling assumption that a statement which is true
QUA X is also true simpliciter. If this
assumption is false – as I believe the experience of
modern science suggests – then Aristotle was wrong and
we must indeed either deny the reality of mathematics,
or invoke special mathematical objects. |
|
|