DOCSLIB.ORG

This Course on Plato Provides an In-Depth Account of This Seminal Thinker’S Philosophy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

PLATO PHILO 380(W) Dr. V. Adluri Sec. 001 [4921] Office: Hunter West, 12th floor, Room 1242 Spring 2009 Telephone: 973 216 7874 Prof. Adluri Email: [email protected] Monday/Wednesday, 4:10-5:25pm Office hours: Wednesdays, 6:00 – 7:00 P.M and by appointment DESCRIPTION: This course on Plato provides an in-depth account of this seminal thinker’s philosophy. Major themes such as the nature of knowledge, soul, universe, city, God, language, love, and art will be discussed based on selections from all of his dialogues. Plato’s relationship to Pre- Socratic philosophy, especially Parmenides and Heraclitus will be discussed. We will pay special attention to Plato’s use of the dialogic form and its main protagonist: Socrates. In the second half of the course, we will read the Republic in detail, with special attention to the legacy of Plato’s thought in the history of Western Philosophy. Required Text: Plato. Complete Works. Edited by John Cooper. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1997. $54. All textbooks are on order at Shakespeare & Co. Booksellers (939 Lexington Avenue between 68th and 69th streets; 212 570 0201). Shakespeare & Co. also has a limited number of used copies available at lower prices. COURSE OBJECTIVES: This course is intended to give students a basic familiarity with the Platonic corpus and an in-depth knowledge of the Republic. In the first half of the course, students will gain a basic familiarity with Platonic philosophy, including its method of argumentation, its ultimate aims, and its wider political and literary context. We will then apply these insights to a close- reading of the Republic. We will also consider modern critiques of ‘Platonism’ and Plato’s legacy in the Neo-Platonic and Augustinian traditions. In addition, the course will teach basic analytic and critical skills, especially how to read texts carefully paying attention to literary form, structure, context, and nuance. Students will learn how to interpret texts rigorously, to research secondary sources, and to reconstruct an argument in their own language. Opportunities for class participation will allow students to develop the ability to formulate and discuss ideas, objections, and their own solutions to problems. Regular writing assignments will give students the opportunity to train their expository writing skills, i.e., organization, clarity, precision, and fluidity of expression. This is a writing-intensive course. GRADES AND REQUIREMENTS: 1. All students are responsible for a mid-term paper and a final paper (both 15 pages min.). 2. The mid-term paper focuses on one Platonic dialogue of the student’s choosing. The aim of this paper is to summarize the dialogue to show its unity, structure, and argument. 3. The final paper examines one theme from the Platonic corpus. Students must compare their chosen dialogue from the mid-term paper with another Platonic dialogue. This 1 of 4 comparison is to demonstrate an understanding of one of the following themes: Plato’s epistemology, psychology, ethics, logic, political theory, or cosmology. 4. The final paper is due two weeks before the end of the semester and will be returned with your grade in the final week; you will have the option of rewriting your paper for a better grade if you hand it in on time. 5. Regular attendance is required; any student who misses more than two classes without notice will have to see me before he/she can continue attending. SPECIAL NEEDS: In compliance with the American Disability Act of 1990 (ADA) and with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Hunter College is committed to ensuring educational parity and accommodations for all students with documented disabilities and/or medical conditions. It is recommended that all students with documented disabilities (emotional, medical, physical and/ or learning) consult the Office of AccessABILITY located in Room E1124 to secure necessary academic accommodations. For further information and assistance please call (212- 772- 4857)/TTY (212- 650- 3230). ACADEMIC HONESTY: Hunter College regards acts of academic dishonesty (e.g., plagiarism, cheating on examinations, obtaining unfair advantage, and falsification of records and official documents) as serious offenses against the values of intellectual honesty. The College is committed to enforcing the CUNY Policy on Academic Integrity and will pursue cases of academic dishonesty according to the Hunter College Academic Integrity Procedures. A detailed statement about plagiarism is posted on Blackboard and will be distributed before papers are submitted. CLASS SCHEDULE AND REQUIRED READING: This course is designed to fit 25 lectures. These do not exactly correspond to the calendar as discussion may extend beyond one class into the next. It is the student’s responsibility to attend every single class to note the necessary reading material for the next class. In case a student is absent, it is the student’s responsibility to find out what the assigned reading for the next class is. The course consists of two parts: the first is thematic and will present selections from various dialogues; in the second, we will read one Platonic dialogue in depth—the Republic. In addition to the classroom sessions, students are expected to read one other dialogue (other than the Republic) on which they will write their mid-term paper. Each student is required to meet me during office hours at least once so that I can advise on the choice of dialogue as well as the proper argument to reconstitute from the dialogue. The following dialogues are not suitable for students to write their paper on: Parmenides, Cratylus, Timaeus. SECONDARY SOURCES: Secondary sources for each dialogue and each theme will be provided as needed. In general, I emphasize close reading of the primary Platonic texts. When you write your papers, you will be required to provide a brief bibliography comprising at least two monographs pertaining to your dialogue and a minimum of five relevant articles. I will provide guidance on this portion of your research. 2 of 4 CITING PLATO: Plato is traditionally cited according to a scheme known as the Stephanus numbers. You are not expected to memorize the numbers, but you should read the attached handout on citing Plato and know how to refer to relevant portions of the text using the Stephanus numbers, or, if given the Stephanus numbers in class, know how to look up the relevant section. Session Topic Required reading No. 1. Introduction: Socrates, Plato, influence of Pre-Socratic None philosophy (Homer, Parmenides, Heraclitus), relevant background of ancient Greek history 2. Being and Becoming Parmenides and Heraclitus 3. Socrates’ defense: historical and political considerations of the Apology trial, the Socratic question, discussion of piety 4. Socrates’ defense: the city vs. the philosopher Apology 5. Philosopher and the law Crito 6. Plato’s psychology: philosophy as preparation for death, death as Phaedo separation of body and soul, myth of after-life 7. Plato’s psychology: argument for the immortality of the soul Phaedo 8. Plato’s theory of recollection Meno 9. Plato’s epistemology Sophist (selections) 10. Plato’s epistemology: know thyself Alcibiades I 11. Plato’s aesthetics: Homer, the bard, Athenian education Ion 12. Plato on love: two speeches on love Phaedrus 13. Plato on love: Socrates as Eros, Alcibiades’ speech Symposium 14. Plato on love: Plato on the problem of the body and desire, Symposium Aristophanes’ and Eryximachus’ speeches 15. Introduction to the structure of the Republic, its relevance to Republic 1 contemporary political theory, and the argument ‘might is right’. 16. The story of the ring of Gyges and the analogy of city and soul Republic 2 17. Education of the Guardians Republic 3 18. Divisions and virtues of the city and soul Republic 4 19. Philosophy, wisdom, and knowledge Republic 5 20. The Idea of the Good, divided line Republic 6 21. Allegory of the cave and the limits of the city Republic 7 3 of 4 22. Decline of the best city: timocracy, oligarchy, democracy, tyranny Republic 8 23. The capacity for discrimination: true and false pleasures Republic 9 24. Plato’s eschatology: myth of Er Republic 10 25. Conclusion: Aristotle and Neo-Platonism None 4 of 4 HOW TO CITE PLATO Background: Why Stephanus numbers? The figures and letters used almost universally to quote Plato refer to a Renaissance edition of his works published in Geneva in 1578 by a famed printer and humanist of the time named Henri Estienne (1528-1598), also known by the Latinized version of his name: Stephanus. This complete edition of Plato's works was in three volumes, whose page were continuously numbered from beginning to end of each volume. Each page of this edition is split in two columns, the inner one providing the Greek text and the outer one a Latin translation (by Jean de Serres). In between the two columns are printed letters from A to E dividing the column into five sections includes pictures of some of its pages, thus alowing a more visual understanding of this disposition). It is common practice to cite Plato by the name of the dialogue (plus the book number for Republic and Laws), the page number in the Stephanus edition followed by the letter of the section including the first word of the quotation. No volume number needs to be provided because no dialogue splits over two volumes, and thus, the dialogue name suffices to make the reference unambiguous. Thus, quotations take the form Sophist, 247d (the “provisional” definition of being) or Republic, V, 473c (the principle of the philosopher-king). Quotations are usually given with reference to the start and end point of the quoted section. If the end point is in the same page as the start point, only the end section letter is added, and the quotation takes the form Sophist, 247d-e.
Recommended publications
  • SGR VERY Final Version

    SGR VERY Final Version

    PLATO’S EXPLANATORY PREDICATION A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Saul Gordon Rosenthal January 2011 © 2011 Saul Gordon Rosenthal All rights reserved PLATO’S EXPLANATORY PREDICATION Saul Gordon Rosenthal, Ph. D. Cornell University 2011 One of the most classic puzzles in Plato’s metaphysics is how to interpret his apparently self-predicational language. Plato seems committed, at least in his middle dialogues, to the view that for all forms, the form of F “is F”. For instance, he seems to say that the form of largeness itself “is large”, and to generalize this claim to all forms. Commentators have struggled to find an interpretation of such claims that is consistent with Plato’s text and that attributes to Plato a view with some plausibility. One aim of this dissertation is to show that we have good reason to doubt all of the most influential interpretations offered by commentators. The views discussed include Narrow Self-Predication, the Tautologous Identity view, two Non- Tautologous Identity views, the Pauline Predication view, Broad Self-Predication, and a view distinguishing different kinds of predication. It is doubtful whether any of these interpretations correctly captures Plato’s self-predicational commitments. Another aim of the dissertation is to argue that the textual evidence most often thought to commit Plato to the Self-Predication Assumption (SP), that for all forms, the form of F is itself an F thing, is insufficient to establish such a commitment. One chapter focuses on Plato’s repeated discussion of the resemblance between form and participant.
  • Protagoras 330-1 David Wol£Sdorf

    Protagoras 330-1 David Wol£Sdorf

    ~tKatO<J"UVll and 'Qc.nem,c; at Protagoras 330-1 David Wol£sdorf I Introduction and Review In an argument in Protagoras for the similarity of Ol1WlO(j'\JVTj and oCH6'tTj~ Socrates introduces the following set of propositions: 1 (1) OtKalO(j'\JVT] is OtKlXlOV. 2 (2) oCH6'tTj~ is OCHOV. 3 (3) OtKlX lO(j'\JVTj is ocrWV. 4 (4) oCH6'tT]~ is otKawv. iI , I The meanings of (1)-(4) remain controversial. The objective of this paper is to give an update on the state of the discussion and to offer my own interpretation. The words 'OtKlXtOOUVTj' and 'OtKlXtoV' are typically translated as 'jus- tice' and 'just'. Thus, (1) is rendered as 'Justice is just'. The words '6CH6'tT1~' and 'ocrtoV' are typically translated as 'piety' or 'holiness' and 'pious' or 'holy'. But 'piety' and 'holiness' are not synonyms. Humans and their actions can be pious or holy, but inanimate objects can be holy, 330c4-dl 2 330d2-el 3 331a7-b3 4 331a7-b3 182 David Wolfsdorf ~lKato(jUVT\ and 'CXn6'!T\~ at Protagoras 330-1 183 but not pious. Thus, it is unclear whether to translate (2)-(4) as 'Holiness defined, is a condition that can only occur within a metaphysical discur- is holy', 'Justice is holy', and 'Holiness is just', or 'Piety is pious', 'Justice sive context.9 is pious', and 'Piety is just'. For much of the paper I will retain the original Insofar as the condition of self-predication depends upon the subject Greek and render the key words in English only where necessary.
  • Plato's Project for Education in the Early Socratic Dialogues

    Plato's Project for Education in the Early Socratic Dialogues

    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 1-1-1996 Plato's project for education in the early Socratic dialogues. Heather Lynne Reid University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1 Recommended Citation Reid, Heather Lynne, "Plato's project for education in the early Socratic dialogues." (1996). Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014. 2285. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1/2285 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PLATO'S PROJECT FOR EDUCATION IN THE EARLY SOCRATIC DIALOGUES A Dissertation Presented by HEATHER LYNNE REID Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May 1996 Department of Philosophy © Copyright by Heather Lynne Reid 1996 All Rights Reserved PLATO'S PROJECT FOR EDUCATION IN THE EARLY SOCRATIC DIALOGUES A Dissertation Presented by HEATHER LYNNE REID Approved as to style and content by: ca Gareth B. Matthews, Chair Robert Ackerman, Member J^n Robison, Department Head philosophy ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my dissertation director Gareth B. Matthews for his special balance of support and criticism throughout this project, as well as Bruce Aune and Marios Philippides for their comments on early stages of the manuscript. I also wish to thank the Department of Philosophy of the University of Southern California for providing library privileges and research support necessary to the completion of this dissertation.
  • On the Arrangement of the Platonic Dialogues

    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.
  • Plato: Influences and Context1

    Plato: Influences and Context1

    Θεαίτητος | Theaetetus 1 1. Plato: Influences and Context1 1. Socrates. Plato is a member of his inner circle (Apology 34a, Phaedo 59b). Like others, he began to write ‘Socratic discourses’ (Aristotle) after Socrates’s death, continuing for forty years. Philosophy is a dialectical inquiry. Lifelong engagement with sophists. 2. Politics in Athens. The trial and execution of Socrates in 399 BCE shatters Plato’s political confidence. His aristocratic origin contributes to scepticism about democracy and the philosopher’s role in the city (cf. Tht. 172c). Yet: philosophy flourished in late 5th-century Athens. 3. Italy, Sicily. Plato visits Syracuse three times (see next page). He aimed to meet Pythagoreans, in particular Archytas (Tarentum), whose ideas are discernible in his work: immortality of the soul, mathematics, philosophical community. Consequence: founding of Academy in c. 387 BCE (dissolved in 527 CE). 4. Isokrates. The highly influential rhetor (orator) was a life-long foe. Tyranny at home: political rhetoric does (even) more harm than the Sophists (cf. the confusing logic-chopping in Euthydemus; cf. Tht. 164 c, 197a). Rivalry shapes Plato’s mature philosophy. 5. Parmenides, Heraclitus. Before joining Socrates, Plato studied with Cratylus and thus knew Heraclitean views (flux theory). Parmenides of Elea (Italy, early 5th century): only what is could be an intelligible object of thought—the forms. 6. Academy. Plato’s late work depends increasingly less on Socrates. His own views develop in the academy, in conversation with fellow ‘academics’, such as Aristotle. In 347, there are about 20 ‘disciples’, including two women.2 Leaves no dogmatic canon. Successors: Speusippus, Xenocrates, and Polemo (i.e.
  • Parmenides' Theistic Metaphysics

    Parmenides' Theistic Metaphysics

    Parmenides’ Theistic Metaphysics BY ©2016 Jeremy C. DeLong Submitted to the graduate degree program in Philosophy and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ________________________________ Chairperson: Tom Tuozzo ________________________________ Eileen Nutting ________________________________ Scott Jenkins ________________________________ John Symons ________________________________ John Younger Date Defended: May 6th, 2016 ii The Dissertation Committee for Jeremy C. DeLong certifies that this is the approved version of the following thesis: Parmenides’ Theistic Metaphysics ________________________________ Chairperson: Thomas Tuozzo Date Defended: May 6th, 2016 iii Abstract: The primary interpretative challenge for understanding Parmenides’ poem revolves around explaining both the meaning of, and the relationship between, its two primary sections: a) the positively endorsed metaphysical arguments which describe some unified, unchanging, motionless, and eternal “reality” (Aletheia), and b) the ensuing cosmology (Doxa), which incorporates the very principles explicitly denied in Aletheia. I will refer to this problem as the “A-D Paradox.” I advocate resolving this paradoxical relationship by reading Parmenides’ poem as a ring-composition, and incorporating a modified version of Palmer’s modal interpretation of Aletheia. On my interpretation, Parmenides’ thesis in Aletheia is not a counter-intuitive description of how all the world (or its fundamental, genuine entities) must truly be, but rather a radical rethinking of divine nature. Understanding Aletheia in this way, the ensuing “cosmology” (Doxa) can be straightforwardly rejected as an exposition of how traditional, mythopoetic accounts have misled mortals in their understanding of divinity. Not only does this interpretative view provide a resolution to the A-D Paradox, it offers a more holistic account of the poem by making the opening lines of introduction (Proem) integral to understanding Parmenides’ message.
  • Gregory Vlastos

    Gregory Vlastos

    Gregory Vlastos: A Preliminary Inventory of His Papers at the Harry Ransom Center Descriptive Summary Creator: Vlastos, Gregory, 1907-1991 Title: Gregory Vlastos Papers Dates: circa 1930s-1991 Extent: 100 document boxes (42.00 linear feet) Abstract: The papers of philosopher Gregory Vlastos, a scholar of ancient Greek philosophy who spent most of his career studying the thought of Plato and Socrates, document his studies, his writings, and his career as an educator at several American universities. Call Number: Manuscript Collection MS-4361 Language: English, with Ancient Greek, French, German, Italian, Latin, Modern Greek, and Spanish Access: Open for research Administrative Information Acquisition: Gifts, 1993-2010 (G9070, G9134, G9163, G9225, G9252, G9628, G9979, G9982, G10214, G10288, G11877, 10-03-014-G) Processed by: Hope Rider, 2006; updated by Joan Sibley, 2016 Repository: The University of Texas at Austin, Harry Ransom Center Vlastos, Gregory, 1907-1991 Manuscript Collection MS-4361 Scope and Contents The papers of philosopher Gregory Vlastos (1907-1991), a scholar of ancient Greek philosophy who spent most of his career studying the thought of Plato and Socrates, document his studies, his writings, and his career as an educator at several American universities, especially Cornell, Princeton, and The University of California at Berkeley. The papers are arranged in six series: I. Correspondence and Offprint Files, II. Study, Lecture, and Teaching Files, III. Works, IV. Works by Others, V. Miscellaneous, and VI. Offprints Removed from Manuscripts. The Correspondence and Offprint Files (35 boxes) in Series I. represent Vlastos' extensive correspondence with other philosophers, classicists, former students, academics, and others. The files are arranged alphabetically by correspondent name, and generally include not only letters received, but copies of Vlastos' responses.
  • Plato's Critique of Injustice in the Gorgias and the Republic

    Plato's Critique of Injustice in the Gorgias and the Republic

    Plato's critique of injustice in the Gorgias and the Republic Author: Jonathan Frederick Culp Persistent link: http://hdl.handle.net/2345/972 This work is posted on eScholarship@BC, Boston College University Libraries. Boston College Electronic Thesis or Dissertation, 2008 Copyright is held by the author, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise noted. Boston College The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Department of Political Science PLATO’S CRITIQUE OF INJUSTICE IN THE GORGIAS AND THE REPUBLIC a dissertation by JONATHAN FREDERICK CULP submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 2008 © Copyright by JONATHAN FREDERICK CULP 2008 Plato’s Critique of Injustice in the Gorgias and the Republic Jonathan Frederick Culp Advisor: Professor Christopher Bruell No rational decision can be made concerning how to live without confronting the problem of justice—both what it is and whether it is good to be just. In this essay I examine Plato’s articulation of these problems in the Gorgias and the Republic. Through detailed analyses of Socrates’ exchanges with several interlocutors, I establish, first, that despite some real and apparent differences, all the interlocutors share the same fundamental conception of justice, which could be called justice as fairness or reciprocal equality (to ison). The core of justice lies in refraining from pleonexia (seeking to benefit oneself at the expense of another). Second, according to this view, the practice of justice is not intrinsically profitable; it is valuable only as a means to the acquisition or enjoyment of other, material goods. This conception thus implies that committing successful injustice is often more profitable than being just.
  • Justice for Juveniles

    Justice for Juveniles

    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. )OS!, 7 JUSTICE FOR JUVENILES Charles E. Springer Vice-Chief Justice Supreme Court of Nevada ~ " :tment of Justice lvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention OJJDP Ie * JUSTICE FOR JUVENILES Charles E. Springer Vice-Chief Justice Supreme Court of Nevada U.S. Department of Justice Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention OJJDP II ,I;' - c :;;w '&-••1\'£:-.' ¥W, Charles E. Springer is Vice-Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the State of Nevada. Prior to being commissioned to the Supreme Court, he was Juvenile Court Master for the Second Judicial District Court for the State of Nevada from 1973 to 1980. He has also served the State of Nevada as Attorney General. He received the Outstanding Service Award from the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges in 1980 and has served on the Boards and Commissions of numerous civic and State organizations in an effort to improve the quality of justice for adults and juveniles . ........ * & & !MI',. u. S. ~partment of Justice Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention NmionallnslituJejiJr Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Juvenile Ju.rl;" Cfrorin8/w"''' NCJRS Box6000. Rochill<. MD 20lJjO Dear Colleague: "Justice for Juveniles" is a serious and deliberative look at the juvenile justice systeln, its philosophical and historical underpinnings, the strengths and weaknesses of today's system, and the implications for its future. Last year over 35,000 juveniles were arrested in this country for violent crimes, including murder, rape, and aggravated assault. The success of this office's e~forts to reduce juvenile crime and create a nlore secure society depends on the ready exchange of information and ideas among professionals in the field.
  • Ethics and Moral Choices Ethics, Morality and Religion, Socrates Versus Abrahamic Religions

    Ethics and Moral Choices Ethics, Morality and Religion, Socrates Versus Abrahamic Religions

    ETHICS AND MORAL CHOICES ETHICS, MORALITY AND RELIGION, SOCRATES VERSUS ABRAHAMIC RELIGIONS BY PARVIZ DEHGHANI The dialogue between Euthyphro and Socrates has captured the imagination of many Western philosophers since Plato wrote it more than two thousand years ago. Socrates meets young Euthyphro on the steps of the same court where he would be sentenced to death. The false allegations were he had been involved in corrupting the youth, turning his back to the gods of Athens and secretly admiring the Persian monarchical system as opposed to the democracy of his day and Spartans' firm belief in their gods and causes. After all, Athens had been invaded by both armies in the past and were considered the enemies by the Athenians. Apparently Socrates wanted to keep his friends close and his enemies closer. Because for him the truth was more important than patriotism. He never desired to be politically correct. He asked Euthyphro as to why he was sitting on the steps? Euthyphro answered Socrates by saying that he was about to go to the court and indict his father. Why, Socrates asked? Because my father captured a murderer and left him in a ditch with his hands tied up behind him and ran to bring in authorities. But by the time he was back, the murderer was dead due to excessive heat and hunger. Socrates being a man of discernment could not let such an opportunity slip. So he began engaging Euthyphro in a dialogue in order to let the truth emerge. Do you realize what you're doing, Socrates asked? After all he is your father.
  • Geneva, April–August 1593

    Geneva, April–August 1593

    chapter 7 Geneva, April–August 1593 Thomson seems to have left Christmann’s house in Heidelberg in March 1593. We do not know when he arrived in Geneva, but he was certainly there by August. Henri Estienne, the great Greek scholar and Isaac Casaubon’s difficult father-in-law, was in Geneva during Thomson’s stay.1 Estienne had been absent from the city for eight or nine months when Casaubon wrote to Thomson in April 1594, a statement which allows us to deduce that Thomson had reached Geneva before August 1593.2 Thomson may have heard Casaubon speak pub- licly on the subject of the New World during this visit.3 In Geneva he knew the man who taught Casaubon Hebrew, Pierre Cheva- lier. Their acquaintance, however, cannot have extended beyond Thomson’s time in Geneva: he sent his regards to Chevalier in a letter of December 1593, and is informed of his death by Casaubon in April 1594.4 In his letter of April 1594, Casaubon also sends greetings from Jacques de Lect, a Genevan historian, lawyer and magistrate, and from Paul Estienne, the son of Casaubon’s father-in- 1 Casaubon married Estienne’s daughter Florence, but her father never allowed his son-in- law to enter his library: see Casaubon’s letter to Scaliger of 2 September 1598, in Botley and Van Miert, eds, Scaliger Correspondence, 2012, 3, p. 195; Pattison, Casaubon, 1892, pp. 30–32. Scaliger said: ‘H. Estienne ne voulut point voir sa fille femme de Casaubon. Il n’aymoit point son gendre’ (Scaliger, Secunda Scaligerana, 1740, p.
  • The Fragments of the Poem of Parmenides

    The Fragments of the Poem of Parmenides

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by D-Scholarship@Pitt RESTORING PARMENIDES’ POEM: ESSAYS TOWARD A NEW ARRANGEMENT OF THE FRAGMENTS BASED ON A REASSESSMENT OF THE ORIGINAL SOURCES by Christopher John Kurfess B.A., St. John’s College, 1995 M.A., St. John’s College, 1996 M.A., University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, 2000 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The Dietrich School of Arts and Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Pittsburgh 2012 UNVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH The Dietrich School of Arts and Sciences This dissertation was presented by Christopher J. Kurfess It was defended on November 8, 2012 and approved by Dr. Andrew M. Miller, Professor, Department of Classics Dr. John Poulakos, Associate Professor, Department of Communication Dr. Mae J. Smethurst, Professor, Department of Classics Dissertation Supervisor: Dr. Edwin D. Floyd, Professor, Department of Classics ii Copyright © by Christopher J. Kurfess 2012 iii RESTORING PARMENIDES’ POEM Christopher J. Kurfess, Ph.D. University of Pittsburgh, 2012 The history of philosophy proper, claimed Hegel, began with the poem of the Presocratic Greek philosopher Parmenides. Today, that poem is extant only in fragmentary form, the various fragments surviving as quotations, translations or paraphrases in the works of better-preserved authors of antiquity. These range from Plato, writing within a century after Parmenides’ death, to the sixth-century C.E. commentator Simplicius of Cilicia, the latest figure known to have had access to the complete poem. Since the Renaissance, students of Parmenides have relied on collections of fragments compiled by classical scholars, and since the turn of the twentieth century, Hermann Diels’ Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, through a number of editions, has remained the standard collection for Presocratic material generally and for the arrangement of Parmenides’ fragments in particular.