To be delivered at the 3d symposium platonicum
|Abstract||It is widely known that Plato seems to be committed in a number of dialogues to the view that all perfections are “united” — whether such unity is construed as identity, which doesn’t lack textual evidence, or, more probably, as some kind of mutual “supervenience”. (See for instance Laches 199e3-4, Alcib. I 114d-116d, Protag. 329c-333d & 349a-c. Whatever the solution to those interpretive problems is, what anyway can be ascertained is that, when writing the Statesman, our philosopher is keen on maintaining that not only is it not the case that all perfections are identical, but, moreover, some perfections do in fact clash with others, which means that a thing can possess one of them only to the extent it lacks the opposite perfection. However, as we’re going to see straight away, the Statesman’s main purpose and thrust is likely to be that of emphasizing the necessity of some unity among opposite qualities. The significance of such a contention can be set off against what will become the Aristotelian (and in effect the commonly received) view on the topic. In the Statesman Plato recognizes that in each case there is some desirable mean between the extremes, but where it lies changes according to circumstances. Trying to secure that convenient mean doesn’t debar us from loking upon the extremes under consideration as virtues or perfections themselves. Thus, when the Statesman is drawing towards its conclusion, the Foreigner abruptly brings up the issue of υπερβολην και την ελλειψιν (283c3-4), and thereby that of the art of measuring (η µετρητικη). Immediately the problem arises of the relations between the opposite extremes. In Theaet. 152d, 157a, 160b-c, it appears that Plato distinguishes relative from non-relative properties or determinations in the same way as he does between empirical, earthly, changeable things and the Forms. Yet in his later dialogues Plato is clearly committed to holding the view that the Forms themselves enter a number of relations, and even that some Forms partake of others. Since very early onwards he seems to have been concerned about some reciprocal relativity of opposite qualities (there are many places where such relativity is stressed, as Charm. 168b5-169a5, Phaed..|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|External links||This entry has no external links. Add one.|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
J. Tate (1954). Plato's Statesman J. B. Skemp: Plato's Statesman. A Translation of the Politicus of Plato, with Introductory Essays and Footnotes. Pp. 244. London: Routledge, 1952. Cloth, 28s. Net. [REVIEW] The Classical Review 4 (02):115-117.
Plato (1931). The Dialogues of Plato. London, H. Milford, Oxford University Press.
C. J. Rowe (ed.) (1995). Reading the Statesman: Proceedings of the Iii Symposium Platonicum. Academia Verlag.
George Harvey (2009). Technê and the Good in Plato's Statesman and Philebus. Journal of the History of Philosophy 47 (1):pp. 1-33.
R. M. Dancy (2004). Plato's Introduction of Forms. Cambridge University Press.
M. S. Lane (1998). Method and Politics in Plato's Statesman. Cambridge University Press.
M. R. Wright (2004). Symposium Platonicum V T. M. Robinson, L. Brisson (Edd.): Plato: Euthydemus, Lysis, Charmides. Proceedings of the V Symposium Platonicum . Pp. VI + 402. Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag, 2000. Cased. Isbn: 3-89665-143-. [REVIEW] The Classical Review 54 (02):322-.
Kenneth M. Sayre (2006). Metaphysics and Method in Plato's Statesman. Cambridge University Press.
Sherwin Klein (1988). Plato's Statesman and the Nature of Business Leadership: An Analysis From an Ethical Point of View. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 7 (4):283 - 294.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-03-06
Total downloads1 ( #291,125 of 722,752 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?