There are two main interpretations of how the Stoics understood impulsive impressions in adults: the "form"interpretation and the "no-form"interpretation. I assess these interpretations against the well-known passages in Stobaeus' account of Stoic ethics that provide the primary evidence for how the Stoics understood impulsive impressions. It is in terms of these passages that Inwood and other historians argue for the form interpretation. I argue that these arguments for the form interpretation are not sound and that these passages in Stobaeus provide no reason to believe that the form interpretation is more plausible than the no-form interpretation.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||22|
|State||Published - Jul 27 2017|
- impulsive impressions
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- History and Philosophy of Science