| |
| | Bryn Mawr Classical Review 2004.07.67 |
 | | Some parts of the Mantissa are certainly weak and many arguments are shallow, but we must admit that Alexander can show different degrees of acuteness in his argumentation and some variations in depth of analysis. |
 | | "Alexander of Aphrodisias: what is a mantissa?", in P. Adamson et al., eds., Philosophy, Science and Exegesis, London. |
 | | Chapter 22: "Responsibility, chance and not-being (Alexander of Aphrodisias Mantissa pp.179-186 Bruns)", Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 27 (1980), 76-94; chapters 22-25: On Fate, London, Duckworth, 1983, p. |
| ccat.sas.upenn.edu /bmcr/2004/2004-07-67.html (1238 words) |
|