Plato’s Phaedo and “the Art of Glaucus”: Transcending the Distortions of Developmentalism
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14195/1984-249X_31_e031Keywords:
Plato, Phaedo, developmentalismAbstract
In a 1985 article, Diskin Clay offered a modern solution to an ancient problem: instead of choosing between the scholiast’s two different explanations of “the art of Glaucus,” he offered a more textual explanation based on Socrates’ image of the distorted appearance of the embodied soul in Republic X. This paper’s thesis is that we should reconsider the way we read Socrates’ last discourse by privileging its dramatic and didactic aspects in a manner that allows us to give Clay’s insights the weight they deserve. This is preferable to regarding Phaedo as an outgrown stage of Plato’s development rather than the dramatic culmination of the dialogues as a whole, and the hegemonic hermeneutic based on chronological order of composition has made this great dialogue’s original form as unrecognizable as the ocean has made Glaucus.
Downloads
References
ADAM, J . (trans.) (1902). Plato. The Republic of Plato Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
ACKRILL, J. L. (1953). “Review of David Ross, Plato’s Theory of Ideas” Mind 62, no. 248, p. 549-556.
ALMEIDA, N. E. D. (2019). “A Metafísica Platônica como Método das Formas.” Dissertatio 49, p. 175-245.
ALTMAN, W. H. F. (2012) Plato the Teacher: The Crisis of the Republic. Lanham, Lexington.
ALTMAN, W. H. F. (2016) The Guardians in Action: Plato the Teacher and the Post-Republic Dialogues from Timaeus to Theaetetus.
Lanham, Lexington.
ANNAS, JULIA (1975). “On the ‘Intermediates.’” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 57, no. 2, p. 146-166.
ANNAS, J. (1976). Aristotle. Aristotle’s Metaphysics, Books M and N; Translated with Introduction and Notes Oxford, Clarendon Press.
ARSEN, H. S. (2012). “A Case for the Utility of the Mathematical Intermediates.” Philosophia Mathematica III 20, p. 200-223.
BAE, E. (1996). Soul and Intermediates in Plato’s Phaedo Ph.D. Dissertation. University of California, Los Angeles.
BARNEY, R.; BRENNAN, T.; BRITTAIN, C. (eds.) (2012). Plato and the Divided Self Cambridge, Cambridge University Press .
BLUCK, R. S. (1955). Plato. Plato’s Phaedo: a translation with Introduction, Notes and Appendices Indianapolis, Bobbs-Merrill.
BOSTOCK, D. (1986). Plato. Plato’s Phaedo Oxford, Clarendon Press.
BURNET, J. (ed.) (1901). Plato. Platonis Opera, volumes 2-5. Oxford, Clarendon Press .
BURNET, J. (ed.) (1911). Plato. Plato’s Phaedo ; edited with Introduction and Notes Oxford, Clarendon Press .
BURNET, J. (1930). Early Greek Philosophy fourth edition. London, Macmillan.
BURGER, R. (1984). The Phaedo: A Platonic Labyrinth New Haven, Yale University Press.
BURNYEAT, M. F. (2006). The Truth of Tripartition. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 106, p. 1-22.
CHERNISS, H. (1944). Aristotle’s Criticism of Plato and the Academy, volume 1. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press.
CLAY, D. (1985). The Art of Glaukos (Plato Phaedo 108d4-9). American Journal of Philology 106, no. 2, p. 230-236.
COOPER, J. M. and HUTCHINSON, D. S. (eds.) (1997). Plato. Plato, Complete Works; edited with an Introduction and Notes. Chicago, Hackett.
CORNFORD, F. M. (1939). Plato and Parmenides: Parmenides’ Way of Truth and Plato’s Parmenides. London, Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co.
CROSS, R. C., and WOOZLEY, A. D. (1964). Plato’s Republic: A Philosophical Commentary New York, St. Martin’s Press.
DENYER, N. (2008). Plato, Protagoras. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.
DORTER, K. (1989). The Theory of Forms and Parmenides I. In: ANTON, J.; PREUS, A. (eds.), Essays in Ancient Greek Philosophy III: Plato Albany, State University of New York Press, p. 183-202.
DUKE, A. et al. (eds.) (1995). Plato. Platonis Opera, volume 1. Oxford, Clarendon.
FRIEDLANDER, P; MEYERHOFF, H. (trans.) (1958). Plato: An Introduction New York, Pantheon.
FREDE, D. (1997). Plato. Philebos. Übersetzung und Kommentar Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
FREDE, D. (1999). Plato on What the Body’s Eye Tells theMind ’s Eye. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 99, p. 191-209.
GALLOP, D. (1975). Plato. Phaedo; Translated with Notes Oxford, Clarendon Press.
GALLOP, D. (1982). Plato’s ‘Cyclical Argument’ Recycled. Phronesis 27, n. 3, p. 207-222.
GALLOP, D. (2003). The Rhetoric of Philosophy: Socrates’ Swan Song. In: MICHELINI, A. N. (ed.), Plato as Author: The Rhetoric of Philosophy Leiden and Boston, Brill, p. 313-332.
GEACH, P. T. (1956). The Third Man Again. Philosophical Review 65, no. 1, p. 72-82.
GERSON, L. (2000). Plato Absconditus In: PRESS, G. (ed.), Who Speaks for Plato? Lanham, Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, p. 201-210.
GERSON, L. (2013). From Plato to Platonism Ithaca, NY and London, Cornell University Press.
GREEN, C. T. (2014). Is Platonic Rebirth Pointless? In: HEATH, M., GREEN, C. T., and SERRANITO, F. (eds.), Religion and Belief: A Moral Landscape Newcastle upon Tyne, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, p. 57-75.
GREENE, W. C. (ed.) (1938). Scholia Platonica Haverford, American Philological Society.
GUTIÉRREZ, R. (2017). El Arte de la Conversión: Un estudio sobre la Républica de Platón Lima, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.
HACKFORTH, R. (1955). Plato. Plato’s Phaedo : Translated with Introduction and Commentary Cambridge, Cambridge University Press .
Howland, J. (1991). Re-Reading Plato: The Problem of Platonic Chronology.Phoenix45, n.3, 189-214.
JORGENSON, C. (2018). The Embodied Soul in Plato’s Later Thought Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
KAHN, C. H. (1996). Plato and the Socratic Dialogue: The Philosophical Use of Literary Form Cambridge, Cambridge University Press .
KLEIN, J. (1985). The Concept of Number in Greek Mathematics and Philosophy (1939). In: KLEIN, J., Lectures and Essays Annapolis, St. John’s College Press, p. 43-52.
KRAMER, H. J. (1966). Über den Zusammenhang von Prinzipienlehre und Dialektik bei Platon; Zur Definition des Dialektikers Politeia 534 B-C. Philologus 110, p. 35-70.
LEE, D. C. (2012). Drama, Dogmatism, and the ‘Equals’ Argument in Plato’s Phaedo Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 44, p. 1-39.
LOHR, G. (1990). Das Problem des Einen und Vielen in Platons Philebos. Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht .
MORROW, G. R. (1952). Review of David Ross, Plato’s Theory of Ideas Ethics 62, no. 2, p. 147-149.
Nails, D. (1994). Plato’s “Middle” Cluster. Phoenix , 48, n.1, p.62-67.
PRIOR, W. J. (1985). Unity and Development in Plato’s Metaphysics LaSalle, Open Court.
PRITCHARD, P. (1995). Plato’s Philosophy of Mathematics. Sankt Augustin, Academia.
RAVEN, J. E. (1948). Pythagoreans and Eleatics. London, Cambridge University Press.
RIST, J. M. (1964). Equals and Intermediates in Plato. Phronesis 9, n. 1, p. 27-37.
ROSS, W. D. (ed.) (1924). Aristotle. Aristotle’s Metaphysics: A Revised Text with Introduction and Commentary, two volumes.
Oxford, Clarendon Press.
ROSS, W. D. (1951). Plato’s Theory of Ideas. Oxford, Clarendon Press.
RUPRECHT, L. A., Jr. (1999). Symposia: Plato, the Erotic, andvMoral Value. Albany, State University of New York Press.
RYLE, G. (1966). Plato’s Progress. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
SEDLEY, D. (ed.) (2010). Plato: Meno and Phaedo, translated by Alex Long. Cambridge/New York, Cambridge University Press.
SHINER, R. A. (1983). Knowledge in Philebus 55c-62a: A Response. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Supplementary Volume
, p. 171-183.
SHOREY, P. (1903). The Unity of Plato’s Thought. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
SLINGS, S. R. (ed.) (2003). Platonis Rempublicam. Oxford, Clarendon Press.
SMITH, N. D. (1996). Plato’s Divided Line. Ancient Philosophy 16, p. 25-46.
VLASTOS, G.Postscript to the Third Man: A Reply to Mr. Geach (1965) in: ALLEN, R. E. (ed.). Studies in Plato’s Metaphysics.
London, Routledge & Kegan Paul; New York, Humanities Press, p.279-291.
WATERFIELD, R. A. H. (1980). The Place of the Philebus in Plato’s Dialogues. Phronesis, 25, no. 3, p. 270-305.
WEDBERG, A. (1955). Plato’s Philosophy of Mathematics. Stockholm, Almqvist & Wiksell.
WOOLF, R. (2012). How to See an Unencrusted Soul. In: BARNEY, R.; BRENNAN, T.; BRITTAIN, C. (eds.). Plato and the Divided Self. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 150-173.
ZUCKERT, C. H. (2009). Plato’s Philosophers: The Coherence of the Dialogues. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 William Henry Furness Altman
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International 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.
