Platons Darlegung des Sokratischen ‚Umsonst‘ in den Dialogen der ersten Tetralogie (Euthyphron, Apologie, Kriton und Phaidon)

Andrés Quero-Sánchez
{"title":"Platons Darlegung des Sokratischen ‚Umsonst‘ in den Dialogen der ersten Tetralogie (Euthyphron, Apologie, Kriton und Phaidon)","authors":"Andrés Quero-Sánchez","doi":"10.1075/BPJAM.18.01QUE","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The author interprets the dialogues belonging to Plato’s first Tetralogy, i. e. Euthyphro,\nApology, Crito and Phaedo, as a coherent whole, in which the concept of ‘gratuitousness’\nplays the leading role. The expression ‘gratuitous’ does not mean here, however,\n‘arbitrary’ or ‘as someone likes’ but rather ‘free’, ‘gratis’, ‘for nothing’. Based on\nsuch an interpretation the author discusses then the important similarities existing\nbetween – on the one hand – Plato’s metaphysics of ‘gratuitousness’ and – on\nthe other hand – Meister Eckhart’s ‘mystics’ (in which the concept of ‘why-less’\nbeing [wesen sunder warumbe] is crucial) and Schelling’s Philosophy of Identity\n(in which the concept of ‘absolute’ being plays the fundamental role). These three\nthinkers are all interested in the world as it is not merely for us or for something\nelse – that is not in the world as it merely appears to someone under particular\ngiven conditions –, but in the world as it is in itself. However, this distinction\nbetween ‘appearances’ and ‘things-in-themselves’ is not to be thought as an epistemological\nbut rather as an ethical or existential one, which is not related to the\nway how we ‘can know’ the world but rather to the way how we ‘should live’ in it.","PeriodicalId":148050,"journal":{"name":"Bochumer Philosophisches Jahrbuch Fur Antike Und Mittelalter","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bochumer Philosophisches Jahrbuch Fur Antike Und Mittelalter","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/BPJAM.18.01QUE","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The author interprets the dialogues belonging to Plato’s first Tetralogy, i. e. Euthyphro, Apology, Crito and Phaedo, as a coherent whole, in which the concept of ‘gratuitousness’ plays the leading role. The expression ‘gratuitous’ does not mean here, however, ‘arbitrary’ or ‘as someone likes’ but rather ‘free’, ‘gratis’, ‘for nothing’. Based on such an interpretation the author discusses then the important similarities existing between – on the one hand – Plato’s metaphysics of ‘gratuitousness’ and – on the other hand – Meister Eckhart’s ‘mystics’ (in which the concept of ‘why-less’ being [wesen sunder warumbe] is crucial) and Schelling’s Philosophy of Identity (in which the concept of ‘absolute’ being plays the fundamental role). These three thinkers are all interested in the world as it is not merely for us or for something else – that is not in the world as it merely appears to someone under particular given conditions –, but in the world as it is in itself. However, this distinction between ‘appearances’ and ‘things-in-themselves’ is not to be thought as an epistemological but rather as an ethical or existential one, which is not related to the way how we ‘can know’ the world but rather to the way how we ‘should live’ in it.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
柏拉图的律例Sokratischen‚免费’的对话中第Tetralogie (Euthyphron Apologie Kriton和Phaidon)
作者将柏拉图第一部《四联曲》中的《优西弗罗》、《自辩篇》、《克里托篇》和《斐多篇》的对话录解读为一个连贯的整体,其中“无偿”的概念起着主导作用。然而,“gratuitous”这个词在这里并不是指“任意的”或“随心所欲”,而是指“免费的”、“免费的”、“免费的”。基于这样的解释,作者讨论了存在的重要相似之处-一方面-柏拉图的形而上学的“无厘头”和-另一方面-迈斯特·埃克哈特的“神秘主义”(其中“为什么没有”的概念是至关重要的)和谢林的同一性哲学(其中“绝对”的概念发挥了基本作用)。这三位思想家都对世界感兴趣,因为世界不仅是为我们而存在的,也不是为其他事物而存在的——也不是仅仅在特定的条件下出现在某人面前的世界——而是世界本身。然而,“表象”和“自在之物”之间的区别不应被视为认识论的区别,而应被视为伦理或存在主义的区别,这与我们“如何认识”世界的方式无关,而是与我们“应该如何生活”在其中的方式有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Die Chaldäischen Orakel in proklos philosophie Kritik über Leeten (2019): Redepraxis als Lebenspraxis. Die diskursive Kultur der antiken Ethik Kritik über Hengelbrock (2018): Zeit und Freizeit: Seneca, Epistulae morales Proclus armeniacus “Mirum est si intellectus noster omnem scientiam accipiens ex phantasmate”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1