DOCSLIB.ORG

A Multiform Desire: a Study of Appetite in Plato's Timaeus, Republic And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Multiform Desire: a Study of Appetite in Plato's Timaeus, Republic And A Multiform Desire A Multiform Desire A Study of Appetite in Plato’s Timaeus, Republic and Phaedrus Olof Pettersson Dissertation presented at Uppsala University to be publicly examined in Universitetshuset, Sal IV, Biskopsgatan 3, Uppsala, Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at 13:15 for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. The examination will be conducted in English. Abstract Pettersson, O. 2013. A Multiform Desire: A Study of Appetite in Plato’s Timaeus, Republic and Phaedrus. Filosofiska institutionen. 242 pp. Uppsala. ISBN 978-91-506-2325-3. This dissertation is a study of appetite in Plato’s Timaeus, Republic and Phaedrus. In recent research is it often suggested that Plato considers appetite (i) to pertain to the essential needs of the body, (ii) to relate to a distinct set of objects, e.g. food or drink, and (iii) to cause be- haviour aiming at sensory pleasure. Exploring how the notion of appetite, directly and indi- rectly, connects with Plato’s other purposes in these dialogues, this dissertation sets out to evaluate these ideas. By asking, and answering, three philosophically and interpretatively crucial questions, individually linked to the arguments of the dialogues, this thesis aims to show (i) that the relationship between appetite and the body is not a matter of survival, and that appetite is better understood in terms of excess; (ii) that appetite is multiform and cannot be defined in terms of a distinct set of objects; and (iii) that appetite, in Plato, can also pertain to non-sensory objects, such as articulated discourse. Chapter one asks what the universe can teach us about embodied life. It argues that Plato, in the Timaeus, works with an important link between the universe and the soul, and that the account of disorder, irrationality and multiformity identifying a pre-cosmic condition of the universe provides a key to understanding the excessive behaviour and condition of a soul dominated by appetite. Chapter two asks why the philosophers of the Republic’s Kallipolis return to the cave, and suggests that Plato’s notion of the noble lie provides a reasonable account of this. By explor- ing the Republic’s ideas of education, poetry and tradition, it argues that appetite – a multi- form and appearance oriented source of motivation – is an essential part of this account. Chapter three asks why Socrates characterizes the speeches of the Phaedrus as deceptive games. It proposes that this question should be understood in the light of two distinctions: one between playful and serious discourse and one between simple and multiform. It argues that the speeches of the Phaedrus are multiform games, and suggests that appetite is the primary source of motivation of the soul addressed, personified by Phaedrus. Keywords: Philosophy, Ancient Philosophy, Plato, Appetite, Desire, Epithymia, Soul, Tripartition, Multiform, Poikilos, Timaeus, Republic, Phaedrus, Embodiment, Incarnation, Necessity, Philosopher-kings, Allegory of the Cave, Noble Lie, Poetry, Multi-headed Beast, Game, Play, Rhetoric, Dialectic, Deception. Olof Pettersson, Uppsala University, Department of Philosophy, Logic and Metaphysics, Box 627, SE-751 26 Uppsala, Sweden. Photo cover picture: Mathilda Vinkka Haarla © Olof Pettersson 2013 ISBN 978-91-506-2325-3 urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-186130 (http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-186130) Printed by Elanders Sverige AB, 2012 Acknowledgements A book has neither object nor subject; it is made of variously formed matters, and very different dates and speeds. To attribute the book to a subject is to overlook this working of matters, and the exteriority of their relations.1 Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari In writing this book I have been helped by many people. I am in great debt to my supervisor Pauliina Remes whose devotion to my cause has been invalu- able. Without the initial support from Lilli Alanen it would not have been written at all. The feedback I have received from the participants in the his- tory of philosophy seminar at Uppsala University – in particular, Peter Myrdal, Tomas Ekenberg, Lorenzo Casini, Frans Svensson, Alexander Stöpfgeshoff, Annika Wennersten, Marcel Quarfood, Erik Åkerlund and Tor Freyr – has been crucial. The moral support from Per Algander, the proof- reading by David McVicker, and all the practical aid from Sandra Olsson and Ryszard Sliwinski have been indispensable as well. I am also in great debt to Tony Long for comments on an early draft of what eventually became chapter three, for welcoming me into his seminar on the Phaedrus, and for taking great care of me during my stay at the Universi- ty of California at Berkeley; where, in various forms, I also received im- portant reactions from John Ferrari, Dorothea Frede, David Crane, Wei Liu, Derin McLeod and Alexandre Roberts. In addition, I am also sure that the letter of recommendation Hans Ruin wrote for me was essential in the pro- cess of getting there. Nicholas Smith’s comments on parts of the manuscript have been im- portant, just as the inspiring discussions I have had with Mats Persson. The positive reactions and the critical remarks from Vasilis Politis, on the whole manuscript, have also been decisive in the final stages of writing. On top of this, I have received much appreciated financial support from Gästrike-Hälsinge Nation, in the form of Göransson-Sandviken’s forskar- utbildningsstipendium, and from Sverige-Amerika Stiftelsen, that made it possible for me to spend a year abroad. Last but not least, besides the support from my friends and my family, nothing would have been possible without the love of my life, Tuva Widén. 1 Deleuze and Guattari (2002, 3). Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................... 9 1. Cosmic and Mortal Necessity ................................................................... 15 1.1. Introduction .............................................................................. 15 1.2. Cosmic Necessity ..................................................................... 18 1.3. Mortal Necessity ...................................................................... 47 1.4. Conclusion ............................................................................... 80 2. The Power of Lies ..................................................................................... 85 2.1. Introduction .............................................................................. 85 2.2. The Return to the Cave ............................................................ 88 2.3. The Function of the Noble Lie ............................................... 107 2.4. The Psychological Background of the Noble Lie .................. 119 2.5. Conclusion ............................................................................. 140 3. A Multiform Game ................................................................................. 147 3.1. Introduction ............................................................................ 147 3.2. A Serious Line of Interpretation ............................................ 152 3.3. Serious and Playful Discourse ............................................... 163 3.4. Multiform and Simple Discourse ........................................... 182 3.5. The Deception of the Multiform Soul .................................... 210 3.6. Conclusion ............................................................................. 217 Conclusion .................................................................................................. 223 Bibliography ............................................................................................... 231 Index ........................................................................................................... 241 Introduction Plato has a good claim to have invented the idea of rationality; and with rationality the idea of the philosopher.2 A philosopher is supposed to have rational motivations and he is supposed to be ruled by reason. But just like philosophers, rational motivations are rare (e.g., Rep., 494a or 496a). The motivating forces of most people come in different forms. In the three dia- logues where Plato develops the famous idea of the soul’s tripartite nature, i.e. in the Timaeus, in the Republic and in the Phaedrus, Plato also singles out two forms of non-rational motivation that are particularly important: motivations spelled out in terms of victory and honour, and motivations per- taining to irrational appetite and desire.3 This book is a study of the latter. As recent research on appetite (ἐπιθυμία) in Plato has shown, appetite may in general be understood along the following lines. (1) Appetite is a source of motivation pertaining to the body. (2) Appetite is essentially linked to the world as it appears, and (3) appetite gives rise to behaviour that aims at sensory pleasure and satisfaction.4 In a comprehensive account of Plato’s theory of appetite, these ideas would be central, not only because they are often highlighted in the litera- ture, but also because they, to some extent, have intuitive appeal. It seems reasonable to think about appetite in terms of food, drink and sex. And inso- far as we understand appearance as a matter of how the world presents itself before (or unless) it is submitted to rational scrutiny, it is sensible to say that our appetites drag us towards what appears to be worthwhile, in the same way as it is reasonable to say that appetite is a source of motivation that ori- ents us towards the sensory
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Theory of Forms 1 Theory of Forms
    Theory of Forms 1 Theory of Forms Plato's theory of Forms or theory of Ideas[1] [2] [3] asserts that non-material abstract (but substantial) forms (or ideas), and not the material world of change known to us through sensation, possess the highest and most fundamental kind of reality.[4] When used in this sense, the word form is often capitalized.[5] Plato speaks of these entities only through the characters (primarily Socrates) of his dialogues who sometimes suggest that these Forms are the only true objects of study that can provide us with genuine knowledge; thus even apart from the very controversial status of the theory, Plato's own views are much in doubt.[6] Plato spoke of Forms in formulating a possible solution to the problem of universals. Forms Terminology: the Forms and the forms The English word "form" may be used to translate two distinct concepts that concerned Plato—the outward "form" or appearance of something, and "Form" in a new, technical nature, that never ...assumes a form like that of any of the things which enter into her; ... But the forms which enter into and go out of her are the likenesses of real existences modelled after their patterns in a wonderful and inexplicable manner.... The objects that are seen, according to Plato, are not real, but literally mimic the real Forms. In the allegory of the cave expressed in Republic, the things that are ordinarily perceived in the world are characterized as shadows of the real things, which are not perceived directly. That which the observer understands when he views the world mimics the archetypes of the many types and properties (that is, of universals) of things observed.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Arrangement of the Platonic Dialogues
    Ryan C. Fowler 25th Hour On the Arrangement of the Platonic Dialogues I. Thrasyllus a. Diogenes Laertius (D.L.), Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers 3.56: “But, just as long ago in tragedy the chorus was the only actor, and afterwards, in order to give the chorus breathing space, Thespis devised a single actor, Aeschylus a second, Sophocles a third, and thus tragedy was completed, so too with philosophy: in early times it discoursed on one subject only, namely physics, then Socrates added the second subject, ethics, and Plato the third, dialectics, and so brought philosophy to perfection. Thrasyllus says that he [Plato] published his dialogues in tetralogies, like those of the tragic poets. Thus they contended with four plays at the Dionysia, the Lenaea, the Panathenaea and the festival of Chytri. Of the four plays the last was a satiric drama; and the four together were called a tetralogy.” b. Characters or types of dialogues (D.L. 3.49): 1. instructive (ὑφηγητικός) A. theoretical (θεωρηµατικόν) a. physical (φυσικόν) b. logical (λογικόν) B. practical (πρακτικόν) a. ethical (ἠθικόν) b. political (πολιτικόν) 2. investigative (ζητητικός) A. training the mind (γυµναστικός) a. obstetrical (µαιευτικός) b. tentative (πειραστικός) B. victory in controversy (ἀγωνιστικός) a. critical (ἐνδεικτικός) b. subversive (ἀνατρεπτικός) c. Thrasyllan categories of the dialogues (D.L. 3.50-1): Physics: Timaeus Logic: Statesman, Cratylus, Parmenides, and Sophist Ethics: Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Phaedrus, Symposium, Menexenus, Clitophon, the Letters, Philebus, Hipparchus, Rivals Politics: Republic, the Laws, Minos, Epinomis, Atlantis Obstetrics: Alcibiades 1 and 2, Theages, Lysis, Laches Tentative: Euthyphro, Meno, Io, Charmides and Theaetetus Critical: Protagoras Subversive: Euthydemus, Gorgias, and Hippias 1 and 2 :1 d.
    [Show full text]
  • The Saylor Foundation 1 Guide to Responding Study Guide for Plato's
    Guide to Responding Study Guide for Plato’s The Allegory of the Cave Main Point Summary/Background: Plato’s The Allegory of the Cave is a meditation on “the essence of truth” and its paradoxical relation to human comportment. Plato uses this allegory to gradually guide readers toward a personal realization of knowledge and philosophy as the key elements for freedom and enlightenment. This fable also contains exquisite reflections on concepts such as knowledge, education, and politics. The Allegory of the Cave is one of the most famous pieces of philosophical literature and a pillar of western philosophy. To this day, it remains the best known and most critically assessed of Plato’s works. Just remember that this text is full of complex symbols and analogies, which scholars still differ as to their full meaning. Related Readings: This reading is related to the other readings in subunit 5.3 “Greek and Hellenistic Culture,” particularly to Dr. Steven Kreis’s “Greek Thought: Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle.” Remember that Plato’s The Allegory of the Cave is considered as one of the most important of Classical Greece’s literary and philosophical works; thus, this reading is of great importance to understand the entirety of Unit 5 “Classical Greece and the Hellenistic World.” Instructions: Below are excerpts from the reading and responses that serve as sample answers for the study questions. Review these answers after you have completed the study questions. Highlighting or taking notes while you read paired with later outlining and paraphrasing is an excellent method to ensure comprehension and retention of difficult material.
    [Show full text]
  • Plato the ALLEGORY of the CAVE Republic, VII 514 A, 2 to 517 A, 7
    Plato THE ALLEGORY OF THE CAVE Republic, VII 514 a, 2 to 517 a, 7 Translation by Thomas Sheehan THE ALLEGORY OF THE CAVE SOCRATES: Next, said I [= Socrates], compare our nature in respect of education and its lack to such an experience as this. PART ONE: SETTING THE SCENE: THE CAVE AND THE FIRE The cave SOCRATES: Imagine this: People live under the earth in a cavelike dwelling. Stretching a long way up toward the daylight is its entrance, toward which the entire cave is gathered. The people have been in this dwelling since childhood, shackled by the legs and neck..Thus they stay in the same place so that there is only one thing for them to look that: whatever they encounter in front of their faces. But because they are shackled, they are unable to turn their heads around. A fire is behind them, and there is a wall between the fire and the prisoners SOCRATES: Some light, of course, is allowed them, namely from a fire that casts its glow toward them from behind them, being above and at some distance. Between the fire and those who are shackled [i.e., behind their backs] there runs a walkway at a certain height. Imagine that a low wall has been built the length of the walkway, like the low curtain that puppeteers put up, over which they show their puppets. The images carried before the fire SOCRATES: So now imagine that all along this low wall people are carrying all sorts of things that reach up higher than the wall: statues and other carvings made of stone or wood and many other artifacts that people have made.
    [Show full text]
  • The Form of the Good in Plato's Timaeus
    THANASSIS GKATZARAS | 71 One of the many philosophical problems The Form of the Good in that we face in the Timaeus is raised by the Plato’s Timaeus claim that the God who created the world (from now on we shall call him ‘Demiurge’)1 is good (Tim. 29d7-30a2). A satisfying explanation of Demiurge’s goodness is far from easy, and dif- ferent approaches have been proposed. How- ever, in this paper I’ll try to show that a clear, sufficient and relatively simple interpretation is possible, if we are based on the hypothesis that Timaeus follows the theory of causation in the Phaedo (including the distinction between ‘safe’ and ‘elegant’ cause) and the concept of the Thanassis Gkatzaras Form of the Good in the Republic.2 University of Ioannina [email protected] To be more specific, I’ll try to show that the Form of the Good of the Republic is also presupposed in the Timaeus and it plays the same role, and we should consider it as a first principle of platonic cosmology, independ- ent from the existence of Demiurge or even the Divine Paradigm (i.e. the model accord- ing to which the Demiurge creates the world). On first impression, this interpretation looks barely possible, since there is no direct refer- ence in the text to this particular Form, with the possible exception of what is said at Tim. 46c7-d1.3 In my opinion, this absence has to do ABSTRACT with specific purposes Timaeus serves, and not with the abandonment of the Good as a cause.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Plato's Theory of Art: Aesthetics and the Timaeus
    Rethinking Plato’s Theory of Art: Aesthetics and the Timaeus Omid Tofighian Introduction The Timaeus presents a fascinating account of the cosmos. It includes a creation myth that introduces the figure known as the ‘Demiurge’, who, despite the fact that he is the cause of the sensible world, is reverently attributed with reason, and whose creation – the cosmos – is actually beautiful and good. In this dialogue Plato offers his readers a panorama of the universe. But just what are his intentions for this? Is his approach a precursor to the methods of natural science,1 or does the Timaeus fall under the category of theology? This paper will discuss Plato’s cosmological treatise and certain consequences that can be drawn, that is, how the methods used to analyse the origins and structure of the universe reveal a more existential attitude towards aesthetics. In the Timaeus Plato explores the complexities of mimesis and entertains the possibility that imitation could actually exhibit ideal qualities. These considerations have repercussions for the status of the material world in Plato’s cosmology, but they may also be extended to rethink his theory of art. I wish to analyse a number of salient themes in the Timaeus such as ontology, mythic symbols and the use of rhetoric. I will demonstrate how Plato’s view towards these themes in the Timaeus can be extrapolated to reassess his aesthetics. My critical analysis will provoke the question – ‘What evaluation of art would Plato have offered in accordance with the positions explicated in the Timaeus?’ Upon investigating a number of dialogues, searching specifically for references to art or representation, I realised that certain views I had thought to be exclusive to the Timaeus, or other late dialogues, also featured in works as early as the Ion.
    [Show full text]
  • THE MATHEMATICAL COSMOLOGY of PLATO's TIMAEUS Introduction
    THE MATHEMATICAL COSMOLOGY OF PLATO’S TIMAEUS [419] Introduction In this paper I argue that Plato’s Timaeus should be understood in light of the purportedly Socratic ‘autobiography’ in Phaedo 96–100, even though the Apology claims that Socrates took little or no interest in cosmological speculation. Extant reports (Met. 987b1–3) about Socrates’ philosophical activity also testify to his lack of interest in mathematics and in physics, while the early ‘Socratic’ dialogues consistently con ne him to pursuing moral questions by means of his famous elenctic method. By contrast, the Meno presents a ‘Socrates’ who uses mathematical diagrams to teach a slave boy something about geometry, so as to illustrate and defend a theory of recollection which can hardly be attributed to the historical Socrates. Finally the Phaedo, which develops a more elaborate version of this theory, the so- called ‘autobiography’ of Socrates, tells about an early interest in cosmological speculation which he gave up in disappointment because it failed to answer his questions. This inconsistency in the representation of Socrates I see as a clear hint that in the Meno and Phaedo Plato is self-consciously going beyond his mentor by introducing the hypothetical method of mathematics, combined with a metaphysical and epistemological theory of recollection. Furthermore, I claim that the so-called ‘autobiographical’ passage in the Phaedo can be treated as Plato’s own path to the cosmological theory which is developed fully in the Timaeus. Since this cosmology is narrated by a Pythagorean from Sicily in the sort of ‘long speech’ which Socrates deplored, it is quite clear that Plato has abandoned any pretence of merely expanding the ideas of his mentor.
    [Show full text]
  • Knowledge and Values
    1 Academic Knowledge Orientation Program and 2020 Values 2 Contents From Another Time (1940) * Jonathan Becker, “What a Liberal Arts Education is…and is Not?” 3 William Carlos Williams, “Landscape with the Fall of Icarus” 82 From Pictures from Brueghel and Other Poems (1962) Immanuel Kant, “What is Enlightenment?” 14 Muriel Rukeyser, “Waiting for Icarus” 82 From Breaking Open (1973) Herodotus Selections (c.460 BCE – 425 BCE) 19 From The History, David Grene, trans. Zbigniew Herbert, “Daedalus and Icarus”. 83 From The Collected Poems 1956-1998, tr. Alissa Valles, 2014 * Plato, The Republic, Book 7 (the Allegory of the Cave) 20 (c. 360 BCE), from Complete Works (G.M Grube, trans.). Carol Ann Duffy, “Mrs. Icarus” 84 From The World's Wife, 1999 * Rene Descartes, “Meditations I and II” 33 From Meditations,tr. Michael Moriarty Anne Sexton, “To a Friend Whose Work Has Come to Triumph”. 85 From Selected Poems, 2000 The White Ministers’ Law and Order Statement 39 (1963) and White Ministers’ Good Friday Statement (1963) Edward Field, “Icarus” 85 * Martin Luther King, Jr., “Letter From a Birmingham Jail” (1963) 41 From Stand Up, Friend, with Me , 1963 From Letters of a Nation: A Collection of Extraordinary Letters Joanie V. Mackowski, “Consciousness”, From Poetry, 2012 86 Franz Kafka, “A Report to An Academy” 52 Willa and Edwin Muir, trans. Alykul Osmonov, “Native Tongue”, “Man” 87 From, Waves of the Lake, 1995. Ryūnosuke Akutagawa, “The Nose”, From Rashōmon 58 and Seventeen Other Stories, tr. Jay Rubin 2006. Rainer Maria Rilke, “The Panther”, “Der Panther” 88 From Selected Poetry of Rainer Maria Rilke, Nikolay Gogol.
    [Show full text]
  • The Theodicy of Plato's Timaeus
    Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Philosophy Theses Department of Philosophy 8-10-2021 Reincarnation and Rehabilitation: the Theodicy of Plato's Timaeus John Garrett Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/philosophy_theses Recommended Citation Garrett, John, "Reincarnation and Rehabilitation: the Theodicy of Plato's Timaeus." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2021. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/philosophy_theses/298 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Philosophy at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. REINCARNATION AND REHABILITATION: THE THEODICY OF PLATO’S TIMAEUS by JOHN GARRETT Under the Direction of Timothy O’Keefe, PhD A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in the College of Arts and Sciences Georgia State University 2021 ABSTRACT Plato wonders why a good God might allow the existence of evil. This problem is especially pertinent to his dialogue Timaeus, in which Plato describes the creation of the cosmos by a benevolent divine craftsman called the Demiurge. A justification for why God allows evil to exist is called a theodicy. Readers of the Timaeus have interpreted the theodicy of this dialogue in many ways. After showing the shortcomings of some common interpretations, I offer a largely original interpretation of the theodicy of the Timaeus. I claim that in the Timaeus evil is caused by conflict between souls, and this conflict is something that the good (but not omnipotent) Demiurge could not avoid.
    [Show full text]
  • And Plato's Allegory of the Cave: Archetypes of Spiritual Liberation
    Volume 17 Number 4 Article 2 Summer 7-15-1991 The Silver Chair and Plato's Allegory of the Cave: Archetypes of Spiritual Liberation Courtney Lynn Simmons Joe Simmons Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.swosu.edu/mythlore Part of the Children's and Young Adult Literature Commons Recommended Citation Simmons, Courtney Lynn and Simmons, Joe (1991) "The Silver Chair and Plato's Allegory of the Cave: Archetypes of Spiritual Liberation," Mythlore: A Journal of J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Charles Williams, and Mythopoeic Literature: Vol. 17 : No. 4 , Article 2. Available at: https://dc.swosu.edu/mythlore/vol17/iss4/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Mythopoeic Society at SWOSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Mythlore: A Journal of J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Charles Williams, and Mythopoeic Literature by an authorized editor of SWOSU Digital Commons. An ADA compliant document is available upon request. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To join the Mythopoeic Society go to: http://www.mythsoc.org/join.htm Mythcon 51: A VIRTUAL “HALFLING” MYTHCON July 31 - August 1, 2021 (Saturday and Sunday) http://www.mythsoc.org/mythcon/mythcon-51.htm Mythcon 52: The Mythic, the Fantastic, and the Alien Albuquerque, New Mexico; July 29 - August 1, 2022 http://www.mythsoc.org/mythcon/mythcon-52.htm Abstract Compares The Silver Chair and the allegory of the cave in Plato’s Republic, identifying eight commonalities. Asserts they have a common motif, “the spiritual quest for existential meaning where the divine and the terrestrial combine.” Additional Keywords Lewis, C.S.
    [Show full text]
  • NARRATIVES of NOTHING in TWENTIETH-CENTURY LITERATURE by MEGHAN CHRISTINE VICKS B.A., Middlebury College, 2003 M.A., University of Colorado, 2007
    NARRATIVES OF NOTHING IN TWENTIETH-CENTURY LITERATURE by MEGHAN CHRISTINE VICKS B.A., Middlebury College, 2003 M.A., University of Colorado, 2007 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Comparative Literature 2011 This thesis entitled: Narratives of Nothing in Twentieth-Century Literature written by Meghan Christine Vicks has been approved for the Department of Comparative Literature _________________________________________________ Mark Leiderman _________________________________________________ Jeremy Green _________________________________________________ Rimgaila Salys _________________________________________________ Davide Stimilli _________________________________________________ Eric White November 11, 2011 The final copy of this thesis has been examined by the signatories, and we find that both the content and the form meet acceptable presentation standards of scholarly work in the above mentioned disciple. iii Vicks, Meghan Christine (Ph.D., Comparative Literature) Narratives of Nothing in Twentieth-Century Literature Thesis directed by Associate Professor Mark Leiderman (Lipovetsky) This study begins with the observation that much of twentieth-century art, literature, and philosophy exhibits a concern with nothing itself. Both Martin Heidegger and Jean Paul Sartre, for example, perceive that nothing is part-and-parcel of (man’s) being. The present study adopts a similar position concerning nothing and its essential relationship to being, but adds a third element: that of writing narrative. This relationship between nothing and narrative is, I argue, established in the writings of Friedrich Nietzsche, Mikhail Bakhtin, Jacques Derrida, and Julia Kristeva. As Heidegger and Sartre position nothing as essential to the creation of being, so Nietzsche, Bakhtin, Derrida, and Kristeva figure nothing as essential to the production of narrative.
    [Show full text]
  • The Allegory of the Cave
    Source: http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/cave.htm The Allegory of the Cave 1. Plato realizes that the general run of humankind can think, and speak, etc., without (so far as they acknowledge) any awareness of his realm of Forms. 2. The allegory of the cave is supposed to explain this. 3. In the allegory, Plato likens people untutored in the Theory of Forms to prisoners chained in a cave, unable to turn their heads. All they can see is the wall of the cave. Behind them burns a fire. Between the fire and the prisoners there is a parapet, along which puppeteers can walk. The puppeteers, who are behind the prisoners, hold up puppets that cast shadows on the wall of the cave. The prisoners are unable to see these puppets, the real objects, that pass behind them. What the prisoners see and hear are shadows and echoes cast by objects that they do not see. Here is an illustration of Plato's Cave: 4. Such prisoners would mistake appearance for reality. They would think the things they see on the wall (the shadows) were real; they would know nothing of the real causes of the shadows. 5. So when the prisoners talk, what are they talking about? If an object (a book, let us say) is carried past behind them, and it casts a shadow on the wall, and a prisoner says "I see a book," what is he talking about? He thinks he is talking about a book, but he is really talking about a shadow.
    [Show full text]