Plato, Parmenides1

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Plato, Parmenides1 1 Primary Source 1.3 PLATO, PARMENIDES1 Plato (429–348 B.C.) was an ancient Greek philosopher, mathematician, writer of philosophical dialogues, and student of Socrates (469–399 B.C.). He also founded the Academy in Athens, the first institution of higher learning in the Western world. Along with Socrates and his student, Aristotle, Plato helped to lay the foundations of Western philosophy and science. Plato believed that every class of existing things corresponds to a transcendent and permanently existing idea of that class of things and that each transcendent idea (or form) is more real than the things themselves and indeed makes their existence possible. Thus, the idea of a “man” must have a real, transcendent existence, and each individual human being must correspond to this idea or form. Plato’s theory of forms was perhaps his most notable contribution to philosophy. In the dialogue excerpted below, Plato imagines a conversation between a youthful Socrates and two pre-Socratic philosophers, Zeno (490–430 B.C.) and Parmenides (fl. early 5th century B.C.). The pre-Socratic philosophers, of whose writings only fragments still remain, investigated and theorized about the nature of reality, the complexities of human thought, and the natural world. Zeno was famous for discovering contradictions, absurdities, and paradoxes even in assertions by philosophers. Parmenides believed that everything is interconnected and forms a single unchanging unity. Opposed to his thinking, but not mentioned in the dialogue, was Heraclitus (c. 535–c. 475 B.C.), who claimed that everything constantly changes, such that no one can ever step in the same river twice. In the dialogue, Parmenides offers numerous intellectual challenges to Plato’s theory of the forms. It seems that Plato thereby intended to equip philosophers to defend the theory of forms by foreseeing possible objections to it. For the excerpt online, click here. For the full text, click here. For a freely accessible audio recording, click here. PARMENIDES We went from our home at Clazomenae to Athens, and met Adeimantus2 and Glaucon3 in the Agora. Welcome, said Adeimantue, taking me by the hand; is there anything which we can do for you in Athens? Why, yes, I said, I am come to ask a favor of you. What is that? he said. I want you to tell me the name of your half-brother, which I have forgotten; he was a mere child when I last came hither from Clazomenae, but that was a long time ago: your father’s name, if I remember rightly, is Pyrilampes?4 1 Oliver J. Thatcher, ed., The Library of Original Sources, 10 vols. (Milwaukee, WI: University Research Extension Co., 1907), 2: 239-248. 2 Adeimantus was Plato’s older brother. 3 Glaucon (445–400 B.C.) was an ancient Athenian philosopher and Plato’s older brother. 4 Pyrilampes (480–413 B.C.) was an Athenian philosopher and stepfather of Plato. 2 Yes, he said, and the name of our brother, Antiphon; but why do you ask? Let me introduce some countrymen of mine, I said; they are lovers of philosophy, and have heard that Antiphon was in the habit of meeting Pythodorus, the friend of Zeno, and remembers certain arguments which Socrates and Zeno and Parmenides had together, and which Pythodorus had often repeated to him. That is true. And could we hear them? I asked. Nothing easier, he replied; when he was a youth he made a careful study of the pieces; at present his thoughts run in another direction; like his grandfather, Antiphon, he is devoted to horses. But, if that is what you want, let us go and look for him; he dwells at Melita, which is quite near, and he has only just left us to go home. Accordingly we went to look for him; he was at home, and in the act of giving a bridle to a blacksmith to be fitted. When he had done with the blacksmith, his brothers told him the purpose of our visit; and he saluted me as an acquaintance whom he remembered from my former visit, and we asked him to repeat the dialogue. At first he was not very willing, and complained of the trouble, but at length he consented. He told us that Pythodorous had described to him the appearance of Parmenides and Zeno; they came to Athens, he said, at the great Panathenaea;5 the former was, at the time of his visit, about 65 years old, very white with age, but well favored. Zeno was nearly 40 years of age, of a noble figure and fair aspect; and in the days of his youth he was reported to have been beloved of Parmenides. He said that they lodged with Pythodorous in the Ceramicus, outside the wall, whither Socrates and others came to see them; they wanted to hear some writings of Zeno, which had been brought to Athens by them for the first time. He said that Socrates was then very young, and that Zeno read them to him in the absence of Parmenides, and had nearly finished when Pythodorous entered, and with him Parmenides and Aristoteles6 who was afterwards one of the Thirty;7 there was not much more to hear, and Pythodorus had heard Zeno repeat them before. When the recitation was completed, Socrates requested that the first hypothesis of the first discourse might be read over again, and this having been done, he said: What do you mean, Zeno? Is your argument that the existence of many necessarily involves like and unlike, and that this is impossible, for neither can the like be unlike, nor the unlike like; is that your position? Just that, said Zeno. And if the unlike cannot be like, or the like unlike, then neither can the many exist, for that would involve an impossibility. Is the design of your argument throughout to disprove the existence of the many? and is each of your treatises intended to furnish a separate proof of this, there being as many proofs in all as you have composed arguments, of the non-existence of the many? Is that your meaning, or have I misunderstood you? No, said Zeno; you have quite understood the general drift of the treatise. 5 The most important religious festival in Athens, held every four years in honor of the goddess Athena. 6 This was not the philosopher Aristotle but a statesman. 7 The pro-Spartan puppet leadership of Athens following the Peloponnesian War (431–404 B.C.). 3 I see, Parmenides, said Socrates, that Zeno is your second self in his writings too; he puts what you say in another way, and half deceives us into believing that he is saying what is new. For you, in your compositions, say that the all is one, and of this you adduce excellent proofs; and he, on the other hand, says that the many is naught, and gives many great and convincing evidences of this. To deceive the world, as you have done, by saying the same thing in different ways, one of you affirming and the other denying the many, is a strain of art beyond the reach of most of us. Yes, Socrates, said Zeno. But although you are as keen as a Spartan hound in pursuing the track, you do not quite apprehend the true motive of the performance, which is not really such an artificial piece of work as you imagine; there was no intention of concealment effecting any grand result—that was a mere accident. For the truth is, that these writings of mine were meant to protect the arguments of Parmenides against those who ridicule him, and urge the many ridiculous and contradictory results which were supposed to follow from the assertion of the one. My answer is addressed to the partisans of the many, and intended to show that greater or more ridiculous consequences follow from their hypothesis of the existence of the many if carried out, than from the hypothesis of the existence of the one. A love of controversy led me to write the book in the days of my youth, and someone stole the writings, and I had therefore no choice about the publication of them; the motive, however, of writing, was not the ambition of an old man, but the pugnacity of a young one. This you do not seem to see, Socrates; though in other respects, as I was saying, your notion is a very just one. That I understand, said Socrates, and quite accept your account. But tell me, Zeno, do you not further think that there is an idea of likeness in the abstract, and another idea of unlikeness, which is the opposite of likeness, and that in these two, you and I and all other things to which we apply the term many, participate; and that the things which participate in likeness are in that degree and manner like; and that those which participate in unlikeness are in that degree unlike, or both like and unlike in the degree in which they participate in both? And all things may partake of both opposites, and be like and unlike to themselves, by reason of this participation. Even in that there is nothing wonderful. But if a person could prove the absolute like to become unlike, or the absolute unlike to become like, that, in my opinion, would be a real wonder; not, however, if the things which partake of the ideas experience likeness and unlikeness—there is nothing extraordinary in this. Nor, again, if a person were to show that all is one by partaking of one, and that the same is many by partaking of many, would that be very wonderful? But if he were to show me that the absolute many was one, or the absolute one many, I should be truly amazed.
Recommended publications
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Democratic Education in The
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Democratic Education in the Works of Plato A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science by Richard A. Barrett Committee in charge: Professor Tracy B. Strong, Chair Professor Page duBois Professor Fonna Forman Professor Marcel Hénaff Professor Gerry Mackie 2014 Copyright Richard A. Barrett, 2014 All rights reserved. The Dissertation of Richard A. Barrett is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: ______________________________________________ ______________________________________________ ______________________________________________ Chair UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO 2014 iii DEDICATION To those who have shared conversations about our world with me. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Signature Page……………………………………………………………………...…iii Dedication……………………………………………………………………………..iv Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………....v Vita…………………………………………………………………………………....vii Abstract of the Dissertation.………………………………………………………....viii Introduction: Plato and the Problem of Democratic Education ..................................... 1 Chapter 1 Reading Plato: Plato and Xenophon as Teachers and Poets ............. 7 1.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 7 1.2 Comparison of Apologies ................................................................................ 8 1.3 Plato on the Relationship of Philosophy,
    [Show full text]
  • MINEOLA BIBLE INSTITUTE and SEMINARY Philosophy II Radically
    MINEOLA BIBLE INSTITUTE AND SEMINARY Page | 1 Philosophy II Radically, Biblical, Apostolic, Christianity Bishop D.R. Vestal, PhD Larry L Yates, ThD, DMin “Excellence in Apostolic Education since 1991” 1 Copyright © 2019 Mineola Bible Institute Page | 2 All Rights Reserved This lesson material may not be used in any manner for reproduction in any language or use without the written permission of Mineola Bible Institute. 2 Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 7 Alexander the Great (356-323 B.C.) ........................................................................................... 8 Philip II of Macedonia (382-336 B.C.) ....................................................................................... 12 Page | 3 “Olympias the mother of Alexander was an evil woman. .......................................... 13 Philip II (of Macedonia) (382-336 BC) .............................................................................. 13 Aristotle (384-322 BC) ............................................................................................................... 15 Works .................................................................................................................................... 16 Methods ............................................................................................................................... 17 Doctrines ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Plato's Defence of the Forms in the Parmenides
    1 Plato’s defence of the Forms in the Parmenides In Plato’s Parmenides we find objections against the Forms which Aristotle in the Metaphysics presents as arguments that refute the theory of Forms. Plato does not refute those objections. This led many philosophers to suppose that the Parmenides initiated a new, critical phase in Plato’s thought, in which he radically revised the theory of Forms presented in the Republic.i I shall argue that Plato in the Parmenides defends the Forms by pointing to his presentation of them in the Republic. Parmenides reflects on his criticism of the Forms in the Parmenides as follows: ‘And yet, these difficulties and many more still in addition necessarily hold of the characters (anankaion echein ta eidȇ), if these characteristics of things that are exist (ei eisin hautai hai ideai tȏn ontȏn), and one is to distinguish each character as something by itself (kai horieitai tis auto hekaston eidos). The result is that the hearer is perplexed and contends that they do not exist, and that even if their existence is conceded, they are necessarily unknowable by human nature. In saying this, he thinks he is saying something significant (kai tauta legonta dokein ti legein) and, as we just remarked (kai, ho arti elegomen), it’s astonishingly hard to convince him to the contrary. Only a man of considerable natural gifts will be able to understand that there is a certain kind of each thing, a nature and reality alone by itself, and it will take a man more remarkable still to discover it and be able to instruct someone else who has examined all these difficulties with sufficient care.’ (134e-135b, tr.
    [Show full text]
  • Socrates and Plato
    M01_JOHN0380_04_SE_C01.qxd 1/7/11 5:05 PM Page 17 1 Socrates and Plato Time Line for Socrates 470 BC Is born in Athens, Greece, the son of Sophroniscus, a stonemason, and Phaenarete, a midwife. 470–400 Grows up during the “golden age” of Greece—his father, an intimate friend of the son of Aristides the Just, provides Socrates an acquaintanceship with the members of the Pericles circle. Serves with valor in the Peloponnesian War. Marries Xanthippe. They have seven or eight children. Is declared the wisest man by the Oracle at Delphi. Is put on trial for corrupting the minds of the youth of Athens. 399 Is found guilty and forced to drink hemlock. Socrates wrote nothing. All that we know of him is from the writings of Aristophenes (The Clouds), Plato, and Xenophon. Time Line for Plato 427 BC Is born in Athens, Greece, to a prominent family. Following his father’s death, his mother marries Pyrilampes, a close friend of Pericles. 405–400 Studies with Socrates. 399 Attends the trial and execution of Socrates. 387 Establishes the Academy. Later, Eudoxius, respected mathematician, unites his school, located at Cyzicus, with the Academy. 367 Accepts Aristotle into the Academy. 347 Dies in Athens. Although scholars continue to debate the time frame of Plato’s writings, the following are generally attributed to each period: Early Period Works, usually referred to as Socratic dialogues, focus on ethics. Included in this period are Apology, Crito, Charmides, Laches, Euthyphro, Euthydemus, Cratylus, Protagoras, and Gorgias. 17 M01_JOHN0380_04_SE_C01.qxd 1/7/11 5:05 PM Page 18 18 Chapter 1 • Socrates and Plato Middle Period Works focus on theory of ideas and metaphysical doctrines.
    [Show full text]
  • Brainy Quote ~ Plato 002
    Brainy Quote ~ Plato 002 “Courage is knowing what not to fear.” ~ Plato 002 "Keberanian adalah mengetahui apa yang tidak perlu ditakuti." ~ Plato 002 Anda pernah memiliki rasa takut terhadap sesuatu? Takut datang ke sekolah pertama sekali, takut bertemua orang baru, atau takut meninggalkan kampung halaman? Takut menghadapi wawancana kerja atau takut berbicara di depan orang banyak? Pada akhirnya, Anda berani menghadapinya. Mengapa? Apa yang membuat keberanian Anda tumbuh? Apakah Anda berani karena kemampuan Anda bertambah atau karena Anda menyadari tidak ada yang perlu ditakuti? Sesungguhnya, rasa takut selalu ada. Namun, ketika kita mengetahui bahwa tidak perlu ada rasa takut, maka pada saat itu, keberanian kita muncul. Demikianlah apa yang pernah diutarakan Plato, seorang penulis dan filsuf berkebangsaan Yunani, hidup dalam rentang tahun 428-348 BC, lewat quote-nya, ‘Courage is knowing what not to fear.’ Secara bebas diterjemahkan, ‘Keberanian adalah mengetahui apa yang tidak perlu ditakuti.’ Kita memiliki keberanian akan sesuatu karena kita memiliki pengetahuan terhadap apa yang kita hadapi. Ketika kita memilik cukup ‘senjata’ saat menghadapi sesuatu yang baru atau sesuatu yang asing pada mulanya, kita tidak akan merasa khawatir terhadap apapun yang akan terjadi. Bila kita memiliki persiapan yang cukup, pengalaman yang mumpuni, atau wawasan yang relevan terhadap apa yang akan kita hadapi, keberanian kita otomatis akan muncul. Milikilah keberanian! Walaupun rasa takut selalu ada. Rasa takut tetap diperlukan agar kita mawas diri dan waspada senantiasa, andai sesuatu terjadi diluar bayangan kita. Dengan persiapan yang cukup serta pengetahuan yang layak, kita akan mampu mengatasi rasa takut yang menghantui. Kita tidak sendiri. Sesungguhnya, setiap orang memiliki ketakutan yang sama dengan kadar yang berbeda.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Daimonion of Socrates
    SAPERE Scripta Antiquitatis Posterioris ad Ethicam REligionemque pertinentia Schriften der späteren Antike zu ethischen und religiösen Fragen Herausgegeben von Heinz-Günther Nesselrath, Reinhard Feldmeier und Rainer Hirsch-Luipold Band XVI Plutarch On the daimonion of Socrates Human liberation, divine guidance and philosophy edited by Heinz-Günther Nesselrath Introduction, Text, Translation and Interpretative Essays by Donald Russell, George Cawkwell, Werner Deuse, John Dillon, Heinz-Günther Nesselrath, Robert Parker, Christopher Pelling, Stephan Schröder Mohr Siebeck e-ISBN PDF 978-3-16-156444-4 ISBN 978-3-16-150138-8 (cloth) ISBN 987-3-16-150137-1 (paperback) The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Natio- nal bibliographie; detailed bibliographic data is availableon the Internet at http:// dnb.d-nb.de. © 2010 by Mohr Siebeck Tübingen. This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher’s written permission. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems. This book was typeset by Christoph Alexander Martsch, Serena Pirrotta and Thorsten Stolper at the SAPERE Research Institute, Göttingen, printed by Gulde- Druck in Tübingen on non-aging paper and bound by Buchbinderei Spinner in Ottersweier. Printed in Germany. SAPERE Greek and Latin texts of Later Antiquity (1st–4th centuries AD) have for a long time been overshadowed by those dating back to so-called ‘classi- cal’ times. The first four centuries of our era have, however, produced a cornucopia of works in Greek and Latin dealing with questions of philoso- phy, ethics, and religion that continue to be relevant even today.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Afterlife Myths in Plato's Moral Arguments
    Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Philosophy Theses Department of Philosophy 5-18-2009 The Role of Afterlife Myths in Plato's Moral Arguments Daniel William Issler Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/philosophy_theses Part of the Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Issler, Daniel William, "The Role of Afterlife Myths in Plato's Moral Arguments." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2009. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/philosophy_theses/56 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]. THE ROLE OF AFTERLIFE MYTHS IN PLATO’S MORAL ARGUMENTS by DANIEL ISSLER Under the Direction of Tim O’Keefe ABSTRACT I will address the issue of Plato’s use of myths concerning the afterlife in the context of the ethical arguments of the Gorgias , Phaedo and Republic , and I will contend that while the arguments in each dialogue are aimed at convincing the rational part of the self, the myths are aimed at persuading the non-rational part of the self. In support of this interpretation, I will examine Plato’s views on the relation between the different parts of the soul and the relationship that poetry and myth have to philosophy. I will argue that Plato’s use of myth is a legitimate tactic in his project of moral education, given his views concerning the role that the non-rational parts of the self play in one’s moral life.
    [Show full text]
  • Listening Carefully: Plato Tells About the Sophists*
    Rustam Galanin Listening Carefully: Plato Tells About the Sophists* Rustam Galanin Listening Carefully: Plato Tells About the Sophists Abstract. It is well known that most of our knowledge of the Sophists is obtained from Plato’s dialogues as well as the long tradition of criticism aimed at sophistry. Thanks to the œuvre of Plato and Aristotle and their followers, we envisage the Sophists as bad guys, obnoxious “many-sided creatures” who take fees for their teachings and are “not to be caught with one hand”. Fortunately we know not only how bad the Sophists were, but also what they taught, and it is Plato who in many cases is our only source of information on the topic. That is why I am not going to criticize Plato for having an inadequate view of the Sophists — which is a common notion — but, on the contrary, will try to offer an apology in behalf of Plato by way of demostrating how much we owe him in terms of our knowledge about the Sophists. Further, I am planning to make a summary of modern assessments of Plato as a source for sophistology, and to show that Plato’s dialogues are unique historical testimonies, and therefore many things written by him about the Sophists are to be taken on trust. Keywords: ancient philosophy, sophistry, rhetoric. The dialogues never lie Everyone would remember the famous words of the Eleatic Stranger to Theaetetus regarding a Sophist, “that this creature is many-sided and, as the saying is, not to be caught with one hand.”¹ The irony of Socrates ridiculing the false importance in which wallow the Sophists and their © Р.Б.
    [Show full text]
  • PLATO (The Philosopher): USER's GUIDE
    PLATO (the philosopher): USER’S GUIDE (version of December 6, 2016, emended April 6, 2020) “Unless either the philosophers become kings in the cities or those who are nowadays called kings and rulers get to philosophizing truly and adequately, and this falls together upon the same person, political power and philosophy, while the many natures of those who are driven toward the one apart from the other are forcibly set aside, there will be no cessation of evils, my dear Glaucon, for cities, nor, methinks, for the human race.” Plato, République, V, 473c11-d61 “I realised that it is not only the material world that is different from the aspect in which we see it; that all reality is perhaps equally dissimilar from what we think ourselves to be directly perceiving and that we compose by means of ideas which don’t show up but are active, in the same way the trees, the sun and the sky would not be such as we see them if they were appre- hended by beings having eyes differently constituted from ours, or else en- dowed for this task with organs other than eyes which would provide equiva- lents of trees and sky and sun, though not visual.” M. Proust, The Guermantes Way, translation C. K. Scott Moncrieff revised by me (Note: a table of contents based on bookmarks is available for display on the left part of the screen in Adobe Reader) Foreword: this paper is a translation by me into English of a paper I originally wrote in French, my native tongue, under the title “Platon: mode d’emploi” (version of December 6, 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Godless Human Philosophy: Truth According to Man
    Chapter One Godless Human Philosophy: Truth According to Man “The desire of power in excess caused the angels to fall; the desire of knowledge in excess caused man to fall.” Francis Bacon, Advancement of Learning, 1605 Man’s Futile Search for Wisdom and Truth The origin of the word “philosophy” comes from the combination of the Greek words philos, which means love, and sophia, which means wisdom. The meaning of the word philosophy, therefore, is a “love of wisdom.” As sentient creatures made in the image and likeness of God, human beings have an inborn urge to know and understand the truth. No other creatures have this desire for wisdom and knowledge. That’s what separates us from the brutes. Merely surviving from day to day like the animals do is not enough for mankind, for we cannot live in peace with ourselves if we don’t ponder where we come from and where we’re going when we die. God recognizes this inborn desire we have, for he was the one who gave it to us in the first place, and has revealed himself to us in order that we may know the truth, and love him and seek him out, and ultimately be reunited to him when we die. As we have discovered from the modern sciences of archaeology, anthropology, and paleontology, the whole of human history has been a never-ending search for the truth about our creator. Primitive savages once believed that the heavenly bodies and the natural forces and elements of the earth were gods and therefore worshipped such things as the moon, the sun, the planets, earth, wind, fire, rain, crops, animals, insects, and many other things that exist in the natural realm.
    [Show full text]
  • Plato's Gorgias
    a fi : 'I 1 tJly' Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from University of Toronto http://www.archive.org/details/platosgorgiasOOplat PLATO'S GOEGIAS. Cambritjge: PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, 3I.A. AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. : PLATO'S GORGIAS, LITERALLY TRANSLATED, WITH AN INTRODUCTORY ESSAY, CONTAINING A SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT. BY E. M. COPE, FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE. CAMBRIDGE DEIGHTON, BELL, AND CO. LONDON: BELL AND DALDY, 1864. THE INSTITI'Tr ri!" ftfrr!»n/£| STUDIES JO - . Jot ^ WAH 3 1 1932 PREFACE. The object aimed at in this Translation is, as the title-page sets forth, to render Plato's text as nearly as possible word for word into English, and it is therefore not intended specially for English readers. On the contrary, it is intended principally for stu- dents and scholars, for those who are learning or have learnt to compare the structure and resources of the Greek and the English language, and the several modes of expression which the habits of thought pre- vailing in times and places so far removed from one another have stamped upon their respective idioms. Those who have done so are the only fair judges of such an attempt, and will be the first to make the requisite allowance for the defects and shortcomings which will most assuredly be found in this transla- tion. My endeavour has been not only to convey the spirit and freedom, which of course must be the aim of every translator, but also as far as possible to preserve the form of the original language; and I have done my best to hold a middle course between the pedantic and servile adherence to the letter by vi rUEFACE.
    [Show full text]
  • (I) PLATO- LIFE and WORK
    1 (4) PLATO Here I summarize the main points in the work of Plato that are in some way relevant to our discussion of the evolution of the ideas of modern physics. Plato of course ranged very widely over many other topics, and his ideas about physical reality have to be seen in this wider context- for this reason I also discuss questions about, eg., justice, that were essential to the development of the theory of Forms. Almost all the writings of Plato have come down to us from later translations by Islamic writers- the originals have been lost, apart from the Timaeus. (i) PLATO- LIFE and WORK LIFE of PLATO The dates of Plato's life are usually based upon Eratosthenes' calculations- according to these, he was born in 428-7 B.C. and died at the age of eighty or eighty-one at 348-7 B.C. Plato came from one of the wealthiest and most politically active families in Athens. One of Plato's uncles (Charmides) was a member of the notorious "Thirty Tyrants," who overthrew the Athenian democracy in 404 B.C. Charmides' own uncle, Critias, was the leader of the Thirty. However, his stepfather Pyrilampes was apparently a close associate of Pericles, when the latter was the leader of the democratic faction. Plato's real name was apparently Aristocles, after his grandfather. "Plato" seems to have started as a nickname (for platos, or "broad"). He came under the influence of Socrates while a young man, and was obviously very deeply influenced by him and by his 'Socratic method' of inquiry.
    [Show full text]