{"id":12,"date":"2011-07-29T18:56:54","date_gmt":"2011-07-29T18:56:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/people.unica.it\/neoplatonic\/?page_id=12"},"modified":"2012-03-04T12:03:44","modified_gmt":"2012-03-04T12:03:44","slug":"panels","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/people.unica.it\/neoplatonic\/panels\/","title":{"rendered":"Panels"},"content":{"rendered":"

List of Panels for the Cagliari Conference June, 20-24, 2012<\/strong><\/p>\n

1.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Vishwa Adluri (vadluri@hunter.cuny.edu<\/a>), Philosophy and Salvation in Greek Religion<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

This panel explores the tradition of soteriology in Greek philosophy. It especially welcomes papers on how Neoplatonic beliefs about the soul, its purification and ascent through philosophy are already prefigured not only in Plato and Aristotle, but in the archaic poets as well (including Homer, Hesiod, the Homeric Hymns,<\/em> etc.). In what way do Neoplatonic thinkers represent a continuation of Pythagorean and Parmenidean philosophy? How do they conceive of the relationship between the soul and the body? How does philosophy relate to the task of purifying the soul? How does the soul ascend through philosophy, both in the form of knowledge and practical techniques? Possible areas of focus include the relationship of mortals and gods in Homer, Hesiod, and the tragic poets, Platonic and Aristotelian theology, and the notion of the soul\u2019s ascent in Plotinus, Porphyry, and Iamblichus.<\/p>\n

This panel is interested in looking more closely at the way salvific ideals inform Greek religion and philosophy.<\/p>\n

Panel papers will be circulated beforehand. Each panelist will present a brief overview of their work (about 15 mins. each) allowing for a general discussion with audience questions.<\/p>\n

2.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/strong>Robert Berchman (BerchmaR@dowling.edu<\/a>), Philosophy of Mind: Thinking on Thinking<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Papers are invited on Intellect. Issues addressed include:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. The simplicity of Intellect (Nous<\/em>);<\/li>\n
  2. The relation of Intellect to Consciousness and Self-Consciousness;<\/li>\n
  3. The relation of Intellect to the causal structure of reality.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

     <\/p>\n

    3.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Luc Brisson (lbrisson@agalma.net<\/a>) and Francesco Fronterotta (francesco.fronterotta@fastwebnet.it<\/a>), La conception du principe premier chez Plotin et dans le N\u00e9oplatonisme<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

    La conception plotinienne et n\u00e9oplatonicienne du principe premier n\u2019a pas re\u00e7u, ces derni\u00e8res ann\u00e9es, une attention comparable \u00e0 celle consacr\u00e9e par exemple \u00e0 la th\u00e9orie de la connaissance et de la sensation, \u00e0 la doctrine de l\u2019\u00e2me, \u00e0 la question de l\u2019origine du mal, et, plus g\u00e9n\u00e9ralement, \u00e0 l\u2019arch\u00e9ologie du syst\u00e8me ontologique et cosmologique n\u00e9oplatonicien, et \u00e0 son articulation chez les diff\u00e9rents philosophes et doctrines de cette tradition intellectuelle. L\u2019absence d\u2019un discours rationnel direct sur la premi\u00e8re hypostase est probablement l\u2019une des raisons de cette carence: comme on le sait, Plotin explique \u00e0 plusieurs reprises que l\u2019Un n\u2019est objet ni de pens\u00e9e ni de discours, car il se situe au-del\u00e0 de la pens\u00e9e et du discours, de telle sorte que \u00abl\u2019Un est r\u00e9ellement ineffable, car quoi que l\u2019on dise, on dira toujours quelque chose. Mais dire de lui qu\u2019il est au-del\u00e0 de toutes choses et au-del\u00e0 de l\u2019Intellect qui est le plus v\u00e9n\u00e9rable, c\u2019est de tous les propos le seul qui soit vrai, parce que ce n\u2019est pas l\u00e0 son nom mais une mani\u00e8re de dire qu\u2019il n\u2019est pas une chose parmi toutes, et qu\u2019il n\u2019a pas de nom d\u00e8s lors que rien ne peut \u00eatre dit qui lui convienne; nous nous effor\u00e7ons ainsi de nous signifier les uns aux autres quelque chose de lui, dans la mesure du possible\u00bb (49 [V 3], 13, 1-5).<\/p>\n

    Ce panel se propose de r\u00e9pondre \u00e0 un certain nombre de questions concernant le poion <\/em>(en relation avec l\u2019hoion<\/em>) du principe premier: ce principe est-il \u201cbon\u201d, \u201cun\u201d, \u201ccause\u201d, \u201cprincipe\u201d, et en quel sens ? Exerce-t-il une libre volont\u00e9, poss\u00e8de-t-il la pens\u00e9e, est-il un objet de d\u00e9sir, et dans quelles limites ? Chacune de ces notions pourra \u00eatre examin\u00e9e dans le cadre des trait\u00e9s plotiniens, et \u00e9ventuellement de leurs sources, ou dans le cours de la tradition n\u00e9oplatonicienne post\u00e9rieure.<\/p>\n

    Dans son Commentaire sur le Parm\u00e9nide<\/em>, Proclus retrace l\u2019histoire de l\u2019interpr\u00e9tation de la premi\u00e8re hypoth\u00e8se de la seconde partie du Parm\u00e9nide<\/em> de Platon qui m\u00e8ne \u00e0 ces conclusions sur l\u2019Un qui, chez Jamblique et Damascius notamment, sera supplant\u00e9 par l\u2019Ineffable.<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    4.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Dylan Burns (dylanburns93@yahoo.com<\/a>) and Luciana Soares Santoprete (luciana.soares@tiscali.it<\/a>), Neoplatonism and Gnosticism<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

    Any paper that deals with the relationship between Neoplatonic and Gnostic thought will be considered. Sample topics could include the influence of Neoplatonic ideas and terminology on Gnostic literature (or Gnostic influence on Neoplatonism), clash and controversy between Platonic and Gnostic thinkers, comparison of Neoplatonic theurgy and Gnostic divinization, comparison of Gnostic and Neoplatonic approaches to myth, etc. Papers on \u2018Gnosis\u2019 in its wider sense, covering a range of esoteric Platonism (e.g. Hermetica<\/em>, Chaldaean Oracles<\/em>, etc.), are also welcome.<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    5.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>David Butorac (davidbutorac@gmail.com<\/a>), Neoplatonism and Aristotle\u2019s <\/em>Organon<\/strong><\/p>\n

    The Neoplatonists have always had a problematic relationship with Aristotle, which relationship has in general received significant attention. However, although there has been an increasing amount of interest in their usage of Aristotle\u2019s Analytics<\/em>, our understanding of the influence of Aristotle\u2019s logic is still in its infancy. Papers on the influence of the Analytics<\/em> or Categories<\/em> on the Neoplatonic dialectic or on Neoplatonic interpretation of the Parmenides<\/em> are especially welcome.<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    6.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Elisabetta Cattanei (ecattanei@unica.it<\/a>) and Alessia Ferrari (alessiaf.ri@hotmail.it<\/a>) Platonic and Neo-platonic Conceptions of Number and Geometry<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

    \u2018Platonism in mathematics\u2019 has become a large and diverse historiographical category which often overlooks the special peculiarities of arguments developed by different Platonic and Neo-platonic texts. This panel will focus on the various ways of conceiving numbers, mathematical entities and sciences that are to be found in Plato\u2019s dialogues and works belonging to ancient, medieval and modern Neo-platonism. Possible fields of investigation are:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. The nature of numbers and mathematika<\/em> in relation to physical world, soul, metaphysical entities and principle(s);<\/li>\n
    2. The epistemological status<\/em> of arithmetics and geometry and their role in the process of acquiring and constructing knowledge;<\/li>\n
    3. Numerical and geometrical aspects of the relationship between the metaphysical and the physical, the infinite and the finite (with particular regard to problems concerning the one and the many, the indivisible and the divisible, the discrete and the continuous).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Papers on individual authors\/works\/parts of works or groups of authors\/works\/parts of works (both Platonic and Neo-platonic; ancient, medieval, modern) linked up with the mentioned topics are welcome, as well as contributions on historiographical questions arisen by them.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      7.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Jean-Michel Charrue (jmcharrue@free.fr<\/a>), Neoplatonism, Freedom, Providence and Fate<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

      This panel continues the previous ones that I have chaired on this subject, and will probably close the series which began in 2007. The original intention was to explore the theme of providence and its connection with freedom in order to uncover a framework for the concepts in post-Plotinian Neoplatonism.<\/p>\n

      Contributions on all aspects of Neoplatonism are welcome, including the most important Platonic texts, the Timaeus<\/em> and Laws,<\/em> <\/em>as well as the writings of Aristotle, the Stoics, and the late commentators, such as Simplicius; so too Hermetism, Gnosticism, the Platonism of the Church Fathers, and later or contemporary Neoplatonism, the theme of providence in connection with freedom. Thus, possible topics include Platonic theology of divine providence, treatment of human freedom in any form of Platonism, studies on fatalism and determinism, and the role of daimons in philosophy or religion.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      8.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Pierpaolo Ciccarelli (pierpaolo.ciccarelli@unica.it<\/a>), Platonic Influence on the Hermeneutical Critique of Modernity<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

      The hermeneutical criticism of traditional philosophical categories \u2013 such as \u2018truthfulness\u2019, \u2018subjectivity\u2019, \u2018representation\u2019, \u2018theory\/practice\u2019, \u2018justice\u2019 and \u2018natural law\u2019 \u2013 inaugurated by Martin Heidegger in his Being and Time<\/em> (1927) referred, in different ways, to Plato\u2019s thought. It also played a fundamental role in promoting a new reading of Platonic dialogues, which aimed at distinguishing between the original text and later interpretations of it and, in this way, avoided anachronistic overlapping of concepts and perspectives.<\/p>\n

      Proposals are invited on: Heidegger\u2019s interpretation of Plato\u2019s notions of truthfulness and falseness; Plato\u2019s \u2018dialectical ethics\u2019 according to Hans Georg Gadamer\u2019s phenomenological lecture of the Philebus<\/em>; Leo Strauss\u2019s reconstruction of the Platonic ideas of justice and law; the conflict between philosophy and politics in Plato\u2019s political thought according to Hannah Arendt; the concept of simulacrum<\/em> in Gilles Deleuze\u2019s criticism of Plato\u2019s dialectic; the Platonic origin of \u2018logocentrism\u2019 in Jacques Derrida\u2019s \u2018deconstruction\u2019; the notion of epimeleia heautou<\/em> (care of the self) in Michel Foucault\u2019s interpretation of Plato\u2019s Alcibiades I<\/em> and Apology of Socrates<\/em>.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      9.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Sandra and Bernard Collette-Du\u010di\u0107 (Bernard.collette@fp.ulaval.ca<\/a> and Sandra_aria@yahoo.it<\/a> ), The Artists and Plato: A Study of Plato\u2019s Reception in the Works of Poets and other Creators in Renaissance and Romanticism<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

      Plato\u2019s criticisms against poetry did not prevent artists from making him a genuine source of inspiration for their own creations. And this is especially true during the Renaissance and the Romantic era, periods of unequalled artistic creativity. Seemingly unbothered by Plato\u2019s attacks against poets in the Ion<\/em> and the Republic<\/em>, the artists of that time appear to have seen in Plato primarily a lover of Beauty and even, sometimes, a poet himself.<\/p>\n

      In this panel, we welcome all papers concerned with the reception of Plato by artists in Renaissance and Romanticism. We are particularly interested in papers that focus on the way Plato and his philosophy are portrayed by artists and on how artists made use of Plato\u2019s philosophy both in general and, more specifically, to promote the arts.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      10.\u00a0 <\/strong>Anna Corrias (annacorrias_80@hotmail.com<\/a>) and Guido Giglioni (guido.giglioni@sas.ac.uk<\/a>), Renaissance Neoplatonism<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

      This panel will explore the influence of Platonism and Neoplatonism in fifteenth- and sixteenth-century Europe and the role played by Renaissance Platonism in the history of Platonic thought. Possible areas of focus may include: the relationship between Platonism and Christianity \u2013 as evidenced in the writings of many Renaissance thinkers such as Nicholas of Cusa, Pico della Mirandola, Marsilio Ficino and Leo Haebreus; the role of Ficino\u2019s translations of and commentaries on Plato, Plotinus and other Platonic philosophers; the influence of Renaissance interpretations of Neoplatonism on later thought as well as contributions of key early-modern Platonists.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      11.\u00a0 <\/strong>Kevin Corrigan (kcorrig@emory.edu<\/a>) and Jean-Marc Narbonne (Jean-Marc.Narbonne@fp.ulaval.ca<\/a>), Plotinus and the Gnostics<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

      This panel welcomes all contributions concerning the connection of the philosophy of Plotinus and Gnostic sources. We especially encourage any contributions that highlight the philosophical and textual aspects of this connection, with reference to particular passages and intellectual developments, but will also readily accept any broader perspective concerning its cultural or social dimensions.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      12.\u00a0 <\/strong>Francesca Maria Crasta (crasta@unica.it<\/a>) and Laura Follesa (l.follesa@<\/a>unica.it) Platonism and Neoplatonism in Early Modern Metaphysical Systems<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

      This panel will focus on the influence of both Platonism and Neoplatonism upon metaphysical systems developed between the seventeenth century and the first half of the nineteenth century. Possible areas of investigation are:<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. The formation of the material world from spiritual or metaphysical entities;<\/li>\n
      2. The order and organization of the world (both inanimate and animate) according to an intelligent plan or project;<\/li>\n
      3. The relationship between the infinite and the finite, the metaphysical and the physical, the supernatural and the natural.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        We seek contributions that concern individual authors and specific topics related to the presence of the Platonic and Neoplatonic traditions at the late stages of early modern thought. Papers focusing on historiographical problems encountered in the discussions of the above-mentioned themes are especially welcome.<\/p>\n

         <\/p>\n

        13.\u00a0 <\/strong>Claudia D’Amico (claudiadamico@yahoo.com.ar<\/a>), La recepci\u00f3n del Neoplatonismo en la Edad Media<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

        La recepci\u00f3n de la filosof\u00eda neoplat\u00f3nica en la Edad Media se dio por v\u00edas indirectas, como la de la fundante versi\u00f3n cristiana de Dionisio Areopagita, cuanto por v\u00edas directas a trav\u00e9s de la traducci\u00f3n al lat\u00edn o al \u00e1rabe de muchos de los textos fundamentales de esta tradici\u00f3n. As\u00ed, gran parte de los desarrollos conceptuales del pensamiento cristiano y del pensamiento isl\u00e1mico medieval son tributarios de la filosof\u00eda neoplat\u00f3nica de manera expl\u00edcita o impl\u00edcita.<\/p>\n

         <\/p>\n

        14.\u00a0 <\/strong>John F. Finamore (john-finamore@uiowa.edu<\/a>), Conceptions of the Soul in Plato, Aristotle, and the Platonic Tradition<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

        In several dialogues, including the Phaedo<\/em>, Republic<\/em>, Phaedrus<\/em>, and Timaeus<\/em>, Plato investigated the nature and function of the soul. Aristotle criticized Plato and in his turn created his own theory of soul. Later Platonists used Plato and Aristotle\u2019s as models for their own interpretations of the soul.<\/p>\n

        This panel will focus on this evolution of thought on the nature and function of the soul. Contributors may wish to consider such questions as how the doctrine of soul changed over time, how individual authors modified earlier views and their reasons for doing so, the problems raised by the soul\u2019s immortality and transmigration, etc.<\/p>\n

         <\/p>\n

        15.\u00a0 <\/strong>Sarah Klitenic Wear (swear@franciscan.edu<\/a>), Christina-Panagiota Manolea (christinamanolea@hotmail.gr<\/a>), and Carl O\u2019Brien (obriencs@tcd.ie<\/a>), The <\/em>Phaedrus and Neoplatonic Psychology<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

        Following on from a successful panel at last year\u2019s ISNS focusing on Neoplatonic speculations on the Phaedrus<\/em>, this panel will further explore the importance of the dialogue in the development of Neoplatonic speculations on the soul. The panel will be concerned with issues raised in Neoplatonic commentaries, including the much-ignored commentary of Syrianus\u2019 student, Hermias, to the psychology of the Phaedrus<\/em>.<\/p>\n

        Possible areas of interest include (but are not limited to): the relationship of the soul to cosmic principles, the relationship of the individual human soul to the World Soul, the influence of interpretations of the Phaedrus<\/em> upon Neoplatonic psychology and elements of Syrianus psychology which can be gleaned from Hermias\u2019 commentary. The Phaedrus<\/em> is of major importance for the development of theories concerning the \u2018fall\u2019 of the soul, or more neutrally, the descent of the soul into the body, which raises interesting questions for Neoplatonic views on religious practice and their metaphysical speculations on the relationship of the soul to the material world.<\/p>\n

        Papers considering the influence of Neoplatonic psychology upon other traditions (such as Judaic, Christian or Islamic philosophy) are also welcome.<\/p>\n

         <\/p>\n

        16.\u00a0 <\/strong>Dmitri Nikulin (nikulind@newschool.edu<\/a>), Memory in Neoplatonism and its Predecessors<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

        In recent decades, memory has become a major concept and dominant topic within the debates of many different areas of philosophy, including history of philosophy. The panel welcomes submissions on the topic of memory in Neoplatonism and other ancient thinkers who influenced the Neoplatonic understanding of memory, such as Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics.<\/p>\n

         <\/p>\n

        17.\u00a0 <\/strong>Andrea Orsucci (orsucci@unica.it<\/a>), Platonism and Neoplatonism in Ninenteenth and Twentieth Century Philosophy<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

        This panel will explore the presence of both Platonism and Neoplatonism in Nineteenth and Twentieth century philosophy, a topic which will be analysed mainly according to:<\/p>\n

          \n
        1. The philosophical interpretation of myths;<\/li>\n
        2. The problem of theogony from Hegel to Cassirer;<\/li>\n
        3. Victor Cousin\u2019s translation and interpretation of Platonic works and the way in which his philosophy related to both French and German contemporary thought;<\/li>\n
        4. Nineteenth century argumenta<\/em> to and <\/em>commentaries on Platonic dialogues as an independent literary genre;<\/li>\n
        5. The circulation of texts and the use of Platonic and Neoplatonic sources in Modern Europe.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          We welcome contributions dealing with the problems indicated above.<\/p>\n

           <\/p>\n

          18.\u00a0 <\/strong>Suzanne Stern-Gillet (suzanne.stern-gillet@manchester.ac.uk<\/a>) and Gary Gurtler SJ (gurtlerg@bc.edu<\/a>), The Moral Life, the Philosophical Life, and the Ideal Life of God-Likeness<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

          In the Theaetetus<\/em>, Plato wrote: \u2018Theodorus, it isn\u2019t possible that evils should be destroyed; because there must always be something opposite to the good [\u2026] they haunt our mortal nature, and this region here. That is why one ought to try to escape from here to there as quickly as one can. Now the way to try to escape is to become as nearly as possible like a god; and to become like a god is to become just and religious, with intelligence\u2019 (176 a5-b1, tr. McDowell).<\/p>\n

          The panel will focus on the interpretation(s) that Plotinus and his successors put on this seminal passage. Contributions to the following questions will be especially welcome:<\/p>\n

            \n
          1. How does a Neoplatonist become virtuous?<\/li>\n
          2. How are purification and conversion related?<\/li>\n
          3. How close to the life of the gods is the philosophical life, as Neoplatonically conceived?<\/li>\n
          4. How did Plotinus, Porphyry, Iamblichus and\/or Proclus conceive of the scale of the virtues?<\/li>\n
          5. In what circumstances, if any, should the soul that has ascended to Intellect deliberately return to the life in the world of sense?<\/li>\n
          6. What role can theurgical practices play in the development of the moral and the philosophical life, as Neoplatonically conceived?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

             <\/p>\n

            19.\u00a0 <\/strong>Mostafa Younesie (Younesie@modares.ac.ir<\/a>), N<\/em><\/strong>eoplatonic Readings of Plato\u2019s <\/em>Laws<\/strong><\/p>\n

            The focus of this panel will be on Neoplatonic interpretations of the development of Plato\u2019s political thought from the Republic<\/em> to the Laws<\/em>. Although Neoplatonic philosophers proposed different interpretations of the relation between the two dialogues, they were mostly united in viewing the Laws<\/em>, not indeed as the outcome of Plato\u2019s progressive disenchantment with the ideal of Kallipolis, but as his realization that the ideal should be supplemented by a more workable, historically-based, \u2018second-best\u2019 model of political organization.<\/p>\n

            Contributions focusing on Neoplatonic readings of Plato\u2019s Laws<\/em>, from Plotinus to al-Farabi, will be especially welcome.<\/p>\n

             <\/p>\n

            20.\u00a0 <\/strong>Jos\u00e9 Zamora (jm.zamora@uam.es<\/a>) and Doris Meyer (doris.meyer@misha.fr<\/a>), Allegory and Syncretism in Porphyry\u2019s <\/em>De antro nympharum<\/strong><\/p>\n

            Porphyry\u2019s De antro nympharum<\/em> is an original allegorical exegesis, which presents a reading of the Odyssey<\/em> 13.102-112, in particular the passage in which Homer describes the cave at the beach of Ithaca where Odysseus hid his treasures from the Phaeacians. These 11 verses serve as a pretext to frame the Neoplatonic conception of the coming of souls into the world. These topics will be addressed in this panel:<\/p>\n

              \n
            1. The sources and the originality of De antro nympharum<\/em> as well as its relationship to Neo-Pythagoreanism and Middle-Platonism;<\/li>\n
            2. The literary genre, the functions of the commentary and of exegetical literature: a hier\u00f2s l\u00f3gos<\/em> without ritual?;<\/li>\n
            3. Allegory and interpretation of Homer;<\/li>\n
            4. The elements of syncretism;<\/li>\n
            5. The representation of the different religions: Mithraism, mystery cults, Greco-Roman religion, Eastern religions;<\/li>\n
            6. Neoplatonic theology in De antro nympharum<\/em> and the conflict with Christianity (and the Gnosis?);<\/li>\n
            7. Comparison with other texts of Porphyry.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

              List of Panels for the Cagliari Conference June, 20-24, 2012 1.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Vishwa Adluri (vadluri@hunter.cuny.edu), Philosophy and Salvation in Greek Religion This panel explores the tradition of soteriology in Greek philosophy. It especially welcomes papers on how Neoplatonic beliefs about the … Continua a leggere→<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":490,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-12","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/people.unica.it\/neoplatonic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/12","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/people.unica.it\/neoplatonic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/people.unica.it\/neoplatonic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/people.unica.it\/neoplatonic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/490"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/people.unica.it\/neoplatonic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12"}],"version-history":[{"count":61,"href":"https:\/\/people.unica.it\/neoplatonic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/12\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":57,"href":"https:\/\/people.unica.it\/neoplatonic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/12\/revisions\/57"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/people.unica.it\/neoplatonic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}