DOCSLIB.ORG

Convention, Transition, and Intervention in Plato's Lysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Convention, Transition, and Intervention in Plato's Lysis THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO BETWEEN THE HERMS: CONVENTION, TRANSITION, AND INTERVENTION IN PLATO’S LYSIS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE DIVISION OF THE HUMANITIES IN THE CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY BY MICHAEL NICHOLAS GOTTARDO CREMA CHICAGO, ILLINOIS JUNE 2018 Copyright 2018 by Michael Crema All Rights Reserved TO NORA καλὰ κἀγαθὰ TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………………………………………….vii Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...viii Introduction: A ‘Transitional Dialogue᾽ or a Dialogue about Transitions?....……...…….....1 (1) The Argument of the Dissertation………………………………………………………………………………9 (2) Synopsis of Chapters………………………………………………………………………………………….……14 Part I Chapter One: Conventional Athenian Conceptions of Love and Friendship………………22 (1) Conventional Ἔρως………………………………………………………………………………………………....23 (2) Conventional Φιλία........................................................................................................................................35 (3) The Role of Utility in Athenian Conceptions of Love and Friendship………………..…………47 (4) Socrates as Lover and Friend…………………...……………………………………...……………...............57 Chapter Two: The Prologue (203a-207d) and the Dramatic Structure of the Lysis…..59 (1) Transitions and Two Lovers…………………………………………………………………………………….62 (2) Hippothales’ Erotic Love for Lysis……………………..………..………………………………...................65 (3) Lysis’ and Menexenus’ Friendship………………………………………………………..………………..…71 (4) The Problems of the Prologue……………………………………………………………………....................74 (5) The Seeds of a Socratic Solution...............................................................................................................79 Chapter Three: An Erotic Education (207d-210d)……………………………………………………..86 (1) Socrates’ Conversation with Lysis…………………………….………………………..…………………....89 iv (2) Two Questions Concerning Socrates’ Demonstration…………………………………..……………98 (3) A Deflationary Reading…..……….……………………………………………………………………………..102 (4) Towards a New Interpretation...............................................................................................................105 (5) Socrates’ Argumentative Strategy………………………………………………………………………..…109 (6) Action and Argument................................................................................……………………………..……114 Part II Chapter Four: The Uses and Abuses of Convention (210e-213d)………….……………...….117 (1) A Socratic Interlude…………………………………………………………………………………………….…119 (2) Who is the Friend?.......................................................................................................................................125 (3) Is Socrates Engaging in Eristics?.....………………………….…………………………………………...…130 (4) The Problems of Convention: Part I………………………………………………………………………..135 (5) Beginning Again from Bedrock…………………………………………………………………………..…..142 Chapter Five: Conventional Wisdom (213e-216b).……………………………………………….…144 (1) A ‘Turning’ to the Guides in Wisdom……………………………………………..…………………….….146 (2) The Views of the Wise…………………………………………………………………………………………....150 (3) Two Questions……………………………………………………………………………………………………....158 (4) A Refutation Ad Absurdum?.....................................................................................………………….......159 (5) The Problems of Convention: Part II....................................................................................................166 (6) An Erotic Reawakening……………………………………………………………………………………...…..171 Chapter Six: The Limits of Convention (216c-221d)……………………….…………………….…174 (1) The Intermediate as Friend……………………………………………………...…………………………....177 v (2) Socrates’ Divinely-Inspired Account...…………....…...…………………………………………………..179 (3) The Remedial Model of Friendship………………………………………………………………...............182 (4) Socrates’ Critique……………...………………………………………...…………………………….…………..186 (5) Interpreting Socrates’ Critique…………………………………………………………………...………….193 (6) A Rejection of Convention?………………………………………………………………………………….....202 Chapter Seven: A Socratic Departure (221e-223b)………………………………...........................204 (1) The ‘Οἰκεῖον’ as Object of Desire and Socrates’ Inference….……………………………………..206 (2) The Final Aporia……………………………………………………………………………………………………216 (3) Is the Φίλος Indefinable?..........................................................................................................................221 (4) The Problem of Erotic Transition…………………………………………………………...……………....225 (5) Loving Another Philosophically in the Lysis…...……………………………………………………….230 Appendix: The Lysis’ Place in the Platonic Corpus………………………..………………………….234 (1) Locating the Lysis………………………………………………………………………………………………….236 (2) The Object of Φιλία…………………………………………………………………………………………….....245 (3) Desiderative Failure in the Lysis………………………………………………………………………….....254 (4) Living in the Lysis.........................................................................................................................................264 Bibliography........................................................................................................................................................266 vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I could not have completed this dissertation without the help of numerous people, but a few deserve particular mention. I would like to thank my co-chairs, Gabriel Richardson Lear and Martha Nussbaum, for sticking with me through the tough times and helping me to see this project to its completion. I will always be grateful for their support and kindness. In my estimation, as good of scholars as they are, they are even better human beings. Without the love and support of my family, none of this would have been possible. Two members in particular have been an undying source of strength: my mother, Mary, and my wife, Nora. This dissertation is as much their accomplishment as it is mine. vii ABSTRACT Plato’s Lysis is a dialogue thematically structured around the notion of transitions. Yet, despite these structural features, the theme of transitions has rarely been mentioned in discussion of the dialogue’s dramatic and philosophical content. When the term ‘transition’ has arisen at all, it has either been with reference to the Lysis’ place within in the larger Platonic corpus as a ‘transitional’ or so-called ‘Socratic’ dialogue, or even more often, in connection with its odd status within this subset of Plato’s works. To be sure, the Lysis has much in common with these other transitional or Socratic dialogues. Yet unlike these dialogues, the Lysis seems uniquely burdened with the unfortunate distinction of having a ‘transitional problem’. It appears to be caught, or ‘lost in transition’ as it were, between two subject matters: ἔρως (erotic love) and φιλία (friendship). In recent years, a reevaluation of the Lysis has yielded fresh attempts to discern a unified line of argument from what appears, on the surface, a series of failed attempts to define who, or what, is a φίλος (friend). Yet these renewed efforts to unveil the coherence of the Lysis have done little to dull its reputation for intractability. Even among Plato’s works, over which interpretative disagreement is of course nothing new, the Lysis nevertheless stands out. Few dialogues, if any, have yielded such diametrically opposing interpretations. What can account for this predicament? In large part, I argue, it stems from a lack of clarity over the background against which Socrates is arguing in the dialogue. Despite the extensive scholarship devoted to the subject area over the past thirty-plus years, conventional ancient Greek views of ἔρως and φιλία remain thorny issues. Did the classical Greeks understand familial relations as a form of φιλία? To what extent did the notions of the useful (τὸ χρήσιμον) and beneficial (τὸ ὠφἐλιμον) play a role, either viii implicitly or explicitly, in their ordinary understandings of erotic and friendly love? And how exactly did they understand the relation between ἔρως and φιλία? However we are supposed to understand the answers to these and related questions, one thing that is evident is that the dialogue itself clearly seems meant as an attempt to resolve some problem or problems concerning ἔρως, φιλία, or both. The one ⎯ and perhaps only ⎯ thing commentators have unanimously agreed upon is that it can hardly be an accident that, in addition to referring to the dialogue’s namesake, ‘Lysis’ means ‘solution’, which in turn derives from the verb λύω or ‘to loosen’. Most readings have taken this title to signify the dialogue’s dramatization of Socrates’ attempt to ‘loosen’ or liberate his youthful interlocutors from conventional conceptions of erotic, familial, and friendly relations that are revealed to be problematic. Yet, while this sense of ‘loosening’ as liberation is no doubt an important theme in the Lysis, the shared shortcoming of these readings, I will contend, lies in their failure to take account of deeper sense in which the dialogue’s title signifies a ‘loosening’. Exactly how the youths are liberated from these conventional conceptions can only be understood as a consequence of the dialogue’s even more basic attempt to ‘loosen’ the conventional notions of ἔρως and φιλία themselves; a sense of ‘loosening’ that involves a blurring of the lines between these two notions. I argue that the dialogue’s dramatic details and the primary sense of ‘loosening’ that they invoke indicate a unifying argumentative structure underlying the Lysis. What this structure suggests is that more than merely a
Load more

Recommended publications
  • PLATO's SYMPOSIUM J
    50 ccn~ PLATO'S SYMPOSIUM j - - -- ________j e Library of Liberal Arts PLATO'S SYMPOSIUM Tran lated by BENJAMIN JOWETT With an Introduction by FULTON H. ANDERSON Professor of Philosophy, University of Toronto THE LIBERAL ARTS PRESS NEW YORK CONTENTS SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY .. .... ................................... ......... ... ........... 6 EDITOR'S INTRODUCTION ................... ............................................. 7 SYMPOSIUM APOLLODORUS 13 THE SPEECH OF PHAEDRUS ...... .......................... .......................... .. 19 THE SPEECH OF PAU ANIAS ................. ... ................................. ... .. 21 THE SPEECH OF ERYXIMACHUS 27 THE SPEECH OF ARISTOPHAN E .. ............................... .................. 30 THE SPEECH OF AGATHON ............ .............................................. .. 35 THE SPEECH OF SocRATES ................................ .. ................... ..... .. 39 THE SPEECH OF ALCIBIADES ................. ............... ... ........... ...... .... .. 55 8 PLATO INTROD CTION 9 crescendo, and culminates in the report by Socrates on wi dom and epistemology, upon all of which the Symposium ha bearing, learned from the "wi e" woman Diotima. are intertwined, we m ay set down briefly a few of the more general The dialogue i a "reported" one. Plato himself could not have principles which are to be found in it author's many-sided thought. been present at the original party. (What went on there was told The human soul, a cording to Plato, is es entially in motion. time and time again about Athens.) He was a mere boy when it It is li fe and the integration of living functions. A dead soul is a con­ took place. Nor could the narrator Apollodorus have been a guest; _lladiction in terms. Man throughout his whole nature is erotically he was too young at the time. The latter got his report from motivated. His "love" or desire i manifest in three mutually in­ Aristodemus, a guest at the banquet.
    [Show full text]
  • The Roles of Solon in Plato's Dialogues
    The Roles of Solon in Plato’s Dialogues Dissertation Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Samuel Ortencio Flores, M.A. Graduate Program in Greek and Latin The Ohio State University 2013 Dissertation Committee: Bruce Heiden, Advisor Anthony Kaldellis Richard Fletcher Greg Anderson Copyrighy by Samuel Ortencio Flores 2013 Abstract This dissertation is a study of Plato’s use and adaptation of an earlier model and tradition of wisdom based on the thought and legacy of the sixth-century archon, legislator, and poet Solon. Solon is cited and/or quoted thirty-four times in Plato’s dialogues, and alluded to many more times. My study shows that these references and allusions have deeper meaning when contextualized within the reception of Solon in the classical period. For Plato, Solon is a rhetorically powerful figure in advancing the relatively new practice of philosophy in Athens. While Solon himself did not adequately establish justice in the city, his legacy provided a model upon which Platonic philosophy could improve. Chapter One surveys the passing references to Solon in the dialogues as an introduction to my chapters on the dialogues in which Solon is a very prominent figure, Timaeus- Critias, Republic, and Laws. Chapter Two examines Critias’ use of his ancestor Solon to establish his own philosophic credentials. Chapter Three suggests that Socrates re- appropriates the aims and themes of Solon’s political poetry for Socratic philosophy. Chapter Four suggests that Solon provides a legislative model which Plato reconstructs in the Laws for the philosopher to supplant the role of legislator in Greek thought.
    [Show full text]
  • In Dialogue with the Greeks 1St Edition Kindle
    IN DIALOGUE WITH THE GREEKS 1ST EDITION PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Rush Rhees | 9781351964586 | | | | | In Dialogue with the Greeks 1st edition PDF Book Become an author Sign up as a reader Sign in. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Worlds Apart. This article needs additional citations for verification. Consequentialism Deontology Virtue. Ancient Philosophy. Notify us with 7 days of receiving, and we will offer a full refund without reservation! Kenklies, Karsten Minor wear and tears to head and foot of spine and some slight wear to spine edges. More information about this seller Contact this seller 8. Nabu Press, All Plato's writing, except for The Apology and the Letters, is in dialogue form. Social gadfly Socratic dialogue Socratic intellectualism Socratic irony Socratic method Socratic paradox Socratic questioning. Subjects; Plato. More information about this seller Contact this seller 1. I [69], , [1] o Vol. Plato wrote approximately 30 dialogues, in most of which Socrates is the main character. The translations of Meno, Laches and Euthydemus are included here for the first time. First Edition Thus. Wright, M. First Edition in this Format. Recco, Gregory and Eric Sanday eds. Socratic dialogue remained a popular format for expressing arguments and drawing literary portraits of those who espouse them. In some dialogues Plato's main character is not Socrates but someone from outside of Athens. Plato's Laws : Force and Truth in Politics. It is also said to be the longest day of the year, allowing for the densely packed twelve chapters. Details: Collation: Complete with all pages; 2 volumes o Vol. Cooper in Plato, Complete Works.
    [Show full text]
  • Phi 260: History of Philosophy I Prof
    Phi 260: History of Philosophy I Prof. Brandon C. Look University of Kentucky Spring 2007 Plato’s Symposium Although we will be looking at the Symposium as work of philosophy, its literary qualities should not be ignored. It can easily be read as a Comedy in three acts (see below), with a prologue (the conversation between Apollodorus and his friend) and an epilogue (Alcibiades’ drunken, tragic (?) account of his love). Consider also the narrative complexity of the work. By the time we get to Diotima’s speech, we have the following levels of narration: Plato says that Apollodorus says that Aristodemus says that Socrates says that Diotima says…Why is there so much distance placed within the narration? Is it supposed to show us how far away the Truth lies? The six speeches given by the attendants can be group into three pairs: Phaedrus and Pausanias; Eryximachus and Aristophanes; and Agathon and Socrates. 1st speech: Phaedrus • There is no greater good for a young boy than a gentle lover, and for a lover a boy to love. • Consider Phaedrus’ suggestion regarding the nature of the relation between lover and beloved: “if a man in love is found doing something shameful… then nothing would give him more pain than being seen by the boy he loves. … If only we could have cities and armies of lovers…” (178d-179a) So, gays in the military would actually be a good thing, right? • Gods honor virtue most highly when it belongs to Love. (180b) 2nd speech: Pausanias • There are two kinds of love: Urania, or Heavenly Aphrodite, and Pandemos, or Common Aphrodite.
    [Show full text]
  • The Historicity of Plato's Apology of Socrates
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Master's Theses Theses and Dissertations 1946 The Historicity of Plato's Apology of Socrates David J. Bowman Loyola University Chicago Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses Part of the Classical Literature and Philology Commons Recommended Citation Bowman, David J., "The Historicity of Plato's Apology of Socrates" (1946). Master's Theses. 61. https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses/61 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 1946 David J. Bowman !HE HISTORICITY OP PLATO'S APOLOGY OF SOCRATES BY DA.VID J. BOWJWf~ S.J• .l. !BESIS SUBMITTED Ilf PARTIAL FULFILIJIE.NT OF THB: R}gQUIRE'IIENTS POR THE DEGREE OF IIA.STER OF ARTS Ill LOYOLA UlfiVERSITY JULY 1946 -VI'fA. David J. Bowman; S.J•• was born in Oak Park, Ill1no1a, on Ma7 20, 1919. Atter b!a eleaentar7 education at Ascension School# in Oak Park, he attended LoJola AcademJ ot Chicago, graduat1DS .from. there in June, 1937. On September 1, 1937# he entered the Sacred Heart Novitiate ot the SocietJ ot Jesus at Milford~ Ohio. Por the tour Jear• he spent there, he was aoademicallJ connected with Xavier Univeraitr, Cincinnati, Ohio. In August ot 1941 he tranaterred to West Baden College o.f Lorol& Universit7, Obicago, and received the degree ot Bachelor o.f Arts with a major in Greek in Deo.aber, 1941.
    [Show full text]
  • Plato's Symposium: the Ethics of Desire
    Plato’s Symposium: The Ethics of Desire FRISBEE C. C. SHEFFIELD 1 Contents Introduction 1 1. Ero¯s and the Good Life 8 2. Socrates’ Speech: The Nature of Ero¯s 40 3. Socrates’ Speech: The Aim of Ero¯s 75 4. Socrates’ Speech: The Activity of Ero¯s 112 5. Socrates’ Speech: Concern for Others? 154 6. ‘Nothing to do with Human AVairs?’: Alcibiades’ Response to Socrates 183 7. Shadow Lovers: The Symposiasts and Socrates 207 Conclusion 225 Appendix : Socratic Psychology or Tripartition in the Symposium? 227 References 240 Index 249 Introduction In the Symposium Plato invites us to imagine the following scene: A pair of lovers are locked in an embrace and Hephaestus stands over them with his mending tools asking: ‘What is it that you human beings really want from each other?’ The lovers are puzzled, and he asks them again: ‘Is this your heart’s desire, for the two of you to become parts of the same whole, and never to separate, day or night? If that is your desire, I’d like to weld you together and join you into something whole, so that the two of you are made into one. Look at your love and see if this is what you desire: wouldn’t this be all that you want?’ No one, apparently, would think that mere sex is the reason each lover takes such deep joy in being with the other. The soul of each lover apparently longs for something else, but cannot say what it is. The beloved holds out the promise of something beyond itself, but that something lovers are unable to name.1 Hephaestus’ question is a pressing one.
    [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]
  • Applying the Socratic Method to the Problem Solving Process
    American Journal of Business Education – August 2009 Volume 2, Number 5 Socratic Problem-Solving In The Business World Evan Peterson, University Of Detroit Mercy, USA ABSTRACT Accurate and effective decision-making is one of the most essential skills necessary for organizational success. The problem-solving process provides a systematic means of effectively recognizing, analyzing, and solving a dilemma. The key element in this process is critical analysis of the situation, which can be executed by a taking a Socratic approach to the situation. Applying the Socratic Method to the problem-solving model ensures a well-rounded and versatile analysis. Keywords: Problem-solving process, decision- making, critical analysis, Socratic Method INTRODUCTION he sheer complexity of today’s business organization is rivaled only by the complexity of the business environment in which it operates. The permutation of complexity and exacting time constraints companies and individuals face in making vital decisions involving thousands of people Tand millions of dollars can seem more daunting than storming the beaches of Normandy. However, all hope is not lost. The anxiety, along with the blood, sweat, and tears that come along with difficult decision-making can be reduced by having a clear, time-tested plan of attack that can be applied to the problem situation. The problem-solving model is one such plan of attack, for it provides a framework that an individual decision-maker or group of decision-makers can follow to reach a feasible solution to the problem. Situational analysis is the bread and butter of the problem-solving model, for it goes hand-in-hand with each step of the model.
    [Show full text]
  • |||GET||| Euthyphro 1St Edition
    EUTHYPHRO 1ST EDITION DOWNLOAD FREE Plato | 9781605977409 | | | | | Euthyphro dilemma Tsedeq is something that happens here, and can be seen, and recognized, and known. Practical Ethics 3d ed. Related topics Criticism of religion Ethics in religion Exegesis Faith and rationality History of religions Religion and science Religious philosophy Theology. Roughly, it is the view that there are independent moral standards: some actions are right or wrong in themselves, independent of God's commands. Euthyphro's final suggestion is that holiness is a kind of trading with Euthyphro 1st edition gods, where we give them sacrifices and they grant our prayers. Socrates points out that if both options were true, they together would yield a vicious circle, with the gods loving the pious because it is the Euthyphro 1st edition, and the pious being the pious because the gods love it. Positions Aesthetics Formalism Institutionalism Aesthetic response. At this point the dilemma surfaces. Early life. Euthyphro's first definition of piety is what he is doing now, that is, prosecuting his father for manslaughter 5d. Clearly, the answer is again the latter, something becomes beloved when it is loved. Something is a meter long inasmuch as it is the same length as the standard meter bar, and likewise, something is good inasmuch as it approximates God. Essentialists apply labels to things because they possess certain essential qualities that make them what they are. Is something "beloved" in and of itself like being big or redor does it become beloved when it is loved by someone? Emrys Westacott is a professor Euthyphro 1st edition philosophy at Alfred University.
    [Show full text]
  • Participation and Predication in Plato's Middle Dialogues Author(S): R
    Participation and Predication in Plato's Middle Dialogues Author(s): R. E. Allen Source: The Philosophical Review, Vol. 69, No. 2, (Apr., 1960), pp. 147-164 Published by: Duke University Press on behalf of Philosophical Review Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2183501 Accessed: 10/08/2008 14:32 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=duke. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. http://www.jstor.org PARTICIPATION AND PREDICATION IN PLATO'S MIDDLE DIALOGUES* I PROPOSE in this paper to examine three closely related issues in the interpretation of Plato's middle dialogues: the nature of Forms, of participation, and of predication.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lesson of Plato's Symposium
    University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 2005 Eros, Paideia and Arête: The Lesson of Plato’s Symposium Jason St. John Oliver Campbell University of South Florida Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd Part of the American Studies Commons Scholar Commons Citation Campbell, Jason St. John Oliver, "Eros, Paideia and Arête: The Lesson of Plato’s Symposium" (2005). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/2806 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Eros, Paideia and Arête: The Lesson of Plato’s Symposium by Jason St. John Oliver Campbell A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Masters of Arts Department of Philosophy College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Major Professor: Joanne B. Waugh Ph.D. Charles Guignon, Ph.D. Martin Schöenfeld, Ph.D. Date of Approval: April 14, 2005 Keywords: Ancient Greece, Socrates, Education, Pedagogy, Sunousia © 2005, Jason St. John Oliver Campbell Acknowledgments I wish to extend a debt of gratitude to Professor Joanne B. Waugh for her continued dedication throughout the completion of this thesis. Table of Contents Abstract ii General Introduction 1 Chapter One 4 Introduction 4 Mousikē: The First Component
    [Show full text]
  • Interpv31issue1 1 29 04 (Page 1)
    Volume 31 Issue 1 Interpretation, Inc. 11367-1597 U.S.A. Flushing, N.Y. Queens College 31/1 A JOURNAL OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY Interpretation Fall 2003 3 Ronald Hamowy Two Whig Views of the American Revolution: Adam Ferguson’s Response to Richard Price Discussion: 37 Patrick Coby Mind Your Own Business: The Trouble with Justice in Plato’s Republic 59 Sean Steel Katabasis in Plato’s Symposium Book Reviews: 85 Martin Yaffe The Beginning of Wisdom: Reading Genesis by Leon R. Kass 93 Mera Flaumenhaft Colloquial Hermeneutics: Eva Brann’s Odyssey 103 Wayne Ambler Our Attraction to Justice Devin Stauffer The Idea of Enlightenment: Hanover, PAHanover, 17331 109 Fall 2003 Fall U.S. POSTAGE U.S. POSTAGE Non-Profit Org. A Post-Mortem Study by Permit No. 4 Robert C. Bartlett PAID A JOURNAL OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY Editor-in-Chief Hilail Gildin, Dept. of Philosophy, Queens College Associate Editor Erik Dempsey General Editors Seth G. Benardete (d. 2001) • Charles E. Butterworth • Hilail Gildin • Leonard Grey • Robert Horwitz (d. 1978) • Howard B. White (d. 1974) Consulting Editors Christopher Bruell • Joseph Cropsey • Ernest L. Fortin (d. 2002) • John Hallowell (d. 1992) • Harry V. Jaffa • David Lowenthal • Muhsin Mahdi • Harvey C. Mansfield • Arnaldo Momigliano (d. 1987) • Michael Oakeshott (d. 1990) • Ellis Sandoz • Leo Strauss (d. 1973) • Kenneth W. Thompson International Editors Terence E. Marshall • Heinrich Meier Editors Wayne Ambler • Maurice Auerbach • Robert Bartlett • Fred Baumann • Amy Bonnette • Eric Buzzetti • Susan Collins • Patrick Coby • Elizabeth C’de Baca Eastman • Thomas S. Engeman • Edward J. Erler • Maureen Feder-Marcus • Pamela K. Jensen • Ken Masugi • Carol M.
    [Show full text]