Homeric Resonances

Abstract

This “Homeric” appreciation of Catherine Zuckert's Plato's Philosophers focuses on the significance of the revised chronology for reading the Platonic dialogues and how this changes the conventional understanding of the relation between Plato and Socrates: Plato become Socrates' biographer, not his replacement.     

Plato's Socrates: One Among Many,but Preeminent

Abstract

Catherine H. Zuckert has written a monumental work on Plato's corpus that offers a new framework for understanding his dialogues. Not only does she trace Plato's presentation of Socrates' development over time, but she also shows how Plato uses other philosophic interlocutors to contribute to his philosophic project. Central themes include Socrates' discovery of erôs, the unity of virtue, and the place of teaching in philosophy, and the relation between intelligible ideas and sensible experience.     

De Quelques présents latins

Plato and Xenophon ‐ contrary to Dover's interpretation of the Clouds ‐ provide the background to Aristophanes’ caricature of Socrates: viewed against that background, Aristophanes’ jokes in the Clouds lose their obscurity, his comedy gains on poignancy and artistic unity; Plato's and Xenophon's Socrates regains historicity.     

Teaching Political Science in China: Observations and Suggestions from a Foreign Visitor

Abstract

In responding to the other participants in the Symposium on Plato's Philosophers I attempt to clarify the reasons for, and the results of, my attempt to bring out the interrelations among the dialogues in order to determine what Plato thought. Recognizing that the indications of the dramatic dates of some the dialogues are controversial, I argue that the dates point to an over-arching narrative–the story of the rise, development, and limitations of Socratic philosophy. Plato uses his other philosophers—the Athenian Stranger, Parmenides, Timaeus, and the Eleatic Stranger—to bring out the problems that gave rise to Socratic philosophy and the limitations of his responses. Plato makes Socrates his “hero,” because Socrates provides the best account of the human beings who engage in the search for wisdom. By contrasting him with the other philosophers, Plato dramatizes the insoluble problems that make philosophy always a search for wisdom.     

Cropsey on Plato and the Unity of Philosophy

Abstract

Cropsey's book, Plato's World, contains his longest and most sustained reflections on a set of Platonic dialogues, but it is not the first work he published on Plato or the last he intended to write. His last collection of essays, On Humanity's Intensive Introspection, shows that in his writings on Plato Cropsey was attempting to answer a broader question: What is philosophy?     

Two Theories of Toleration: Locke versus Mill

Abstract

In her book, Zuckert presents a new interpretation of the Platonic corpus based on the internal dramatic chronology of all the dialogues. According to Zuckert, once the dialogues are ordered in this way, then it is possible to understand Plato's story of the development of Socratic philosophy, especially in relation to the other non-Socratic philosophers: Parmenides, Timaeus, the Eleatic Stranger, and the Athenian Stranger. For Plato, Socratic philosophy is superior to these other types of philosophy because of its acute understanding of both the limitations and the erotic character of human knowledge. It is only with his account of erôs in the Symposium that Socrates was able to account for the ways in which the eternal and intelligible ideas of the noble, the just, and the good could come to be exemplified in the life of mortal human beings, via the cooperative practice of philosophic virtue.     

In Praise of Recklessness

Abstract

Catherine Zuckert's Plato's Philosophers argues that the central concern of the Platonic dialogues, read as a single corpus, is to examine the character of philosophy as represented in the activities of five different Platonic characters. The activity of philosophy is most clearly triangulated by showing the advantages and limitations of Socratic philosophy as set against the practices of others laying claim to that title. This article endorses Zuckert's interpretation while raising questions concerning Socrates' eventual philosophic status, the relationship between philosophy and irony, and the standing of philosophy as a social practice.     

Some Thoughts about Standardized Teaching Evaluations

Abstract

Mark Blitz begins his book Plato’s Political Philosophy by making a strong case for Plato’s continuing relevance to us. The book’s three parts are centered on three dialogues of special importance to Blitz’s topic: the Laws, the Republic, and the Statesman. Blitz also pulls into his discussion other dialogues that illuminate the teachings of these three central ones. Blitz’s analyses of the dialogues are illuminating. He lays out the dialogues’ intellectual pathways and gives us an important sense of their meaning. In addition to his examination of particular dialogues, Blitz also gives us rich discussions of four key concepts that underlie and are found throughout Plato’s works: nature, wonder, perplexity, and laughter. The book lacks a deeper discussion of the view that we should be guided by nature in determining our ends. Also missing is a better appreciation of both the challenge posed to philosophy by piety, and the attraction of institutions of modern republics. And we could have a better understanding of the limits of a rational politics in the Statesman. Plato has difficulty finding a place for the philosopher in the city, and this could come through more clearly in Blitz’s account. But these shortcomings are minor when set against the book’s strengths. Its synoptic analyses can help guide those new to Plato. But there is also much here for mature scholars in Blitz’s detailed and careful exploration of Plato’s more important concepts and arguments.     

Machiavelli: A Socratic?

Erica Benner and Leo Strauss have recently challenged the reigning consensus that, having concentrated on politics, Machiavelli was not a philosopher. Readers did not always consider Machiavelli's work to be unphilosophical; and whether a commentator considers Machiavelli to be a “philosopher” depends on his or her understanding of what a philosopher is. Neither Benner nor Strauss takes the activities and studies of professors of philosophy in universities today to be definitive. Instead, they look to an older tradition both describe as “Socratic.” Benner rests her argument primarily on Machiavelli's references to Xenophon, Plato, and Plutarch. Unfortunately, Machiavelli's references to the works of Xenophon and Plato do not include those that feature Socrates. Strauss points out the similarities between Socrates and Machiavelli's emphasis on the political and their appeal to the young, but he concludes that, although Machiavelli is a “political philosopher,” his use of philosophy to serve the desires of the demos means that he is not a “Socratic.”     

Al-Fārābī’s Cave: Aristotle’s Logic and the Ways of Socrates and Thrasymachus

In his commentary on Aristotle’s Rhetoric al-Fārābī harmonizes Plato and Aristotle in terms of philosophic education by ordering Aristotle’s eight logical works onto Plato’s famous image of the cave. He represents the way out of the cave with Aristotle’s four logical works of ascent (Categories, On Interpretation, Prior Analytics, and Posterior Analytics) and the return into the cave through Aristotle’s four logical works of the descent (Topics, Sophistical Refutations, Rhetoric, and Poetics). Al-Fārābī’s image of ascent and descent also alludes to Socrates’ conception of protreptic education in Book VII of the Republic. In essence, protreptic education consists in the Socratic art that freely turns the soul from the images and political interpretations of things to being itself. In this essay I argue that for al-Fārābī the four logical works of ascent guide the soul to free itself from its habituations so as to contemplate real beings, particularly the good of one’s own soul and the souls of one’s fellow citizens. Yet the ruler needs to use the arts of “descent,” as demonstrated by Thrasymachus, in order to rule the city well. The way of Socrates consists of the logical methods used to come to possess knowledge of being, while the way of Thrasymachus comprises the methods of persuasion to habituate citizens and protect the philosophic quest for the truth. Al-Fārābī, I conclude, combines the way of Socrates and the way of Thrasymachus in order to show that both ways are useful and necessary for good governance.     

Philosophy as an Art of Dying

This essay proposes a close look at the tradition of martyr-philosophers in the Western world (Socrates, Hypatia, Giordano Bruno, Edith Stein, Jan Pato?ka) and advances the claim that the death of these people has a distinct philosophical significance. For various reasons, these philosophers place themselves in limit-situations where they cannot use words anymore to express themselves, but have to turn their own flesh into a radical means of expression. Their dying thus becomes an extension of their work, and the image of their violent deaths comes to be regarded as an inseparable part of their heritage. First, I discuss Socrates as the founder of the tradition of “philosophical deaths” in the West; his gradual “taming” of death in Plato's Apology is discussed in some detail. I then introduce a modern case of “Socratic death,” that of Jan Pato?ka (1907–77). Finally, I map out the cultural and social mechanisms, as well as some of the phenomenological preconditions, presupposed by the notion of “philosophy as an art of dying.”     

Capitalism,Christianity, America: Rethinking the Issues

Abstract

Appreciative of the points made by all four commentators, William Connolly seeks to clarify some issues and modify a few positions taken in his book Capitalism and Christianity, American Style (2008). Philip Goodchild's account of "resonance" is superb, but I hesitate over his tendency to argue that the demise of capitalism is inevitable. Catherine Keller deepens the theological issues pursued in my book, as she shows additional ways to open "theopoetic" connections between those who pursue deep, multidimensional pluralism. David Howarth makes important links between my position and that of Ernesto Laclau, and he joins me in resisting those who eschew engagement with the state as they fight off the neoliberal/evangelical machine. I use the occasion of this dialogue to explore further the relations between conceptions of immanence and those of transcendence. Kathy Ferguson admirably shows how the experience of grief by evangelical women opens a possible door to engagements of agonistic respect. In each engagement I try to follow some of the suggestions and to add a couple of my own.     

Instructions for contributors

ABSTRACT

This article deals with the application of Claude Lévi-Strauss's structural analysis of myths to the Hebrew Bible. By comparing the stories of Abraham and Moses with the epic of the Argonauts, and by comparing Plato's ideal State in the Laws with the laws and organisation of biblical Is-rael, I suggest that the books from Genesis to Kings were written by one sin-gle writer living during the Hellenistic era.     

Waller R. Newell,Tyrants: A History of Power,Injustice, and Terror

Waller Newell's historical typology of tyrants looks even more interesting from the philosophical perspective of Plato's Gorgias. Socrates pinpoints a blind spot typical of the reformer tyrant in Gorgias, whose success depends on his personal, not his principled, influence. Polus, the garden-variety tyrant, wants to acquire more and more with impunity, an old story with the usual bad ending. Callicles pushes furthest of all: it's only the exceptional individual like himself who steels himself to follow ideology to the bitter end. The Socratic rejoinders do not persuade the interlocutors, but they might serve to educate liberal democrats: some tyrants are just incurable.     

Methodism and the Rise of Political Correctness

Abstract

Does Aristotle's case for honorable statesmen endanger the case for democratic institutions and equal rights, as two critics contend? It had better not: democracies too need the guidance of a Mandela, an FDR, a Washington. Also, the ancient thinkers had their own doubts about grand ambition, seeking to cabin such types through education and moderate republics, including democratic republics. Also, the objection neglects the relativism, doctrinairism, and postmodernist disillusion that eventually undermined modern political philosophy. Might the old philosophers’ reasonableness, not least on the topic of leadership, be now indispensable to political science? After such points I address the other criticisms: have I not neglected the Biblical improvements on classical political science? Do I portray adequately Plato's analysis of that quintessential lover of power and glory, Alcibiades?     

Between the General and the Particular: Reminiscences of Plato's Timaeus in Piotr Rawicz's Le sang du ciel

Piotr Rawicz's novel Le sang du ciel depicts a Jewish protagonist, Boris, who manages to escape the Nazi genocide and, as a result, doubts his own legitimacy to bear witness to the other Jews' fate during that period. His difficult relationships with the Jewish community find expression in an intertextual construction, founded on the ontocosmology developed in Plato's Timaeus. Boris uses—and sometimes perverts—Plato's world vision both to measure his own inauthenticity and to define new ways of creating a state of "fusion" with the "beings" surrounding him. Another technique to overcome Boris's inability to testify is the use of a frame narrative, which, moreover, sheds new light on the protagonist's identity as a witness.     

Whose Theology? Which Theology?

Abstract

This is a response to Gareth Jones's critique of Changing Worlds, arguing that while this critique largely misunderstands the approach taken in the book, it does raise important questions about the prospect of war in the modern world. Crucial differences are identified in the use of theological rhetoric as a means of resolving differences about the legitimacy of war in the modern world.     

The Relevance of Cassirer and the Rewriting of Intellectual History

Summary

This essay aims to discuss the historiographical implications and premises of Peter Gordon's masterly book Continental Divide, in which he re-evaluates the Davos meeting between Ernst Cassirer and Martin Heidegger. This impressive reminder of the prospects of intellectual history deserves to be paid serious attention, particularly in European philosophy departments. Gordon's book exemplifies how problems of systematic philosophy can be clarified by a detour through history.

I want to highlight three aspects of Gordon's book that fundamentally transform and deepen our understanding of intellectual history in general and the Davos meeting in particular. First, I highlight one of the main merits of Gordon's study: his emphasis on the plurality behind the term ‘continental philosophy’. This opens up a whole new perspective on a seemingly well-known event within the history of twentieth-century philosophy. Second, I address Gordon's methodological premises, which challenge and fundamentally transform our understanding of intellectual history. Third, I attempt to summarise, from an intellectual history perspective, Gordon's argument about Cassirer's relevance. Here we are faced with the task of realigning and legitimising philosophy in a radically historicised world. To adumbrate the core of my comment I should say that I am thrilled by Gordon's book. I agree with nearly everything he says apart from his conclusions. In a closing remark I will try to explain the reasons for this surprising divergence.     

There is Something of One (God): Lacan and Political Theology

Abstract

For both Lacan and Badiou, Plato's Parmenides is a primary locus for the question of the One. Moreover, for both Lacan and Badiou, the One ultimately takes on political valence, as key to the problematics of representation and the discursive conditions of collectivity. However, unlike Badiou, Lacan's exploration of the question of One also passes through theology— through what I am calling "something of One God"— and I want to argue that it is only by bringing the One into explicit relationship with those monotheistic issues that we can fully understand its implications for analytic discourse and political life. Lacan's thinking on the "something of One" takes a necessary swerve back through a theological problematic, and in the process articulates the terms of a political theology, an essential conjunction of political and religious understandings of sovereignty, subjectivity and collectivity.