INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE "PLATO AND PLATONISM IN EUROPEAN CULTURE"
September 6-8, 2012
Vyatcheslav IVANOV, The Russian Anthropological School of the Russian State Humanities University and The Institute of the World Culture of the Moscow Lomonosov State University. Early eastern-indo-european mythopoetic sourses of Plato terms
In studying the earliest period of the development of Plato’s terminology it is necessary to compare it to the old Pythagorian tradition. The most archaic origin of the latter becomes possible to study applying a comparison to the reconstruction of the vocabulary of the early Eastern Indo-European mythpoetic traditions that were continued in Vedic and Avestan texts.
GLOUKHOV, Institute for Philosophy,
AKHUTIN. How is the truth told?
In Cratylus Plato associates the Cratylus' thesis "there are the names, which come by nature" with Heraclitus' flux-thesis (401d5). It's rather strange at first glance:
Instability of being accepts whatever rightness of the names, and
historical Cratylus "only moved his finger" (Arist. Met.
On the contrary, Heraclitus denies something like "natural
rightness" of names: people deceive themselves by trusting to the
words ("Bow: the bow's name (βιός)
is life (βίος),
though its work is death"(B48DK); because of the different names it
seems there are two different things -- "day" and "night",
"life" and "death", but in truth they are the same.
Heraclitus' expression for the form of telling the truth is not the name,
but logos (composition.
constitution, account). "All things happen according to this logos", and he, Heraclitus explains in his logoi
"words and deeds" by distinguishing "each thing according
to its constitution" and declaring "how it is" (B1DK).
His logoi are homological to
the constitution of the things not as predicative assertion, but as
aphorism closed in itself, as some riddle, as enigma.
If "how it is" (the truth) is told neither as the name (S) nor
as predicate (P) nor as assertion (S is P), but as a logos
of such kind, one can understand as well the flux-thesis in a different
way. Logos composes the
telling speech in some enigmatic word. So what was told must be retold
once more. The flow of speech homological to the flow of being is
composed as metamorphosis of metaphors. The apparent world is only an
allegory of unapparent being.
usual word-name is conventional; it doesn't apprehend the own nature of
things. The word-predicate may be interpreted as some phonetic icon of
the actions, but in this case it doesn't apprehend the stable "What"
of the thing. Heraclitean word-logos tells the truth as riddle, it is
dictum and contradictum at once. The truth is told as onto-logical
contest between telling and concealment. M. Heidegger hears this contest
in the Greek word aletheia.
is well known as a thinker never entirely relied on oral speech or
writing , nevertheless such hostility to fundamental and deeply-rooted
human skills did not prevent Plato himself became one of the greatest
and timeless masters of world philosophical prose. That is why Phaedrus
where rhetoric is under scrutiny and which kept and carried through the
times unique Plato's attempt of defending rhetoric and including the
last one in a field of philosophy is especially interesting for us.
According to Phaedrus,
rhetoric to become real techne
should be provided with dialectical method of philosophy and thus is not
to describe appearances that never are but only are coming to be.
Rhetoric should describe essences or ideas of things, essences that only
are. The question raised is: If this is the case, is there any
difference between rhetoric and philosophy?
is well known as a thinker that not only ever blamed rhetoric for lack
of the Being and, consequently, for its connection with pseudos, he is also known as a philosopher who widely used rhetoric
all along his life in all his works. We also know that Plato's Gorgias
entirely devoted to blaming rhetoric for its philosophical and cultural
inconsistency. The question is: what kind of rhetorical skills does
Plato use in his philosophical mission? Is perfect and ideal orator in Phaedrus
completely different or similar to same one in Gorgias?
this is the case, I mean, if corollaries given in both dialogues are the
same, why did many years later Plato need to publish his Phaedros
if all he wanted to say about rhetoric was implied in Gorgias? Possible answers are: 1. Rivalry with Isocrates' rhetorical
school and an attempt (hypothetical) of introduction of rhetorical
courses in Academy concerned with the former. 2. Aristotle's rhetorical
elaborations which can be seen as straight sequels of Phaedros' implications and vice versa, namely,(3) Phaedros would be
seen as being inspired by the early Aristotle's Rhetoric.
many rhetorics are? 1.The true one. 2.The false one. 3. The neutral one,
neither true nor false but becoming one or another and depending on
orator's intentions and purposes.
WOLF, Institute for philosophy and law,
the space of the report it is intended to present a treatment of the
Euripidean tragedy Helen (412
B.C.) in the wider context of the philosophical discussions of the 5th
century. Helen belongs to the
late plays of Euripides. The generic extravagance of the play has
produced a lot of discussion concerning legitimacy of classifying Helen as the tragedy. Debates on the genre, interpretation of Helen
as an example of a new generic form - as "tragicomedy" obscure
the fact, that the real tragedy in this case consists not so much in the
composition of the events, but in the dramatic process of knowing. This
play mirrors practically all the contemporary intellectual problems
concerning the nature of knowledge, the conflict between the essence of
a fact and the possibility of a true judgment, the relation between name
and thing, the ambivalence
of logos, the gap between "to be" and "to appear",
reality and appearance. The action of the play develops as a
conflict between soma - onoma -
eidolon, ergon - pragma -
logos. These discussions, provoked by the sophists, involved
Socrates and the philosophy of Plato followed in the wake of the same
SERYOGIN, Institute for philosophy,
paper offers a discussion of major hermeneutic alternatives that have
arisen in the scholarship on Plato in recent decades. According to the
traditional ("dogmatic" or "doctrinal") approach
Plato's dialogues convey their own philosophical views that we can
reconstruct by applying certain analytical procedures to the text. The
"dialogical" or "dramatic" approach insists that in
order to correctly understand philosophical meaning of Plato's dialogues
one has to take into account all the dialogical and literary aspects of
his texts. The most radical version of this approach (called here "antidogmatic")
thoroughly denies that it is possible to identify Plato's philosophical
views on the basis of dialogical texts. The paper criticizes this last
thesis, as well as "dialogical" approach as a whole, from
moderately "dogmatic" standpoint.
STAVRU, Wuerzburg. Erotikoi logoi within the Socratic circle
is a major issue in the Socratic literature. We have Erōtikoi logoi
in Plato, in Xenophon (Symposium
and Memorabilia), Aeschines (Alcibiades
and Aspasia), and in some very interesting - albeit scarce - testimonies
of Antisthenes, Euclides, and Phaedo. Even the fragments of Aristippus
are of interest, as his concern with hedone seems to be closely linked
with erotic issues.
paper focuses on the erotic "patterns" featured in the
Socratic literature with the aim of analysing the theoretical and
chronologic implications which arise from them. Such is e.g. the
dichotomy between an "exterior" and an "interior"
Eros that characterizes the erotic writings of Antisthenes, Aeschines,
and Plato (an issue to which I devoted a recent article). This and other
"patterns" as that of the Alcibiades-literature which
flourished after Socrates' death will be tackled developing on the works
of Heinrich Dittmar, Konrad Gaiser, Barbara Ehlers, Gregory Vlastos,
Charles Kahn, and Michael Erler. In turn, this will provide also a
better understanding of problems concerning the Platonic Corpus as a
whole, as not only the Lysis, the Symposium and the Phaedrus deal with
Eros: thoughout the dialogues and even in some spuria are featured
"erotic patterns" (often in non-erotic contexts), and in some
cases these enable to gain a general view on comprehensive chronologic
HOFFMANN. Plato and Corpus Platonicum and its reception in the European
tradition of history of philosophy
be sure, Plato's work was in a certain measure conditioned by the
situation in the world where he lived and acted. And that was a world in
which (especially after the Peloponnesian War) there was in the full
force a development usually defined by scholars as "from the
citizen to the subject". In Plato's native
SHICHALIN, Institute for philosophy,
SVETLOV, Russian Platonic Society,
have not got any texts of Socrates. That is the why Socrates' philosophy
is presented as his biography. But each of biographical evidence in this
case has a hermeneutic character and depends on the way of
interpretation of the oral wisdom and practical ethos of Socrates.
Socrates has some "behavior" dominants. One of the them is the
SHICHALIN. Apology of Socrates - the first published work of Plato
ALIEVA, Museum Graeco-Latinum,
well-known sixth definition of the sophist in the homonymous dialogue
contains a discussion of the elenchus (230a-e) which is often referred
to as a manifestation of the late Plato's attitude towards this method
of argumentation. According to this definition, the main function of
elenchus is a cathartic one: it removes the opinions that obstruct the
teaching. This passage is often regarded as corroborating the assumption
that the Socratic elenchus is a "preliminary" only, though an
essential one, to a "constructive philosophy" (Robinson, Kahn
scope of this paper is to demonstrate that the function of elenchus in
the Sophist is not confined to a mere 'purification'. To
accomplish this task, we have to reinterpret the passage (230a-e) in its
connection with the subject of the whole dialogue, notably with the
dialectic of being and non-being. This dialectic not also secures the
possibility for elenchus, but also presents it as a heuristic tool of
it is argued that the notion of elenchus as represented in the Sophist is
in full compliance with the Socrates' practice and beliefs in the early Gorgias. Vlastos was the first to observe that in the Gorgias Socrates
regarded the elenchus as a "truth-seeking device". This
hypothesis was later criticised by scholars, but Socrates' remarks still
remain very obscure. We hope to give a plausible explanation of these
remarks in view of the epistemology elaborated in the Sophist.
ZOLOTUKHINA, Moscow. The position of Crito in the Corpus Platonicum:
former speeches and disputation pro et contra
the history of chronological studies of the Corpus Platonicum Crito almost always was considered as a "sequel" (G. Ryle)
to the Apology of Socrates,
and, with rare exceptions, as an early and undoubtedly authentic
dialogue (the few exceptions are Th. Gomperz, H. Thesleff, some Italian
scholars). In this contribution I am going to check try to check the
position of Crito in the
Corpus, i. e. the early character and the authenticity of the dialogue,
using the following criteria:
features. Crito seems to
depend on other dialogues (Phaedo,
Protagoras and others), reproducing their literary details in
abbreviated form, whereas Plato normally does not repeat himself.
Formally Crito is a direct dramatic dialogue; considering the importance of
form in the Corpus, such a dialogue could appear only after Theaetetus,
when the interest to the last days of Socrates was renewed. The figure
of Socrates will be examined separately.
to former arguments. The characteristic and unique feature of Crito
is the permanent use of references to former speeches. The addresses of
these references, showing the connection of the dialogue with the
tradition of Plato's School, will be examined, as well as some crucial
issues such as οἱ
of the contemporary school situation. The composition of Crito is influenced by a tendency of composing speeches pro et
contra, probably diffused in the late period of Plato's Academy. A
special place will be given to the speech of Laws in comparison with the
Laws. It is possible to
consider Crito, along with a
group of other small dialogues, as a preparatory stage of collecting and
discussing material for the Laws.
dialectic of the way upwards and downwards. The ethos of nothing in
Plato's practice of knowledge is very closely connected with practice of
the power. The Truth and The Justice are the general purposes of
all kinds of knowledge. But people use the "so called justice"
instead the real Justice. The "so called justice"
opposes unjustice and depends of it. The false exists only with the
truth, the life with the death because this order is the becoming order.
When we rise upwards, we fall downwards at the same time. Whether there
is an interval between these two conditions? This is the "Instant",
which no has any extent and divisibility. The Plato's dialectic in Parmenides
continues Socrates practice of death. The main argument in Pheado
is the real death of Socrates which has rendered a great influence
on life of its pupils. The main purpose of Plato's dialectic is death
without the dying. During the process of dialectical
study pupils have to see the real entity and truth without time and
false. This practice results the ethos of no-existence. The
real justice is the justice without the evil and good and every man, who
wants to judge other people have to gain any of this justice. The part
of no-existence becoming the foundation of power and so the
myth of the general good forming the space of the power. This
arguments create the paradox of the power. If the politic cause
the social order, where his own place? This paradoxal situation is
the general feature of the all administration orders. "The
role of king is playing by his servants, but the real king is nowhere".
ROSSIUS, Institute for philosophy,
MESSIATS, Institute for philosophy, Russian Academy of Sciences.
Philebus as Plato's answer to Aristotle.
Philebus arouses interest
not only due to the fact that it is a late Plato's dialogue, which
presents all the key postulates of his teaching, but also due to its
apparent affinity with Aristotle's four causes and principles. Hereby
arises the question of whether Plato wanted to find common ground with
Aristotle, or whether he puts forth his four principles as
counterarguments in polemics with Aristotle. It is a questionable issue,
the resolution of which is further complicated by the fact that the
dialogue itself is identified by researchers as one of the most
intricate and unsystеmatic
The issue of the very possibility of comparison between the principles
comes up against a)
the problematics of the Greek principle, and it is put forth here by
Aristotle, whose teaching is aimed at searching for causes and
principles of all that exists; and b) the possibility of relating (or,
on the contrary, juxtaposing) the principles of Pythagoras and Plato and
Aristotle's "physical" principles.
The comparison will be incomplete without emphasizing another issue that
concerns the difference between the introduced principles in the
structure of these philosophers' teachings. Aristotle begins with the
four causes and principles, without which neither science nor knowledge
are possible, and ends with what he considers the true basis of all
knowledge and all science - the Intellect, which is the "first and
most important principle" (Metaphysics 1064b).
Hereby arises the question of how the Intellect relates to the four
causes and principles, and, moreover, the basis for the union of the
four principles remains unclear. In Philebus Plato
relates his principles very differently, the links between them are
apparent: the limit, its opposite - the unlimited, the blending of the
two, and, finally, the fourth cause - the reason for the blending (the
Intellect), which, it must be noted, was intentionally left as a part of
And now, properly speaking, the key - Plato's fourth cause, which is
central to his answer to Aristotle's four causes. This principle is the
cause of blending and emergence, which he calls the Intellect, is a
forming, defining, generating cause which can not be unambiguously
related to Pythagorean principles, but refers us to Aristotle. We can
hereby distinguish two issues: a) the Mind which is the "form of
forms", primal mover, and the Mind as a cause - is it one Intellect,
given in different aspects, or these are two different concepts; and b)
what is the correlation between Plato's definition of the Intellect as
"related to the cause" or "almost of the same kind"
(Philebus 31a) and Aristotle's understanding of the cause,
whereas he associates it with the principle - why does he, as laconic as
he usually is, consistently use the two terms together, as he says that
"all causes are principles" (Metaphysica,
1013a 17), as if doubling the principle itself. Concurrently with the
seeming synonymy of these concepts we see that these are two
semantically different words (aitia
- guilt и arkhe -principle), and it is unclear how they can correlate, and,
moreover, how they can be synonyms at all.
Moscow. On the complex dating of Phaedrus
adequate understanding of Plato's dialogues is possible in a concrete
historical context, which is primarily based on the intra-academic
debate. In the 60-s of the 4th century BC the theory of Ideas had become
the central theme.
the variety of the shades of meaning of Idea due to the complexity of
the context of Plato's dialogues, three main meanings can be
distinguished: the visual-specific, logical-semantic and ontological.
identification of the logical-semantic and ontological values Ideas has
become the defining trend in the understanding of Ideas in the Academy
in the result of that Ideas turn into substantivized generic and
specific concepts. Ontologization of general concepts and logical links
between them, leads to a number of contradictions and general conclusion
of academics (Speusippus, Aristotle, Xenocrates) about the
self-contradiction of ideas-notions, which means recognizing the falsity
of both the ideas and the study of them.
Parmenides and Sophist can be regarded as a response to the criticism of Plato. He
comes to the conclusion about the need to demarcate the logical-semantic
and ontological values of Ideas, which requires the rejection of
Parmenides identity of being and thought about it, but allows keeping an
Idea as eternal, immutable, self-identical being.
debates led to the foundation of the so-called "doctrine of Ideas"
in the Academy encouraging the students to create their own original
teachings. This allows to speak about the formation of the
early-Platonism as a separate period in philosophical study.
Konstantin BANDUROVSKY, Russian State University for Humanities. Criticism of Plato's gnoseology in Thomas Aquinus
Thomas Aquinas created his theory of knowledge in constant dispute with the Platonic epistemology transferred in the subsequent tradition of Platonism as well as directly with the texts of Plato (the concept of ἀνάμνησις in the "Meno"). He rejects the concept of independent ideas, which are realized by human being in the process guidance. In contrast, Thomas puts forward an original three-stage epistemology - (1) empirical knowledge, (2) abstraction, (3) return to the empirical world on another level. In order to explain the existence of general ideas, Aquinas provides an insightful analysis of the process of abstraction. This antiplatonic position allows him to solve the most complex set of epistemological problems - from the problem of knowledge of the material world to the induction of proofs of the existence of God from the sensory properties of the comprehensible world. Epistemology of Thomas Aquinas is an interesting attempt to overcome the dichotomy between rationalism (Platonism) - empiricism (Aristotelianism), prior to the enterprise, produced by Kant. But it didn't influence on the development of philosophy (because of inopportunity) so strong, as Kant's one did. In essence, the opposition Platonism-Aristotelianism, as well as attempts to overcome this dichotomy is reproduced throughout the history of thought, including the present time. Therefore, reconstruction of the position of Thomas in this dispute may have not only historical-philosophical, but also quite actual significance.
argument about immortal soul as returning in the heaven was
reinterpreted in Christian theology as metaphysical construction around
the notion of the heaven as aim of human life and as cognitive and
axiological model of the heaven as specific deserving object of
cognition. These two sides of argumentation were in mix, but in the age
of Counter-reformation it had become obvious, that the implicit
proposition of all these constructions was changes of the soul, and this
idea hadn't been compatible with representation of unchangeable form as
true form of the soul. These contradictions were most sharp in Greek
theology of the age, due to linguistic and cultural
M. SHAKHNOVICH. Colotes and his Polemics against Academics
The presentation deals with Colotes the Epicurean, the author of “Against Plato’s Lysis”, “Against Plato’s Euthydemus” and “Against Plato’s myth” and his criticism of Platonism. Special attention is devoted to his polemical book “On the point that it is not possible even to live according to the doctrines of the other philosophers”. In this work the concept of the “abstention from judgment” (epoche) by Arcesilaus is one of the main objects of criticism.
van Orman Quine criticizing platonist philosophers, who were defending
abstract objects, universals, possible worlds and nonexistent objects in
his article "On what there is" (1948). He is sequentially
criticizing their conceptions by defeating the argumentation. But in
2000s Quinean critique seems to be very radical. The rehabilitation of
abstract objects, universals, possible worlds and nonexistent
objects have led to raise another questions - for example, on "uniformity"
or "homogeneity" of ontology. Do objects of our world exist
homogeneously or there are different ontological statuses of objects?
Those questions were stated by Jonathan Schaffer in his meditation on
fundamentals and Kris McDaniel on heterogeneity of objects in ontology.
"possible worlds" and "universals" have directed
analytical philosophers to the Philosophy of Middle Ages, so "fundamental
grounds" lead to thorough reading of Aristotle. Additionally, this
tendency to the "Renaissance" also includes platonic
strategies, which presented by neofregeanism
(Bob Hale, Crispin Wright).
in Analytic Philosophy is developing and have come out of philosophy of
language and Quinean principles. We hope that the movement "back to
Aristotle" will be supported by the line of "back to Plato"
and analytic metaphysics will elaborate new methods to work with
difficult platonic terminology and the hierarchy of the Being will be
described, as suggested by Plato and Aristotle.
Adam David ROTH, Ph.D. Assistant Professor and Basic Course Director Department of Communication Studies Harrington School of Communication and Media The University of Rhode Island, USA. Embodied rhetoric: Plaro on the similarities between rhetoric and madecine
Through Plato’s many attempts to discredit rhetoric and to demonstrate that it is not an art, he frequently compares it to medicine which he views as a model for a true techne. But as this paper will show, the opposition Plato draws between rhetoric and medicine does not last, and Plato becomes implicated in the historical moment he occupies, a moment during which the fluidity of disciplinary boundaries is still being widely acknowledged. In making this argument, I proceed as follows. First, I will examine the Gorgias to show that Plato’s portrayal of rhetoric as a “knack” or “skill” and an incomplete art is based on its being the opposite of medicine, a true techne. Second, I examine Phaedrus to show that Plato’s portrayal of rhetoric undergoes a radical change. When rhetoric is treated as a potentially true techne, its relation to medicine becomes rearticulated as one of interconnection, thus exposing the similarities between the two.
of exegesis of Timaeus in
style of apophatic thinking, which forms the Plotinian description of
the One, provides a specific look at the nature of place and space.
Plotinus turned out to become, probably, the first ancient philosopher
who was able to overcome the traditional Hellenic visual (and
consequently spatial) implications that accompanied the conceptions of
the intelligible realm, since Plato and Aristotle (cf. the eldest
meanings of εἶδος,
spite of Plotinus introducing no new doctrine regarding neither place or
space nor the whole metaphysics, the traditional Platonic topics (such
as the intelligible place of Phaedrus
or triangular cosmogonic geometry of Timaeus)
obtain a new level of understanding. The subtle dialectics of continuity
in sensible and intelligible realms provide a key to interrelate the
theory of ideal numbers (Enneads
VI.6), the problem of intelligible and "numeric" matter (recognized
as "the great-and-small" in Aristotle rendering the unwritten
doctrine of Plato), and the genesis of physical extent (of both space
least makes physical objects to be located in different places, mutually
excluding presence of one object where another is already present. Such
kind of ontological "hostility" is opposed to universal
permeability of the intelligible realm and is exposed as the consequence
of "existence" of matter. Generally, the capability to extent
is said to be one of the basic features appearing from the association
of matter and quantity, thus providing us with logical ground necessary
to reconstruct the Plotinian view on another famous problem of Plato's Timaeus
- the χώρα,
which combines spatial and ontological meanings in description of "the
third genus," i.e. the matter.
PETROFF, Institute for philosophy,
prayer in Iamblichus: three steps of prayer. "True" or "perfect"
prayer in Proclus as a five-step process of the soul's uplifting,
culminating in the union with gods. Theoretical and metaphysical
principles that make possible the soul's uplifting in prayer. Symbola
and synthemata as tokens
helping the gods and the beings remember the mutual kinship. The
teaching on prayer in Iamblichus and Proclus: a comparison. The
acquaintance of some 13th-Century Latin Theologians with Proclus'
teaching on prayer. Theurgic context of Proclus' teaching. The
relationship of prayer and hymn. Anagogic prayer in the Corpus
Areopagiticum: mysterial and theurgic allusions. Prayer as uplifting and
initiation. Divine names as uplifting synthemata.
A "great shining chain" of the hymn-prayer.
Filip IVANOVIC. Faculty of Humanities, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim. Participation in Dionysius the Areopagite.
In Platonic terms “all things to which we apply the term ‘many’ participate” in something beyond the world of matter, while for Neoplatonists there is a higher aspect that is unparticipated (One) and the “lower” aspect which is participated (Henads).
paper treats the way in which Macrobius reproduces Colotes of Lampsacus'
criticism of Platonic benevolent attitude towards admittance of myth in
philosophical reasoning. Among the topics considered are the content
side of the dispute and the arguments of the parties are under
consideration; Macrobius' classification of the types of fiction
acceptable to the philosophy; the rationale of Platonists' inclusion of
myth in philosophical
particular approach to the use of myths into philosophical reasoning is
analyzed, as also the arguments pro et contra he gives in his Commentary,
and the difference between myth (fabula)
and fictional narrative (narratio
attempt to reconstruct the main arguments of the parties in dispute
including Macrobius' own attitude to the problem.
is shown that Macrobius, who gives an account of the dispute between
Platonists and Epicureans, joins the former and states that philosophy
does not reject the fiction completely although it does not accept all
kind of myth since philosophers should use allegories, parables and
symbols not in every discussion.
will consider the topic of infinity according to John Philoponus, John
Damascenes and members of the Alexandrian Neoplatonist school. I will
show that, against the background Aristotelian understanding of infinity
which denies an existence of an actual infinity and admits an existence
of a potential infinity, it appears the two extreme positions. Firstly,
it is Philoponus' discourse which, based on rejecting an existence of an
actual infinity, inclines to rejecting of a potential infinity as well,
for that reason, that for Philoponus a potential infinity is reduced to
an actual one. Secondly, it is Damascenes' discourse which is opposite
to a discourse of Philoponus and which admits an existence of an actual
world of Nous in Plotinus can
be interpreted as the answer to the previous proofs of impossibility to
connect somehow something with something. The common feature of these
proofs is the using in them a premises, falling under the following ones:
It is impossible to fulfill a infinite sequence of conditions, so that
for fulfillment of each condition the condition which is following after
it should be fulfilled;
To connect somehow something with something, there must be a connection,
which is connected, in turn, by some connection to each of the connected
arguments based on (-Inf) and (Nex) are found in Parmenides' (28 B
8.22-25 DK) and Zeno's of
accepts (- Inf) and (Nex). But he could have pointed out that it is
impossible to deduce impossibility of any multiple being only from (-Inf)
and (Nex). The existence of an arbitrary sequence of necessary
conditions does not imply that these conditions must always be fulfilled
sequentially, and cannot be fulfilled simultaneously.
demonstrate that some infinite sequences generated by (Nex), can be
fulfilled only simultaneously and not sequentially, if at all, Plotinus
in VI. 7 9-14 proposes to accept, along with (-Inf) and (Nex), the
Any eidos in the world of Nous
exists if and only if all possible connections of this eidos
with all eidē in Nous
all eidē in Nous are
interdependent ones in their existence and are infinite in number. Their
fulfillment is only possible as simultaneous one, but not as sequential
one. So (-Inf) does not prevent the fulfillment of all eidē
in Nous simultaneously.
paper would deal with the so-called "etymological wordplay" in
the texts of Plato analyzed from several different angles: Plato's
attitude to Sophistic etymological observations and the general
possibility of reconstructing Sophistic linguistic theory from Platonic
dialogues and other sources;
as an argument in the structure of Platonic dialogues (Sophist, Protagoras, Philebus)
of the etymological argumentation in the Cratylus
in the context
the dialogue's inner rhetorical and logical organization;
the place etymology holds in Plato's general idea of language
ultimate goal is to demonstrate following some recent research in the
field (especially, that of David Sedley) that etymology should be
consider as a rather "solid" piece within the inventory of
Plato's argumentation, the more so as it becomes the point of polemics
with some rhetorical and philosophical counterparts of Plato. The
question of whom this polemics was aimed at and what sense it implied
will be also discussed in the context of both literary and wider
1. Pasternak studied Greek in his college (a Gymnasium
of a pre-revolutionary period). Later on he mostly remembered how
he and his school-mates were rude towards the teacher of Ancient
Greek; in our conversations he mentioned that he "had missed Greek".
But still his knowledge of the language in the University years made it
possible to look into Plato's originals comparing them to the
translations and to the
later comments. In his youth the intimate
friendship with a cousin, Ol'ga Freudenberg, a future famous
Classical scholar, was another reason for the Platonian studies
and discussions about Plato.
2. From his studies of Plato and the Greek philosophy
at large at the univesities
Mimesis by Plato has different meanings in the same dialogue, for it is not a term but a ‘family’ of images and notions embraced by protean word.
Resp. VI Plato notes a dismal
existence of some "virtuous citizens" in an ordinary polis.
"The manner in which the best men are treated in their own States
is so grievous that no single thing on earth is comparable to it"
(488a). Plato sketches two kinds of life of the "virtuous citizen"
- either the early inglorious and useless death or the useless existence.
Plato sees this situation as a paradox. Who are these virtuous citizens?
Why the virtue of these men can't be coordinated with the present State
order? Why the law-abiding and virtuous polites
becomes a victim of the state. The main hypothesis of my paper is that
these questions could be answered if we try to think the parallel
between Antigone who knowingly broke the law of the polis and Socrates
who knowingly observed the law.
The paper analyzes the content and the meaning of the
concept "paideia" (ancient-greek notion for education) in
Werner Jaeger's and Martin Heidegger's interpretations. The idea of the
connection between german concepts "Bildung" and "Kultur"
and greek "paideia" appeared in german classical philology in
the middle of XIX century. But it was Werner Yeager who formulated this
idea most clearly. He stated that "paideia" gave rise to the
European idea of culture in general. In the paper we will try to compare
his conception with Martin Heidegger's one.
In the article "Plato's doctrine of the truth"
Heidegger reviews the relation of the concepts "paideia" and
"aletheia" - "education" and "not-hidden"
(truth) in Plato's philosophy. He considers, that it's "paideia",
which transforms "truth - not-hidden" into a particular "idea
of the truth". This idea contains the beginning of value thinking.
"Value thinking" is "culture" in a variant very
widespread, but absolutely unacceptable for Heidegger. That's why this
Heidegger's thought is to be understood as detection of the dangerous
closeness between Plato's "paideia" and the "idea of the
In the interpretations which connect Plato's "paideia"
with the ideas of "culture and education" we can observe some
guidelines of German academic community of 1930s. As B. Readings
commented, the classical philology did in
political theorist Hannah Arendt once defined the Platonism as tyranny
of truth. In my presentation I'll try to interpret Heidegger's project
of Dozentenakademie during his Rektorat-period (1933-34) in
accordance with the Platonic model of community described in Politeia.
I proceed on the hypothesis that Heidegger's notion of philosophy as the
principal science was conceived as esoteric and elitist one and
knowingly opposed to its public devaluation within the improper mode of
being (Uneigentlichkeit). In my paper the lecture Ueber das
Wesen der Wahrheit (1933-34) is mainly discussed where Heidegger
analyzes Plato's allegory of the Cave and thinks correspondingly the
"German revolution" as a unique event that allows the decisive
integration of politics and philosophy.
paper analyses the post-war German efforts to "denazify" Plato.
One should distinguish at least 4 types of such a rehabilitation: 1)
conservative (Nebel, Jaeger); 2) democratic (Weinstock, Kuhn); 3)
Marxist (mostly from the RDA historians), and 4) mock-denazification (Hildebrandt,
Wichmann). These efforts were developped along with the polemic against
the very influential 1st volume of K. Popper's Open Society and Its
Among the most influential political philosophers of
the 20th century, who reacted critically to the modern times and
insisted on returning to classical legacy, Leo Strauss is distinguished
by his sheer preference for Plato over Aristotle. As a result of this
returning there has been the original interpretation of Plato's
philosophy, where the central place belongs not to the doctrine of ideas,
but to the question of political conditions of possibility for
philosophy as such and for the life of a philosopher particularly. The
main issue of the paper is the problem of democracy in works by Strauss.
In his works democracy is the only political regime, in which philosophy
could appear, but it is definitely not the best political regime.
According to Strauss democracy being the government of majority and the
power of uneducated people does not favour the formation of civic
virtues, but indulges base desires and a gallery play thereby
endangering the existence of philosophy. Strauss constantly accentuated
the antidemocratic character of classical philosophy. This position is
less problematic. The much more problematic is the fact of democratic
genesis of classical philosophy in the context of such a reconstruction
of its basic principles.
The main subject of this report is the significance of
Plato in the context of Hannah Arendt's reflections on Roman politics.
We will show that in her theory there is a place not only for the Plato
as a destroyer of the Greek vita activa, but for Plato post vitam
activam. In different context, in
paper aims to reveal the relationship between Platonic studies made in
first half of the twentieth century, on the one hand, by A. Losev in
Russia and, on the other hand, by such scholars as J. Stenzel, H.
Gomperz, E. Hoffmann, H. Leisegang in Germany. Early Losev's writings
are focused on the approaches prevailed in European Platonic studies of
nineteenth century. His Eros in Plato (1916) depends on the erotic teaching of V. Solovyev,
and his exploration of terminological basis of theory of ideas (1919) is
based on detailed linguistic analysis of terms eidos
and idea made by C. Ritter.
But after critical assessment, these approaches were rejected as
inappropriate to his own research program. To evaluate this program, it
is important to take in account that Losev was one of the most
significant Russian philosophers of that time. His views were close to
the Neo-Hegelianism (Russian and German) that especially evident in his
interpretation of dialectic as a method to combine rational and
irrational principles. Due to this fact, Plato considered in his works
first of all as dialectician. And later, Losev himself pointed out in
his "Essays in ancient symbolism and mythology" (1928) that
his approach to Plato is philosophical interpretation. Philosophical
milieu of the epoch was reflected in his works and provided resemblance
of his position on Plato with such one of mentioned above German
PETROFF, Institute for philosophy,
IVANOV. On the first russian translations of Plato in the XVIII century
As found by Dm.Tchizhevsky in Old Russia no
translations of Plato were known. The first Russian translations of the
dialogues "Phedon" and "The Banquet" appeared in a
Masonic journal "The Morning Light" by N. Novikov in
1777-1780. At 1780-
ROSSIUS. The Russian text of Plato: the contemporary state
MOCHALOVA. The "enigma" of Plato: on basic trends in
contemporary Russian Platonic studies (from the second half of the 20th