Some indirect testimonies about Plato’s personal character and their connection with passages of the written dialogues
Keywords:
Plato, Personal Character, Dialogues, Indirect TraditionAbstract
This article aims to contribute to the image of the historical Plato. For this purpose, I have selected from the indirect tradition favorable to Plato nine testimonies, which shed some light on his personal character. I believe that this favorable tradition would represent more faithfully the philosopher of Athens than the hostile one. That is why I have tried to draw attention in the second part of the article on the possible connection between those indirect testimonies and some passages from the written dialogues. In fact, Plato’s benevolence and good disposition towards other people would correspond to those attitudes that are required from the interlocutor as preconditions for dialectic conversation. I suggest, finally, that both the personality of Plato and his work would be in harmony and that a key aspect of this harmony is represented by the positive and favorable predisposition towards others.
Downloads
References
BOAS, G. (1948). Fact and Legend in the Biography of Plato. The Philosophical Review 57, no 5, p. 439-457.
CHERNISS, H. (1962). The Riddle of the Early Academy. New York, Russell&Russell (1ed. 1945).
DE ROMILLY, J. (2011). La Doucer dans la Pensée Grecque. Paris, Les Belles Lettres (1ed. 1979).
DILLON, J. (2003). The Heirs of Plato. A Study of the Old Academy (347-374 BC). Oxford, Clarendon Press.
DILLON, J.; O’MEARA, D. (2006). Syrianus. On Aristotle Metaphysics 13-14. London-New Delhi-New York-Sydney, Bloomsbury.
DORANDI, T. (1991). Filodemo. Storia dei Filosofi. Platone e l’Academia. Napoli, Bibliopolis.
DÖRRIE, H. (1976). Von Platon zum Platonismus. Ein Bruch in der Überlieferung und seine Überwindung. Opladen, Westdeutscher Verlag.
DÜRING, I. (1941). Herodicus the Cratetean. A Study in anti-platonic Tradition. Stockholm, Wahlström & Widstrand.
EL MURR, D. (2012). L’Accademia da Platone a Polemone. In: PERILLI, L.; TAORMINA, D. P. (eds.). Manuale di storia della filosofia antica. Torino, UTET, p. 252-266.
ERLER, M. (2007). Die Philosophie der Antike. Band 2/2: Platon. Basel, Schwabe Verlag.
ERLER, M. (2015). Vom admirativen zum irritierten Staunen. Philosophie, Rhetorik und Verunsicherung in Platons Dialogen. In: FRÜH, R.; FUHRER, T.; HUMAR, M. (eds.). Irritationen: rhetorische und poetische Verfahren der Verunsicherung. Berlin-Boston, Walter de Gruyter, p. 109-124.
FALCON, A. (2000). Aristotle, Speusippus, and the Method of Division. Classical Quarterly 50.2, p. 402-414.
FIELD, G. C. (1930). Plato and his Contemporaries. A Study in Fourth-Century Life and Thought. London, Methuen & Co. Ltd.
GAISER, K. (1968). Platons ungeschriebene Lehre. Studien zur systematischen und geschichtlichen Begründung der Wissenschaften in der Platonischen Schule. 2 Aufl. Stuttgart, Ernst Klett Verlag.
GAISER, K. (1988). Philodems Academica: die Berichte über Platon und die Alte Akademie in zwei herkulanensischen Papyri. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt, Frommann-Holzboog.
GEIGER, R. (2006). Dialektische Tugenden. Untersuchungen zur Gesprächsform in den Platonischen Dialogen. Paderborn, Mentis.
GOMPERZ, T. (1882). Die Akademie und ihr vermeintlicher Philomacedonismus. Wiener Studien. Zeitschrift für classische Philologie 4, p. 102-120.
ISNARDI PARENTE, M. (1980). Speusippo. Frammenti. Napoli, Bibliopolis.
¬¬¬ISNARDI PARENTE, M. (1982) Senocrate; Ermodoro. Frammenti. Napoli, Bibliopolis.
JAEGER, W. W. (1923). Aristoteles. Grundlegung einer Geschichte seiner Entwicklung. Berlin, Weidmannsche Buchhandlung.
KOCK, T. (1884). Comicorum Atticorum Fragmenta. Vol. II. Leipzig, Teubner.
MANSFELD, J. (1994). Prolegomena. Questions to be Settled before the Study of an Author, or a Text. Leiden-New York-Köln, Brill.
MOTTA, A. (2014). Anonimo. Prolegomeni alla filosofia di Platone. Saggio introduttivo, traduzione e commento storico-filosofico a cura di A. M. Roma, Armando Editore.
MOTTA, A. (2016). Il Bios di Platone nelle lezioni dei Neoplatonici Alessandrini. In: BORRIELLO, M.; VITALE, A. M. (eds.). Princeps Philosophorum. Platone nell’ Occidente tardo-antico, medieval e umanistico. Roma, Città Nuova, p. 189-203.
MÜLLER, K. (1841). Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum. Vol. I, Paris, Ambroise Firmin-Didot.
NAILS, D. (2002). The People of Plato. A Prosography of Plato and Other Socratics. Indianapolis-Cambridge, Hackett Publishing Company.
NOVOTNÃ, F. (1964). Die antiken Platon-Legenden. Verherrlichung und Verleumdung. In: ÄŒEÅ KA, J.; HEJZLAR, G. (eds.). Mnema Vladimír Groh. Praha, Státní pedagogické nakladatelství, p. 161-179.
PAASSEN, C. R. van (1960). Platon in den Augen der Zeitgenossen. Wiesbaden, Springer Fachmedien.
PHILIP, J. A. (1966). Platonic Diairesis. Transactions of the American Philological Association 97, p. 335-358.
REGALI, M. (2016). ΚάθαÏσις e protrettica nel βίος dei Prolegomena alla filosofia di Platone. In: BONAZZI, M.; SCHORN, S. (eds.). Bios Philosophos. Philosophy in Ancient Greek Biography. Tournhout, Brepols, p. 275-308.
RIGINOS, A. S. (1976). Platonica: The Anecdotes Concerning the Live and Writings of Plato. Leiden, Brill.
RITTER, C. (1910). Platon. Sein Leben, seine Schriften, seine Lehre. Bd. I. München, C. H. Beck.
SOMMERSTEIN, A. (2002). Greek Drama and Dramatists. London-New York, Routledge.
SPINASSI, M. A. (2014a). Platón y las condiciones de la filosofía. La propuesta del Teeteto. In: ASSIS, M. E.; LOBO, C. E. (eds.). Significación y Resignificación del Mundo Clásico Antiguo. Actas del XXII Simposio Nacional de Estudios Clásicos. Tucumán, UNT, p. 1016-1021.
SPINASSI, M. A. (2014b). El Extranjero de Elea y la “Sofística de noble linaje” (Platón, Sofista 230 E5-231 B8). Exemplaria Classica 18, p. 29-46.
SQUILLACE, G. (2017). Filistione di Locri. Un medico del IV secolo a.C. tra Grecia, Magna Grecia e Sicilia. Hildesheim, Olms.
SZLEZÁK, T. A. (1985). Platon und die Schriftlichkeit der Philosophie. Interpretation zu den frühen und mittleren Dialogen. Berlin-New York, Walter de Gruyter.
SZLEZÁK, T. A. (1993). Platon Lesen. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt, frommann-holzboog.
SZLEZÁK, T. A. (2004). Das Bild des Dialektikers in Platons späten Dialogen. Berlin, Walter de Gruyter.
TARÁN, L. (1981). Speussipus of Athens. A Critical Study with a Collection of the Related Texts and Commentary. Leiden, Brill.
TARRANT, H. (2006). Proclus. Commentary on Plato’s Timaeus. Vol. I. Book I: Proclus on the Socratic State and Atlantis. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
TIGERSTEDT, E. N. (1977). Interpreting Plato. Upsala, Almqvist & Wiksell International.
![Archai Journal nº25 (2019 [1])](https://periodicos.unb.br/public/journals/2/cover_issue_1577_en_US.png)
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Given the public access policy of the journal, the use of the published texts is free, with the obligation of recognizing the original authorship and the first publication in this journal. The authors of the published contributions are entirely and exclusively responsible for their contents.
1. The authors authorize the publication of the article in this journal.
2. The authors guarantee that the contribution is original, and take full responsibility for its content in case of impugnation by third parties.
3. The authors guarantee that the contribution is not under evaluation in another journal.
4. The authors keep the copyright and convey to the journal the right of first publication, the work being licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License-BY.
5. The authors are allowed and stimulated to publicize and distribute their work on-line after the publication in the journal.
6. The authors of the approved works authorize the journal to distribute their content, after publication, for reproduction in content indexes, virtual libraries and similars.
7. The editors reserve the right to make adjustments to the text and to adequate the article to the editorial rules of the journal.
