An unexplained overlap between Sophist 232b1-236d4 and Republic X
The case of the sophist as a painter
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14195/1984-249X_30_14Keywords:
Plato, Sophist, Image, Appearance, Imitation, intellect, educationAbstract
Although most scholars agree that the lexicon of Sophist 232b1-236d4 is similar to that of Republic X, they leave undetermined whether they are theoretically compatible. Notably, both dialogues elucidate the art of imitation through the metaphor of the painter who deceives his pupils through φαντάσματα. I argue that Plato’s conception of imitation of the Republic is not only consistent with that presented in the Sophist, but also importantly integrates it.
Downloads
References
ANNAS, J. (1981). An Introduction to Plato’s Republic. Oxford/New York, Oxford University Press.
BLUCK, R. S. (1975). Plato’s Sophist: A Commentary. Edited by Gordon C. Neal. Manchester, Manchester University Press.
BONAZZI, M. (2012). Platone. Fedro. Turin, Einaudi.
BROWN, L. (2010). Definition and Division in the Sophist. In: CHARLES, D. (ed.). Definition in Greek Philosophy. Oxford, Oxford University Press, p. 151-171.
BURNYEAT, M. F. (1997). Culture and Society in Plato’s Republic. Tanner Lectures on Human Values 20, p. 215-324.
BURNYEAT, M. F. (2000). Plato on Why Mathematics is Good for the Soul. In: SMILEY, T. (ed.). Mathematics and Necessity: Essays in the History of Philosophy. New York, Oxford University Press, p. 1-81.
BURNYEAT, M. F. (2012). Explorations in Ancient and Modern Philosophy. Vol. 2. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
CENTRONE, B. (2008). Platone. Sofista. Turin, Einaudi.
CORNFORD, F. M. (1935). Plato’s Theory of Knowledge: the Theaetetus and the Sophist translated with a running commentary. London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.
DELCOMMINETTE, S. (2014). Qu’est-ce que l’intelligence selon Platon? Revue des études grecques 127, n. 1, p. 55-73.
DE RIJK, L. M. (1986). Plato’s Sophist: A Philosophical Commentary. Amsterdam/New York, Royal Netherlands Academy.
DORTER, K. (1994). Form and Good in Plato’s Eleatic dialogues: The Parmenides, Theaetetus, Sophist, and Statesman. Los Angeles, University of California Press.
ELSE, G. F. (1972). The Structure and Date of Book 10 of Plato’s Republic. Heildelberg, Winter.
ESSES, D. (2019). Philosophic Appearance and Sophistic Essence in Plato’s Sophist: A New Reading of the Definitions. Ancient Philosophy 39, n. 2, p. 295-317.
GASTALDI, S. (1999). Paideia/mythologia. In: VEGETTI, M. (ed.). La Repubblica. Traduzione e commento. Vol. 2: Libri 2 e 3. Napoli, Bibliopolis, p. 333-392.
GILL, M. L. (2010). Division and Definition in Plato’s Sophist and Statesman. In: CHARLES, D. (ed.). Definition in Greek Philosophy. Oxford, Oxford University Press, p. 172-199.
LESZL, W. (2001). Pourquoi des formes? Sur quelques-unes des raisons pour lesquelles Platon a conçu l’hypothèse des formes intelligibles. In: PRADEAU, J. (ed.). Platon : les formes intelligibles. Sur la forme intelligible et la participation dans les dialogues platoniciens. Paris, PUF, p. 87-127.
LEVIN, S. (2001). The Ancient Quarrel Between Philosophy and Poetry Revisited. New York, Oxford University Press.
LORENZ, H. (2006). The Brute Within: Appetitive Desire in Plato and Aristotle. New York, Oxford University Press.
MOSS, J. (2007). What is Imitative Poetry and Why is it Bad? In: FERRARI, G. R. F. (ed.). Cambridge Companion to Plato’s Republic. New York, Cambridge University Press, p. 414-444.
MOSS, J. (2014). Plato’s Appearance-Assent Account of Belief. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 114, n. 2, p. 213-238.
MOVIA, G. (1991). Apparenze essere e verità . Commentario storico-filosofico al Sofista di Platone. Milano, Vita e Pensiero.
NETTLESHIP, R. L. (1937). Lectures on the Republic of Plato. London, Macmillan and co.
NOTOMI, N. (1999). The Unity of Plato’s Sophist: Between the Sophist and the Philosopher. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
RICKLESS, S. (2010). Plato’s Definition (s) of Sophistry. Ancient Philosophy 30, n. 2, p. 289-298.
ROSEN, S. (1999). Plato’s Sophist: the Drama of Original and Image. South Bend, St. Augustine’s Press.
ROWE, C. (2012). Plato. Republic. London, Penguin Classics.
ROWE, C. (2015). Plato. Theaetetus and Sophist. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
SHOREY, P. (1935). Plato. The Republic. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
SCOTT, D. (2006). Plato’s Meno. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
SCOTT, D. (2016). From Painters to Poets: Plato’s Methods in Republic X. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 116, n. 3, p. 289-309.
STOREY, D. (2014). Appearance, Perception, and Non-Rational Belief: Republic 602c-603a. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 47, p. 81-118.
TEISSERENC, F. (2012). Le Sophiste de Platon. Paris, PUF.
TELOH, H. (1986). Socratic Education in Plato’s Early Dialogues. Notre Dame, University of Notre Dame Press.
VEGETTI, M. (2003). Quindi Lezioni su Platone. Turin, Einaudi.
VEGETTI, M. (2007). La Repubblica. Traduzione e commento. Vol. 7: Libro 10. Napoli, Bibliopolis.
VILLELA-PETIT, M. (1991). La Question de l’Image Artistique dans le Sophiste. In: NARCY, M. (ed.). Etudes sur le Sophiste de Platon. Napoli, Bibliopolis, p. 55-90.
WERNER, D. (2012). Myth and Philosophy in Plato’s Phaedrus. New York, Cambridge University Press.
WHITE, N. P. (1979). A Companion to Plato’s Republic. Indianapolis, Hackett Publishing Company.
![Archai 30 (2020 [3])](https://periodicos.unb.br/public/journals/2/cover_issue_2020_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.
