As is clear from the title, this thesis presents a comparison of Schenkerian and Ciceronian principles. The thesis will focus mainly on the characteristics of the creative process essential for producing a sublime and intellectual work. Admittedly comparing a Roman lawyer/philosopher (Cicero) to a 20th century musician/theorist (Schenker) will bring forth many obstacles and will suffer from numerous imperfections. Stressing the commonalties between two men of time frames too far apart is an arduous task. I found it most helpful to go about this problem through three stages: first, by presenting an overview of the lives, historical circumstances, and careers of the two mentioned figures; second, by presenting a basic comparison of the two branches of thought; and third, by dealing with some of the more complicated philosophical issues for a better understanding of the two doctrines. Since many of the Schenkerian and Ciceronian principles are heavily rooted in Platonism, an overview of Plato's theory of 'forms and ideas' is presented to guide the reader toward a better grasp of the concepts. The reader may, however, be uncertain regarding the objective of this thesis: is this a comparison of the two philosophies or an evaluation of them? Of course, in order to achieve a satisfactory comparison, one must first understand the two philosophies; this demands an explicit analysis which, in my view, is a form of evaluation. I have also shown and questioned some of the ambiguities of the two philosophies without offering any solutions. This will perhaps help the reader to understand the path I had to take in completing this thesis. I have included these philosophical remarks in the endnotes. Furthermore, Schenkerian philosophy reveals many other important influences other than Platonism; although not the focus of this thesis, numerous references to great thinkers such as Nietzsche, Spinoza, Hanslick, and Freud illustrate this point. Much of the presented bibliographical material on the life of Cicero can be found in the On the Commonwealth and On the Laws. Furthermore, Michael B. Fuster's Masters of Political Thought has been used as a source of reference for a great portion of the philosophical interpretations. Much of what I have presented on Schenker and Schenkerian literature has been gathered through my studies and conversations with Dr. Benjamin, my advisor: the most reliable source with whom I am acquainted. This is perhaps the reason for not including any other philosophical writings on Schenkerian literature in the bibliography.

Doctorat en philosophie et lettres / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

As is clear from the title, this thesis presents a comparison of Schenkerian and Ciceronian principles. The thesis will focus mainly on the characteristics of the creative process essential for producing a sublime and intellectual work. Admittedly comparing a Roman lawyer/philosopher (Cicero) to a 20th century musician/theorist (Schenker) will bring forth many obstacles and will suffer from numerous imperfections. Stressing the commonalties between two men of time frames too far apart is an arduous task. I found it most helpful to go about this problem through three stages: first, by presenting an overview of the lives, historical circumstances, and careers of the two mentioned figures; second, by presenting a basic comparison of the two branches of thought; and third, by dealing with some of the more complicated philosophical issues for a better understanding of the two doctrines. Since many of the Schenkerian and Ciceronian principles are heavily rooted in Platonism, an overview of Plato's theory of 'forms and ideas' is presented to guide the reader toward a better grasp of the concepts. The reader may, however, be uncertain regarding the objective of this thesis: is this a comparison of the two philosophies or an evaluation of them? Of course, in order to achieve a satisfactory comparison, one must first understand the two philosophies; this demands an explicit analysis which, in my view, is a form of evaluation. I have also shown and questioned some of the ambiguities of the two philosophies without offering any solutions. This will perhaps help the reader to understand the path I had to take in completing this thesis. I have included these philosophical remarks in the endnotes. Furthermore, Schenkerian philosophy reveals many other important influences other than Platonism; although not the focus of this thesis, numerous references to great thinkers such as Nietzsche, Spinoza, Hanslick, and Freud illustrate this point. Much of the presented bibliographical material on the life of Cicero can be found in the On the Commonwealth and On the Laws. Furthermore, Michael B. Fuster's Masters of Political Thought has been used as a source of reference for a great portion of the philosophical interpretations. Much of what I have presented on Schenker and Schenkerian literature has been gathered through my studies and conversations with Dr. Benjamin, my advisor: the most reliable source with whom I am acquainted. This is perhaps the reason for not including any other philosophical writings on Schenkerian literature in the bibliography. / Arts, Faculty of / Music, School of / Graduate

This thesis is an investigation into the simplest material entities recognised by Aristotle's theory of nature. In general, the position I defend is that the four 'so-called elements' fire, air, water, and earth are, for Aristotle, genuine elements, i.e., the simplest material constituents, of bodies. In particular, I deal with two problems, the first concerning the relationship between the four 'so-called elements' and the primary contraries, hot-cold, dry-wet; and the second concerning the nature of the matter from which the latter come to be. Responses to these problems in the secondary literature tend to conclude that the contraries (usually together with 'prime matter'), are constitutive of the so-called elements. I reject this conclusion. In the first part of this thesis I consider, and dismiss, the alleged evidence that Aristotle denies to fire, air, water, and earth the status of genuine elements, and I argue that the status of the contraries as the differentiae of the elements effectively rules out the possibility that they could be the constituents of the latter. In the second part of this thesis I attempt to unpack Aristotle's assertion at De Gen. et Cor. II. 1 that the matter of the perceptible bodies is that from which the so-called elements come to be. I argue that the matter of the perceptible bodies, although it is that from which the elements come to be, is not the 'matter of the elements', in the sense of a matter that composes the elements. On the contrary, the 'matter of the perceptible bodies', i.e., the constitutive matter of composite bodies, is itself composed of the elements: it is a mixture of the four elements. Thus the latter can be said to come to be 'from' the 'matter of the perceptible bodies', but this must be understood in a non-constitutive sense of 'from'.