Peitho. Examina Antiqua
Not a member yet
232 research outputs found
Sort by
Divine Command and Socratic Piety in the Euthyphro
Get PDFWhile Socrates was in his own way a deeply religious man, the Euthyphro is often thought to provide a refutation of the divine command theory of morality: the theory that what is morally good is good because it is divinely approved. Socrates seems to suggest that what is holy or pious (ὅσιος) is pleasing to the gods because it is holy, and not holy because it pleases them. Thus the dialogue is sometimes presented as showing that what is morally good and bad must be independent of the divine will. I argue that matters are not so simple, since there are several ways in which the gods could help determine which acts are good, for instance, by disposing certain human affairs which are relevant to moral decisions. Moreover, Socrates suggests that he has obligations to the gods themselves, and these obligations would have to depend in part on what pleases them. It follows that the dilemma which Socrates poses to Euthyphro (pious because loved by the gods, or loved by the gods because pious) does not offer two mutually exclusive alternatives. There are various ways for the preferences of such gods to help determine which acts are adequate for moral praise or blame. It could therefore hardly be the case that religious doctrines, if true, are irrelevant to the content of morality. Knowledge of the gods’ preferences, if such knowledge were available, would be of importance to moral theory. Socrates himself does not deny this, nor should we.While Socrates was in his own way a deeply religious man, the Euthyphro is often thought to provide a refutation of the divine command theory of morality: the theory that what is morally good is good because it is divinely approved. Socrates seems to suggest that what is holy or pious (ὅσιος) is pleasing to the gods because it is holy, and not holy because it pleases them. Thus the dialogue is sometimes presented as showing that what is morally good and bad must be independent of the divine will. I argue that matters are not so simple, since there are several ways in which the gods could help determine which acts are good, for instance, by disposing certain human affairs which are relevant to moral decisions. Moreover, Socrates suggests that he has obligations to the gods themselves, and these obligations would have to depend in part on what pleases them. It follows that the dilemma which Socrates poses to Euthyphro (pious because loved by the gods, or loved by the gods because pious) does not offer two mutually exclusive alternatives. There are various ways for the preferences of such gods to help determine which acts are adequate for moral praise or blame. It could therefore hardly be the case that religious doctrines, if true, are irrelevant to the content of morality. Knowledge of the gods’ preferences, if such knowledge were available, would be of importance to moral theory. Socrates himself does not deny this, nor should we
Approaching Plato’s Euthyphro with a Calm Distance
No full textThe present paper aims to discuss how the Socratic method operates with Euthyphro inside the Euthyphro. The first part of the article focuses on the character’s description, upon which it moves to analyzing the very method itself not only in terms of its argumentative form but also in terms of its psychological and social aspects. Euthyphro is shown to have been a supporter of religion that was entirely incapable of living up to the religious ideals that he so confidently advocated for. Through his portrayal of Socrates’ refutation of Euthyphro, Plato seeks not only to redeem his teacher but also to criticize the then society. When describing the Socratic method, the present paper proposes to view it with a “calm distance” on the grounds of the fact that the distinctive feature of the method consists in creating an emotional distance between Socrates and Euthyphro. The purpose of such a strategy is to make Euthyphro realize the weakness of his position and embrace the purification through the socratic elenchos.E l’arte di Platone ci offre qui l’opportunità di cogliere pienamente il senso di questo straordinario "potere" di Socrate, autentico Dedalo che come per un sortilegio riesce ad infondere vita e movimento nelle forme stesse del linguaggio.The present paper aims to discuss how the Socratic method operates with Euthyphro inside the Euthyphro. The first part of the article focuses on the character’s description, upon which it moves to analyzing the very method itself not only in terms of its argumentative form but also in terms of its psychological and social aspects. Euthyphro is shown to have been a supporter of religion that was entirely incapable of living up to the religious ideals that he so confidently advocated for. Through his portrayal of Socrates’ refutation of Euthyphro, Plato seeks not only to redeem his teacher but also to criticize the then society. When describing the Socratic method, the present paper proposes to view it with a “calm distance” on the grounds of the fact that the distinctive feature of the method consists in creating an emotional distance between Socrates and Euthyphro. The purpose of such a strategy is to make Euthyphro realize the weakness of his position and embrace the purification through the socratic elenchos
Ηοsion, eu dzen and dikaiousune in the Apology of Socrates and Euthyphro
No full textWhile linguistic and analytical interpretations of the Euthyphro are usually circumscribed to two passages of the dialogue (Euthphr. 10 a 2–11 b 1), there is a general tendency to disregard the distinction between the ὅσιον and the θεοφιλές. Consequently, one makes hardly any attempt to understand Plato’s criticism of religion. The concepts of θεραπεὶα τοῦ θεοῦ and ἀπεργασία provide us with the possibility of positively characterizing piety and distinguishing it from pure love affection. Contrary to the views of Schleiermacher and Gigon, but following Willamowitz, the present paper shows that the idea of service to the god consists in the doric harmony of Λόγος and Ἔργον, combined with various duties and services to the state. While this is precisely what justice is, the criticism of religion is not solely negative. Through justice, the ὅσιον becomes elevated to εὖ ζῆν and the highest ἀγαθόν in private as well as in public dimension. Without justice, one is left with the neccessity to flee to the other world and embrace the ὁμοούσια with the god, as shown in the Theaetus. If that is the meaning of Socrates’ death, then the idea resembles Kant’s postu late of the immortality of the soul, for in both cases one is faced with the neverending task of realizing the highest good. The question is whether it is possible to realize the δικαιοσύνη in a political life. Plato considers the issue in his the Republic, Sophist, Statesman and Laws. In the Statesman, justice is the primary goal of any political life that can only be attained through cultivting the divine relationship of harmonious elements in the ὅσιον. It is here that Plato’s doctrine of the ὅσιον becomes completed.While linguistic and analytical interpretations of the Euthyphro are usually circumscribed to two passages of the dialogue (Euthphr. 10 a 2–11 b 1), there is a general tendency to disregard the distinction between the ὅσιον and the θεοφιλές. Consequently, one makes hardly any attempt to understand Plato’s criticism of religion. The concepts of θεραπεὶα τοῦ θεοῦ and ἀπεργασία provide us with the possibility of positively characterizing piety and distinguishing it from pure love affection. Contrary to the views of Schleiermacher and Gigon, but following Willamowitz, the present paper shows that the idea of service to the god consists in the doric harmony of Λόγος and Ἔργον, combined with various duties and services to the state. While this is precisely what justice is, the criticism of religion is not solely negative. Through justice, the ὅσιον becomes elevated to εὖ ζῆν and the highest ἀγαθόν in private as well as in public dimension. Without justice, one is left with the neccessity to flee to the other world and embrace the ὁμοούσια with the god, as shown in the Theaetus. If that is the meaning of Socrates’ death, then the idea resembles Kant’s postulate of the immortality of the soul, for in both cases one is faced with the neverending task of realizing the highest good. The question is whether it is possible to realize the δικαιοσύνη in a political life. Plato considers the issue in his the Republic, Sophist, Statesman and Laws. In the Statesman, justice is the primary goal of any political life that can only be attained through cultivting the divine relationship of harmonious elements in the ὅσιον. It is here that Plato’s doctrine of the ὅσιον becomes completed
»Megiston Agathon« (Pl. Ap., 38 a) – The Heart of Socrates’ Life and Philosophical Challenge
No full textWe suggest a certain minimal approach to the historical Socrates on the basis of Plato’s Apology. This text makes it possible to reconstruct the authentic charge and the defense line of Socrates, as well as his motivation and the quintessence of his philosophical challenge. The most important thing is what the philosopher says in the face of his death sentence: that the greatest good for a man is to live an examined life focusing on virtues and ethical values. Unfortunately, the preponderance of studies, even the most recent ones, fail to recognize the philosopher’s provocative challenge, whilst it is not only a crucial motif in the Socratic examining (ἐξετάζειν), i.e. testing the interlocutors’ knowledge by means of irony, elenchos and aporia, but also an inspiration for his direct and indirect followers in seeking virtues and the greatest good.We suggest a certain minimal approach to the historical Socrates on the basis of Plato’s Apology. This text makes it possible to recon‑ struct the authentic charge and the defense line of Socrates, as well as his motivation and the quintessence of his philosophical challenge. The most important thing is what the philosopher says in the face of his death sentence: that the greatest good for a man is to live an exam‑ ined life focusing on virtues and ethical values. Unfortunately, the preponderance of studies, even the most recent ones, fail to recognize the philosopher’s provocative challenge, whilst it is not only a crucial motif in the Socratic examining (ἐξετάζειν), i.e. testing the interlocutors’ knowledge by means of irony, elenchos and aporia, but also an inspira‑ tion for his direct and indirect followers in seeking virtues and the great‑ est good
Ripensare Socrate: note su alcuni studi recenti
Get PDF[ Livio Rossetti, Le dialogue socratique,Les Belles Lettres, Paris 2011 e Livio Rossetti,Alessandro Stavru (a cura di), Socratica2008, Atti Convegno Napoli 2008,Le Rane, Levante, Bari 2011. ]Livio Rossetti, Le dialogue socratique, Les Belles Lettres, Paris 2011 e Livio Rossetti, AlessandroStavru (a cura di), Socratica 2008, Atti Convegno Napoli 2008, Le Rane, Levante,Bari 2011
‘‘Plato Socraticus’ – The Apology of Socrates and Euthyphro
No full textThe present paper focuses on the two works of Plato’s first tetralogyso as to bring out and generally characterize the Socratic dimensionof Plato’s philosophizing. It is common knowledge that Socrates’ trialand defense inspired Plato to engage in dialogical writing which culminatedin the famous logoi Sokratikoi. The article deals with the followingissues: 1. Philosophy as a ‘care for the soul’ in the Apology; 2. “The unexaminedlife is not worth living for a human being” (Ap. 38a); 3. Philosophyas a service to the god in the Euthyphro; 4. Socrates’ elenchos;5. Plato’s logoi Sokratikoi. While the issues are lively debated in thesubject literature, the present paper makes references to several importantstudies and to the broader account of Plato’s philosophy that is to befound in Erler 2006 and Erler 2007.The present paper focuses on the two works of Plato’s first tetralogy so as to bring out and generally characterize the Socratic dimension of Plato’s philosophizing. It is common knowledge that Socrates’ trial and defense inspired Plato to engage in dialogical writing which culminated in the famous logoi Sokratikoi. The article deals with the following issues: 1. Philosophy as a ‘care for the soul’ in the Apology; 2. “The unexamined life is not worth living for a human being” (Ap. 38a); 3. Philosophy as a service to the god in the Euthyphro; 4. Socrates’ elenchos; 5. Plato’s logoi Sokratikoi. While the issues are lively debated in the subject literature, the present paper makes references to several important studies and to the broader account of Plato’s philosophy that is to be found in Erler 2006 and Erler 2007
Some Remarks on the Nineteenth Century Studies of the Euthyphro in Poland
Get PDFThe present paper examined how Polish philosophers, historians and classicists understood and interpreted Plato’s Euthyphro in the 19th century. The article provides evidence for a twofold interest that Polish readers had for the dialogue in this period. Firstly, Catholic thinkers focused on the ethical issues of the dialogue and supported the revival of the Scholasticism, confirming, at the same time, the vitality of Plato’s thought. Secondly, the text of Plato’s opusculum was a convenient didactic material for various teachers of the Greek language: while the Euthyphro gave them the opportunity to raise ethical and logical issues, they also taught philosophy on the basis of this dialogue
A Socrates That Does Not Listen. The Euthyphro Case
No full textWalter Kohan has recently observed that Socrates does not seem particularly interested in the opinions of his interlocutors. Consequently, the philosopher is not really involved in a peer to peer relation with them, but rather embarks upon the task of annihilating their ideas. With the situation being as it is, the image of Socrates as a champion of dialogue begins to wobble. While the present paper aims to discuss these claims, a number of issues needs to be accounted for. First of all, the Socratic dialogue does begin in a characteristically symmetrical way, but it becomes more and more asymmetric as the elenchos begins to appear. This is due to the fact the elenchos makes the interlocutors defensive, whereas Socrates can attack freely. Given that, Kohan’s claims seem justified and enlightening, but they should not be regarded as conclusive, since one must neither forget nor undervalue how innovative it was to replace monologue speeches with one-to-one dialogues which offered the opportunity of being involved in unforeseeable conversations.Walter Kohan has recently observed that Socrates does not seem particularly interested in the opinions of his interlocutors. Consequently, the philosopher is not really involved in a peer to peer relation with them, but rather embarks upon the task of annihilating their ideas. With the situation being as it is, the image of Socrates as a champion of dialogue begins to wobble. While the present paper aims to discuss these claims, a number of issues needs to be accounted for. First of all, the Socratic dialogue does begin in a characteristically symmetrical way, but it becomes more and more asymmetric as the elenchos begins to appear. This is due to the fact the elenchos makes the interlocutors defensive, whereas Socrates can attack freely. Given that, Kohan’s claims seem justified and enlightening, but they should not be regarded as conclusive, since one must neither forget nor undervalue how innovative it was to replace monologue speeches with one-to-one dialogues which offered the opportunity of being involved in unforeseeable conversations
Why Not Escape? On the Hosiotes in Plato’s Crito
Get PDFWhile the article discusses the factors that motivated Socrates’ decisionin the Crito, it emphasizes the possible cultural import of the choiceundertaken in the aftermath of the political upheavals in the late fifthcentury. It is also argued here that as Plato’s dialogue were written inthe period that followed the renewal of the Athenian politeia, it shouldbe perceived as having its roots both in the historical reality of its narrativefocus (i.e. Socrates’ trial) and in the then reality of Plato’s Athens(i.e., its political stability dependent on the ephebic oath)
Z nowych badań nad dialogiem Sokratejskim
Get PDFLivio Rossetti, Le dialogue socratique, Éditions Les Belles Lettres, Paris 2011, ss. 296.Livio Rossetti, Le dialogue socratique, Éditions Les Belles Lettres, Paris 2011, ss. 296