Definitions and Paradigms: Laches' First Definition

Phronesis 49 (2):143-168 (2004)
Abstract
Laches' first definition is rejected because it is somehow formally inadequate, but it is not clear exactly how this is so. On my interpretation, the failure of this definition cannot be explained by reference to the distinction between universals and particulars. Rather, it provides a paradigm of courage, which is inadequate because it fails to make clear how it is to be projected into other, non-paradigmatic cases. The definition is interesting because it articulates essential elements of the dominant moral tradition, including both its normative content (it is is too conservative and aristocratic) and its form (it is sustained by a certain limited canon of ideals, idols, and images of excellence). Socrates' elenchus of this definition thus amounts to a challenge to this tradition
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1163/1568528041475158
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 31,812
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Manliness in Plato's Laches.T. F. Morris - 2009 - Dialogue 48 (3):619.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total downloads
38 ( #154,433 of 2,231,542 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #120,133 of 2,231,542 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature