Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Epicharmus should not be classified as a Pythagorean — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Truth & Knowledge
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Epicharmus should not be classified as a Pythagorean

    All sources support itTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Epicharmus' comedic fragments show cosmological and ethical views closely resembling Heraclitean flux doctrine, not Pythagorean number theory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Ancient doxographers like Diogenes Laërtius categorize Epicharmus independently, treating him as a comic poet-philosopher without Pythagorean affiliation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Pythagorean identity in antiquity was marked by distinctive practices—acousmatic rules, dietary prohibitions—of which no trace appears in Epicharmus' extant work.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The pseudo-Epicharmus corpus, which contains explicitly Pythagorean content, was identified by Wilamowitz and subsequent scholars as later forgeries designed to claim Pythagorean priority for Platonic ideas.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Attributing Pythagorean views to Epicharmus depends almost entirely on these pseudepigraphical texts, making the classification an artifact of ancient literary fraud rather than historical fact.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.No fifth- or fourth-century source identifies Epicharmus as a Pythagorean
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Epicharmus does not appear in the catalogue of Iamblichus
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The earliest explicit identification of Epicharmus as a Pythagorean is in Plutarch in the first century CE, far removed from Epicharmus' own era
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Truth & KnowledgeAll sources support it

    Connections

    1 topic

    Skepticism2 linked

    Related

    Ancient doxographers like Diogenes Laërtius categorize Epicharmus independently,...Attributing Pythagorean views to Epicharmus depends almost entirely on these pse...Epicharmus does not appear in the catalogue of IamblichusEpicharmus' comedic fragments show cosmological and ethical views closely resemb...
    +4 moreShow less
    No fifth- or fourth-century source identifies Epicharmus as a PythagoreanPythagorean identity in antiquity was marked by distinctive practices—acousmatic...The earliest explicit identification of Epicharmus as a Pythagorean is in Plutar...The pseudo-Epicharmus corpus, which contains explicitly Pythagorean content, was...

    Similar

    Alcmaeon should be regarded as a Pythagorean91%Alcmaeon was not a Pythagorean85%In a Prisoner's Dilemma, (C,C) is not a Nash Equilibrium.81%Simplicius notes that Aristotle explicitly denies Alcmaeon is a Pythag...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: pythagoreanism
    View source passageHide passage
    Some scholars have treated the Sicilian comic poet Epicharmus as a Pythagorean and argued that the growing argument which appears in a fragment of controversial authenticity ascribed to him in Diogenes Laertius (3.11) is thus Pythagorean in origin (Horky 2013, 131–140). However, no fifth- or fourth-century source identifies Epicharmus as a Pythagorean and he does not appear in the catalogue of Iamblichus. The earliest explicit mention of him as a Pythagorean is in Plutarch (Numa 9) in the first
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit