DOCSLIB.ORG

The Logical Structure of Socrates' Expert-Analogies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Logical Structure of Socrates' Expert-Analogies The Logical Structure of Socrates’ Expert-Analogies Petter Sandstad Universität Rostock 1 Introduction Socrates’ expert-analogies are frequent in both Plato’s dialogues and the Socra- tic writings of Xenophon, and are also ascribed to Socrates by Aristotle and Aeschines. This is a group of arguments where Socrates makes an analogy from an uncontroversial expert, or an expertise, like the cobbler or ship-captain, to another often controversial expert like the statesman. The expert-analogy is a key component of Socrates’ philosophical practice, and without a proper understanding of the expert-analogy we cannot fully understand Socrates. Among the occurrences of Socrates’ expert-analogy the fragments of Aes- chines of Sphettus are the least known and discussed.1 One reason is that they are fragmentary; another is that they are quite simple. But these reasons make them good starting-points from which we can move on to the more complex occurrences in the other sources. “Do you consider that men have to begin by being ignorant of music before they become musicians? Or ignorant of horsemanship before they become good riders?” “I think they have to begin by first being ignorant of music and horsemanship.” POxy. 1608 col. i, fr. 1 = ssr vi a 48; tr. field 1948, 148 This is from Aeschines’ Alcibiades, where Alcibiades criticizes the Athenian statesman Themistocles. One of Alcibiades’ arguments must have been based on the common belief that Themistocles was far from perfect in his youth. Socrates replies that just as a musician or a horseman must start out ignorant of his relative subject, so also a statesman like Themistocles must start out igno- rant of statesmanship.2 Or take another fragment from Aeschines’ Miltiades: It won’t be at all strange if the problem that stumps us doesn’t stump him. For it’s no surprise that, if I asked Euripides which craftsman he 1 Cf. Mársico and Brisson (in this volume) for biographical notes on Aeschines. 2 Cf. Field 1948, 147–148; Lampe 2015, 74–75. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2018 | doi: 10.1163/9789004341227_016 320 sandstad should spend time with in order to deliberate best about making shoes, he could answer “cobblers”; or which he should spend time with in order to deliberate best about building houses, he could answer “architects.” But now … POxy. 2890 = ssr vi a 80; tr. lampe 2015, 63 Presumably, Socrates would here have continued the argument by asking Euripides the question: “But now, who should Miltiades spend time with in order to deliberate best about statesmanship?” Presumably, Euripides would answer that he should go to the expert of statesmanship, namely the statesman. To which Socrates would respond that just as we should learn shoemaking from the cobbler, so we should learn statesmanship from the statesman.3 There are good reasons for assuming that the expert-analogy has come down to us from Socrates. Aristotle says: “For two things may be fairly ascribed by Socrates—inductive arguments and universal definition, both of which are concerned with the starting-point of science” (Metaph. μ.4, 1078b27–29; cf. pa 1.1, 642a24–31). Here “inductive arguments” translates ἐπαγωγή, but the argument that Aristotle must be thinking of are better viewed as an analogy or illustrative parallel (παράβολη):4 The illustrative parallel is the sort of argument Socrates used: e.g. “Public officials ought not to be selected by lot. That is like using the lot to select athletes,5 instead of choosing those who are fit for the contest; or using the lot to select a steersman from among a ship’s crew, as if we ought to 3 Rossetti (this volume) argues that this fragment is a parallel of Xen. Mem. 4.4.5, and that Xenophon there discusses justice (in contrast to philosophy). However, that story connects justice to laws and concludes by saying that Socrates was a teacher of justice: “By such words and actions he encouraged Justice in those who resorted to his company” (Mem. 4.4.25)—and by implication, also a teacher of statesmanship (βασιλική τέχνη); cf. Peterson (this volume). Thus, both Aeschines’ fragment and the passage from Xenophon seem to contain such an expert-analogy. For further discussion see Rossetti 1984, 276–277; Lampe 2015, 63–64. 4 Aristotle’s discussion of induction (ἐπαγωγή), e.g., in APr. 2.23, fits very poorly for the Socratic expert-analogies, and pace most of the secondary literature (which implicitly or explicitly refer to APr. 2.23), the emphasis on induction is misleading. Problems with treating the expert-analogies as inductions will become apparent in the next section’s discussion of pre- vious interpreters. I think the expert-analogies are much better seen as illustrative parallels, and will limit my discussion of ἐπαγωγή. 5 Prima facie the case of athletes is a poor example of experts, but cf. Alc. 119b1–e3; 2. Alc. 145c9–e5; and Thg. 123e12–15 (admittedly, all three of these are dubious; cf. the contribution by Tarrant in this volume)..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 341 BC the THIRD PHILIPPIC Demosthenes Translated By
    1 341 BC THE THIRD PHILIPPIC Demosthenes translated by Thomas Leland, D.D. Notes and Introduction by Thomas Leland, D.D. 2 Demosthenes (383-322 BC) - Athenian statesman and the most famous of Greek orators. He was leader of a patriotic party opposing Philip of Macedon. The Third Philippic (341 BC) - The third in a series of speeches in which Demosthenes attacks Philip of Macedon. Demosthenes urged the Athenians to oppose Philip’s conquests of independent Greek states. Cicero later used the name “Philippic” to label his bitter speeches against Mark Antony; the word has since come to stand for any harsh invective. 3 THE THIRD PHILIPPIC INTRODUCTION To the Third Philippic THE former oration (The Oration on the State of the Chersonesus) has its effect: for, instead of punishing Diopithes, the Athenians supplied him with money, in order to put him in a condition of continuing his expeditions. In the mean time Philip pursued his Thracian conquests, and made himself master of several places, which, though of little importance in themselves, yet opened him a way to the cities of the Propontis, and, above all, to Byzantium, which he had always intended to annex to his dominions. He at first tried the way of negotiation, in order to gain the Byzantines into the number of his allies; but this proving ineffectual, he resolved to proceed in another manner. He had a party in the city at whose head was the orator Python, that engaged to deliver him up one of the gates: but while he was on his march towards the city the conspiracy was discovered, which immediately determined him to take another route.
    [Show full text]
  • Looking for Interpreter Zero: the Irony of Themistocles
    Looking for Interpreter Zero: The Irony of Themistocles Themistocles and his historians reflect a range of attitudes to language, identity and loyalty, giving us a sense of attitudes towards interpreters far back in time and memory. Christine ADAMS. Published: March 1, 2019 Last updated: March 1, 2019 Themistocles was a rare example of a Greek who could speak a foreign language …[1] This sense of a common tongue was the decisive criterion for determining who were Greeks [2] Herodotus (484-425 BCE) tells the story of the cradle of western civilisation in The Histories of the Persian Wars, relating the stories of the Greeks and their neighbours - those they called Barbarians - and giving detailed information about the peoples of the Mediterranean as well as the lead up to the wars, before giving an account of the wars themselves. “By combining oral accounts of the past with his own observation of surviving monuments, natural phenomena and local customs, he produced a prose narrative of unprecedented length, intellectual depth and explanatory power.”[3] Histories shows an awareness of the need for language intermediaries, drawing a distinction between linguists and the ‘interpreters’ of dreams or oracular pronouncements and citing instances of interpreters at work. There were Greek-speaking communities in Egypt, for instance. The Pharaoh Psammetichus had allowed them to settle and had honoured all of his commitments to them. He had even “intrusted to their care certain Egyptian children whom they were to teach the language of the Greeks.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 9 Study Guide Key
    Chapter 9 Study Guide Key 7th Grade World History Vocabulary Cavalry – a unit of soldiers who ride horses. The Persian empire was known for their use of cavalry, helping to make them so victorious in battle Hellenistic – Greek-like - when a cultural idea is heavily influenced by Greek ideas (Example – cities of Alexandria created by Alexander.) Alliance – agreement to work together – as in the Persian Wars Vocabulary Phalanx – A square fighting formation – commonly used by Alexander & Sparta Satraps – governors in the Persian empire Helots – Slaves in Sparta – made up majority of population & heavily relied upon Parthenon – Great temple in Athens dedicated to the goddess Athena. Commissioned by Pericles after the Persian Wars. People to Know Cyrus the Great – Rebelled against the Medes to create the Persian Empire. Known for letting others keep their customs to help prevent rebellions Darius I – Leader of the Persians when Greek mainland city-states sent help to the Ionian city- states. Leader during the Battle of Marathon People to Know Xerxes I – the son of Darius. Was the leader of the Persian Wars during the battles of Thermopylae, Salamis & Plataea. Set up his golden throne to watch the Battle of Salamis – which he lost, forcing him to retreat to Persia Philip of Macedonia – Father of Alexander the Great. Conquered the Greek city-states. Alexander the Great – Macedonian King – came to power after his father was murdered. Helped to create the largest empire in the world at that point. Never lost a battle. Died at age 32 from malaria. People to Know Plato – a student of Socrates.
    [Show full text]
  • Utilizing Athenian History in the De Corona
    Utilizing Athenian History in the De Corona Lawrie Whitmore ’16 Abstract The De Corona, given by the famous Athenian orator Demosthenes, depicts him battling against his fierce rival Aeschines. While the speech’s goal was to defend a fellow Athenian being prosecuted for awarding Demosthenes for his services to the city, Demosthenes attempts to justify his award by defending his actions against Philip and his son Alexander the Great of Macedonia and mainly focuses on his personal rivalry with Aeschines. Considered one of the greatest orations in history, one of the main strategies utilized in the De Corona by Demosthenes is an appeal to past Athenian history, such as the Persian Wars. Through this strategy Demosthenes explains how he deserves praise for his actions taken against Macedonia. One of the greatest criticisms of Demosthenes made by his rival Aeschines is how he pales in comparison to other famous Athenians of the past. In fact, a large part of Aeschines’ speech Against Ctesiphon, sections 178-188, is dedicated to how Demosthenes is in no way fit to be compared to the great Athenian forefathers, bringing up famed statesmen such as Themistocles, Miltiades, and Aristides. Aeschines states, “But I by the Olympian gods do not think it is fit to remember those men on the same day as this monster!” (ἀλλ᾽ ἔγωγε μὰ τοὺς θεοὺς τοὺς Ὀλυμπίους οὐδ᾽ ἐν ταῖς αὐταῖς ἡμέραις ἄξιον ἡγοῦμαι μεμνῆσθαι τοῦ θηρίου τούτου κἀκείνων τῶν ἀνδρῶν, Aes. 3.182). While this invective would seem to discourage Demosthenes from referencing Athenian history, he still constantly discusses it throughout his speech, especially the events of the Persian Wars and Themistocles, who led the city for a large part during this time period.
    [Show full text]
  • Three Aspects of Spartan Kingship in Herodotus Rosaria Vignolo Munson
    5 Three Aspects of Spartan Kingship in Herodotus Rosaria Vignolo Munson erodotus’ Histories are governed by the rule of resemblance: they explain the nature of a given historical phenomenon by sug­ gesting similarities to unrelated phenomena entirely different in Hother respects.! We may safely state, in particular, that Herodotus’ analysis of any form of personal power is inseparable from his representation of monarchical rule. This was an essential feature of the foreign culture that threatened the integrity of Hellas at the time of the Persian wars, and it provided the Greeks with a foil for self-definition. The components of the monarchical model in Herodotus have often been discussed,^ and I need only to recall a few points. The speech of Otanes in the Constitutional Debate is the basic theoretical document (3.80). The monarch is here defined as an individual who “can do what he wants without being accountable” (dvevOvvco Trottem ra /SouXerat). When placed in such a position, even the best of men finds himself outside the normal way of thinking (/cat yap av tov aptcTOV avhputv TravTwv (TTavTU e? TavTTjv TTjv apy^v e/cxd? twv ewOoToiv voripdraiv cTTpcreid) and commits many unbearable things (iroWd /cal dracrOaka) out of u/3pts and cpOovos. Typically, the monarch subverts ancestral laws (Ttarpta vopaia), he does violence to women, and he puts people to death without trial. I am happy to dedicate this chapter to Martin Ostwald with gratitude and admiration. 1. The importance of analogical thought in Herodotus is widely recognized. See espe­ cially the work of Immerwahr (1966) and Lateiner (1989, 191-96).
    [Show full text]
  • ATINER's Conference Paper Proceedings Series LIT2017-0021
    ATINER CONFERENCE PRESENTATION SERIES No: LIT2017-0021 ATINER’s Conference Paper Proceedings Series LIT2017-0021 Athens, 22 August 2017 Themistocles' Hetairai in a Fragment of Idomeneus of Lampsacus: A Small Commentary Marina Pelluci Duarte Mortoza Athens Institute for Education and Research 8 Valaoritou Street, Kolonaki, 10683 Athens, Greece ATINER’s conference paper proceedings series are circulated to promote dialogue among academic scholars. All papers of this series have been blind reviewed and accepted for presentation at one of ATINER’s annual conferences according to its acceptance policies (http://www.atiner.gr/acceptance). © All rights reserved by authors. 1 ATINER CONFERENCE PRESENTATION SERIES No: LIT2017-0021 ATINER’s Conference Paper Proceedings Series LIT2017-0021 Athens, 24 August 2017 ISSN: 2529-167X Marina Pelluci Duarte Mortoza, Independent Researcher, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil Themistocles' Hetairai in a Fragment of Idomeneus of Lampsacus: A Small Commentary1 ABSTRACT This paper aims to be a small commentary on a fragment cited by Athenaeus of Naucratis (2nd-3rd AD) in his Deipnosophistai. This is his only surviving work, which was composed in 15 books, and verses on many different subjects. It is an enormous amount of information of all kinds, mostly linked to dining, but also on music, dance, games, and all sorts of activities. On Book 13, Athenaeus puts the guests of the banquet talking about erotic matters, and one of them cites this fragment in which Idomeneus of Lampsacus (ca. 325-270 BCE) talks about the entrance of the great Themistocles in the Agora of Athens: in a car full of hetairai. Not much is known about Idomeneus, only that he wrote books on historical and philosophical matters, and that nothing he wrote survived.
    [Show full text]
  • On Organization (Dem. 13) Jeremy Trevett
    Demosthenes' Speech "On Organization" (Dem. 13) Trevett, Jeremy Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Summer 1994; 35, 2; ProQuest pg. 179 Demosthenes' Speech On Organization (Dem. 13) Jeremy Trevett OUBTS ABOUT THE AUTHENTICITY of the thirteenth speech D of the Demosthenic corpus, fIfpi cr'\)v'ta~fw~ (On Or­ ganization), have been repeatedly entertained since the nineteenth century.! The trend this century has been towards accepting it as genuine, but the most recent discussion of the problem argues forcibly against this view. 2 One hesitates to add to what has already been written on the subject, but the view that it is spurious should not be left holding the field. The objections that have been raised are far from cogent; moreover, it is essential to look at the speech as a whole, rather than concentrate on one or two passages that are thought to present difficulties.3 The question is important, as we need to know whether the speech can be used as evidence of Demosthenes' thought and the development of his political views. Absolute proof is unattainable, but in what follows I argue that the speech is almost certainly genuine. Testimonia. As the speaker identifies himself as Demosthenes (13.12), the speech must be either genuine or a deliberate fake; it cannot be a work of the fourth century wrongly attributed to him. No ancient scholar expresses any doubt about its authen- 1 The principal discussions (hereafter cited by author's name only) are: F. B LASS, Die attische Beredsamkeit2 IILl (Leipzig 1893) 401 ffj ]. M. F OSSEY, • A Demosthenic Doublet (XIII, 22-24 and XXIII, 198-200)," LeM 11 (1986) 77fj ].
    [Show full text]
  • Poleis, Choras and Spaces, from Civic to Royal. Spaces in the Cities Over
    PYRENAE, vol. 47 núm. 2 (2016) ISSN: 0079-8215 EISSN: 2339-9171 (p. 27-38) © Borja Antela-Bernárdez, 2016 – CC BY-NC-ND REVISTA DE PREHISTÒRIA I ANTIGUITAT DE LA MEDITERRÀNIA OCCIDENTAL JOURNAL OF WESTERN MEDITERRANEAN PREHISTORY AND ANTIQUITY DOI: 10.1344/Pyrenae2016.vol47num2.2 Poleis, Choras and spaces, from Civic to Royal. Spaces in the cities over Macedonian rule from Alexander the Great to Seleucus I Poleis, Choras y espacios, de cívicos a reales. Territorios en las ciudades bajo dominio macedonio de Alejandro Magno a Seleuco I BORJA ANTELA-BERNÁRDEZ Departament de Ciències de l’Antiguitat i l’Edat Mitjana. Facultat de Lletres. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Edifici B. Carrer de la Fortuna, E-08193 Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès) [email protected] The conquest of Asia by Alexander the Great led the Macedonian tradition to a new challenge in order to control and manage the landscape and its resources in the new territories. As far as these territories were spear-won lands, the usual perspective of the Argead Kingdom, itself a result of conquests, still had validity. Nevertheless, this Macedonian tradition must also conceal the Greek cities founded within the new Hellenistic Kingdoms, and also the native population. In order to understand the construction of relationships between royal and city spaces during Alexander’s rule and in the very early configuration of the Hellenistic Monarchies, the break between the Classical Poleis and the Hellenistic ones must be described, paying attention to the difference between the classical chora as city space and the new Hellenistic reality of the shared politiké and basiliké chora.
    [Show full text]
  • The Battle of Marathon: the Stunning Victory and Its Contribution to the Rise of Athens
    Studia Antiqua Volume 5 Number 2 Article 5 December 2007 The Battle of Marathon: The Stunning Victory and Its Contribution to the Rise of Athens Doug Marsh Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/studiaantiqua Part of the History Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Marsh, Doug. "The Battle of Marathon: The Stunning Victory and Its Contribution to the Rise of Athens." Studia Antiqua 5, no. 2 (2007). https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/studiaantiqua/vol5/iss2/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Studia Antiqua by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. The Battle of Marathon: The Stunning Victory and Its Contribution to the Rise of Athens Doug Marsh THENS had never before been faced with so great a threat as the approach APersian forces to the Greek mainland in 490 b.c.e. Angered by the insolence of Athens and Eretria, which had recently supplied aid to rebelling Ionian cities, the Persian king Darius dispatched his generals Datis and Ataphernes “with the charge to reduce Athens and Eretria to slavery and to bring the slaves back into his presence.” Both Herodotus and Plato saw this dispatch as a mere pretext to accomplish his true aim: to enslave all of Greece and Europe.1 He moved first against the Eretrians, “reputed to be amongst the noblest and most warlike of the Hellenes of that day (and they were numer- ous); but he conquered them all in three days.”2 Having accomplished his objective against Eretria, Darius next turned his gaze to Athens, leaving it and its citizens to decide whether they ought to attempt to resist their seemingly inevitable defeat.3 Faced with almost certain ruin, many Athenian generals did not wish to fight, “seeing that they were too few to fight with the army of the Medes.” With the voting generals evenly split between those for and against fighting, the deciding vote was to be cast by Callimachos, the polemarch.
    [Show full text]
  • Week 7: the Persians Wars
    Week 7: The Persians Wars Lecture 12, Marathon, Key Words Aryans Media Babylonia Lydia Persia Cyrus Achaemenid Armenia Syria Cappadocia Croesus Cambyses Egypt India Sudan Persian Gulf Darius Samos Polycrates Scythia Macedon Miltiades Danube Earth and Water Boeotia Chalcis Corinth Demaratus Cleruchs Aegina Ionian Rebellion Aristagoras Miletus Naxos Sardis Eretria Lade Hipparchus archon 496/5 Phrynichus Chersonnesus Piraeus Themistocles 1 Mardonias Thrace Mt. Athos Rapprochement Datis Artaphernes Delos Carystus Pheidippides Pan Carneia Arête Beach head Cavalry Archers Plataeans Herakleion Marshes Charadra Soros Cynosura Phaleron Dromoi Grundy Stoa Poikile Aeschylus Hastings Spanish Armada Neville Chamberlain Bertrand Russell Churchill Marlborough Holocaust Sophocles Euripides Aristophanes Socrates Plato Aristotle Phidias Parthenon Pericles Scientific Revolution Western Civilization Marathonomachoi 2 Chronological Table for Persian History and the Persian Wars 2000-1000 Indo-Iranians migrate from the Eurasian plains of south Russia, across the Caucasus Mountains and into upper-Mesopotamia; others move east of the Caspian Sea and into the Indus river valley (founders of the Aryan Sanskrit civilization). 1150-1000 Phrygians migrate from the Balkans into central Anatolia; spread of iron technology: early Iron Age (1150-550). 950 Phrygian kings establish capital at Gordium and unite Anatolian plateau. 900-612 Assyria dominates the Near East. 844 Assyrian records refer to the Iranian tribes, the Persians. 836 Assyrian records mention the Medes. 705-690 Phrygian power shattered by Cimmerians (Iranian or Thracian nomads, who swept over Asia Minor and Syria at the end of the 8th /early 7th century); Lydia becomes independent of Phrygia. 700-675 Medes coalesce into a united kingdom under the initiative of the Mede Deioces (Hdt.
    [Show full text]
  • The Persian Wars
    The Persian Wars The Limits of Empire And the Birth of a Greek World View Median Empire • Cyaxares: – Attacks Lydia in 590 BC. – On 28 May 585 BC. the war ends. • Astyages (585-550 BC.) – Married Aryenis in 585 BC. – Gave Mandane to Cambyses I before 580 BC. – Deserted by his troops and defeated by his grandson, Cyrus, in 550 BC. Cyrus the Great • King of Anshan in 560 BC. • Attacked Media in 550 BC. • Defeated Croesus of Lydia in 547/6 BC. • Defeated Babylon in 539 BC. • Died in 530 BC. attacking the Massagetae The Persian Empire Cambyses • King of Babylon by 27 March, 538 BC. • Great King in Sept, 530. • Invaded Egypt in 525. • Cambyses was “not in his right mind, but mad” (Hdt.3.25). • Died accidentally in 522 BC. • Succeeded by Smerdis, March 522 • Smerdis killed September 522 BC Darius I • Two years of rebellions: consolidated power by 520 BC. • Reorganization into 20 satrapies • Invaded Scythia via Europe in 513 • Satrapy in Europe, Skudra (Thrace) • Construction of Persepolis • 507: Accepted ‘Earth and Water’ from Athens. Empire of Darius I Persia in the Aegean The Ionian Revolt • Aristagoras, Tyrant of Cyzicus and Miletus – Convinced Persians to invade Naxos – Four month siege failed in 499 – Aristagoras and Histiaeus launch revolt of the Ionians Ionian Revolt • Cleomenes refused to participate • Athens contributed 20 ships – “Perhaps it is easier to fool a crowd…” (Hdt. V.97). – Sardis sacked, the temple of Cybele burned. – Ionian army defeated near Ephesus – Athenian aid withdrawn – Aristagoras killed in Thrace Ionian Revolt Persian Response • 498 • Took Byzantium, Chalcedon, the Troad, Lamponium, Lemnos and Imbros – Defeated the Ionian army at Ephesus – Took Clazomenae and Cyme • 497-494 – Besieged Miletus and campaigned in that area • 494 BC.
    [Show full text]
  • The Themistocles Naval Decree of 483/2 BCE and the Greek Referendum of 2015: a Comparative Analysis of Choice Set Under Direct Democracy Procedures
    Munich Personal RePEc Archive The Themistocles Naval Decree of 483/2 BCE and the Greek Referendum of 2015: A comparative analysis of choice set under direct democracy procedures Economou, Emmanouel/Marios/Lazaros and Kyriazis, Nicholas and Metaxas, Theodore University of Thessaly, Department of Economics, University of Thessaly, Department of Economics, University of Thessaly, Department of Economics 15 June 2015 Online at https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/76421/ MPRA Paper No. 76421, posted 26 Jan 2017 15:32 UTC The Themistocles Naval Decree of 483/2 BCE and the Greek Referendum of 2015: A comparative analysis of choice set under direct democracy procedures Emmanouil M.L. Economou1, Nicholas C. Kyriazis2 and Theodore Metaxas3 1,2,3 University of Thessaly, Department of Economics Korai 43 PC: 383 33 Volos, Thessaly, Greece, Emmanouil M.L. Economou () e-mail: [email protected] Abstract: In the present essay we examine decision-making and choice under direct democracy procedures, focusing on two famous examples: Themistocles’ Naval Law of 483/2 BCE and modern Greece’s referendum of June 2015. They concerned, in a broad sense, the choice between the finance of public good(s) versus the increase in available personal income. We analyse the similarities and differences in the institutional setting, the means available for discussion and consensus building and the actual outcomes, which were different: in ancient Athens the outcome was in favour of the “public good” defense and in modern Greece, it was of no consequence since the final actual outcome was contrary to the referendum. Lastly, we offer some thoughts regarding the different outcomes, which were dependent on the specific perceptions of each issue, the possibility of disaggregation of choice elements, the time horizon and historic context and the perception of citizens-voters, as to the “quality” of their government.
    [Show full text]