Kein Profilbild | No profile picture | Utilisateur n'as pas d'image
https://philosophie.ch/profil/gersh

Stephen E. Gersh (gersh)

Contributions to Philosophie.ch

No contributions yet

Bibliography

    Führer, Markus L. and Gersh, Stephen E. 2014. Dietrich of Freiberg and Berhold of Moosburg.” in Interpreting Proclus. From Antiquity to the Renaissance, edited by Stephen E. Gersh, pp. 299–317. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Gersh, Stephen E. 1973. Kı́nēsis akı́nētos. A Study of Spiritual Motion in the Philosophy of Proclus. Philosophia Antiqua n. 26. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
    Gersh, Stephen E. 1997. Dialectical and Rhetorical Space. The Boethian Theory of Topics and its Influence during the Early Middle Ages.” in Raum und Raumvorstellungen im Mittelalter, edited by Jan A. Aertsen and Andreas Speer, pp. 391–401. Miscellanea Mediaevalia n. 25. Berlin: de Gruyter.
    Gersh, Stephen E. 2005a. Eriugena’s Fourfold Contemplation: Idealism and Arithmetic.” in Eriugena, Berkeley, and the Idealist Tradition, edited by Stephen E. Gersh and Dermot Moran, pp. 151–167. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.
    Gersh, Stephen E. 2005b. Plotinus on Harmonia. Musical Metaphors and Their Uses in the Enneads.” in Agonistes: Essays in Honour of Denis O’Brien, edited by John M. Dillon and Monique Dixsaut, pp. 195–208. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate.
    Gersh, Stephen E. 2010. Ancient Philosophy Becomes Medieval Philosophy.” in The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity, volume II, edited by Lloyd P. Gerson, pp. 894–914. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Gersh, Stephen E. 2012. The First Principles of Latin Neoplatonism: Augustine, Macrobius, Boethius.” Vivarium 50(2): 113–138.
    Gersh, Stephen E., ed. 2014a. Interpreting Proclus. From Antiquity to the Renaissance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Gersh, Stephen E. 2014b. One Thousand Years of Proclus: an Introduction to His Reception.” in Interpreting Proclus. From Antiquity to the Renaissance, edited by Stephen E. Gersh, pp. 1–29. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Gersh, Stephen E. 2014c. Proclus as Theologian.” in Interpreting Proclus. From Antiquity to the Renaissance, edited by Stephen E. Gersh, pp. 80–108. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Gersh, Stephen E. 2014d. Damascius and Boethius.” in Interpreting Proclus. From Antiquity to the Renaissance, edited by Stephen E. Gersh, pp. 125–136. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Gersh, Stephen E. 2014e. George Gemistos Plethon.” in Interpreting Proclus. From Antiquity to the Renaissance, edited by Stephen E. Gersh, pp. 216–228. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Gersh, Stephen E. 2014f. Nicholas of Cusa.” in Interpreting Proclus. From Antiquity to the Renaissance, edited by Stephen E. Gersh, pp. 318–351. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Gersh, Stephen E. 2018. Les notions de puissance et d’harmonie chez Porphyre.” in Contemplation and Philosophy: Scholastic and Mystical Modes of Medieval Philosophical Thought. A Tribute to Kent Emery, Jr., edited by Roberto Hofmeister Pich and Andreas Speer, pp. 21–40. Studien und Texte zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters n. 125. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
    Gersh, Stephen E., ed. 2019. Plotinus’ Legacy: The Transformation of Platonism from the Renaissance to the Modern Era. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, doi:10.1017/9781108233019.
    Gersh, Stephen E. and Moran, Dermot, eds. 2005a. Eriugena, Berkeley, and the Idealist Tradition. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.
    Gersh, Stephen E. and Moran, Dermot. 2005b. Introduction.” in Eriugena, Berkeley, and the Idealist Tradition, edited by Stephen E. Gersh and Dermot Moran, pp. 1–13. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.
    Gersh, Stephen E. and Roest, Bert, eds. 2003. Medieval and Renaissance Humanism. Brill’s Studies in Intellectual History n. 115. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
    Gersh, Stephen E. and Stéphany, Cédric. 2013. L’ordo ‘naturalis’ des causes primordiales. La transformation érigénienne de la doctrine dionysienne des noms divins.” Les Études Philosophiques 67(1): 57–78.