“A Crowd of Gorgons and Winged Horses”. A Critique of Socratic Philosophers in Athenaeus’ The Deipnosophists

Q4 Arts and Humanities Pro-Fil Pub Date : 2023-06-20 DOI:10.5817/pf23-1-33931
František Škvrnda
{"title":"“A Crowd of Gorgons and Winged Horses”. A Critique of Socratic Philosophers in Athenaeus’ The Deipnosophists","authors":"František Škvrnda","doi":"10.5817/pf23-1-33931","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The study analyses the critique of the Socratic philosophers in Athenaeus’ The Deipnosophists. The main goal of the study is to assess its overall quality, argumentative structure, historical relevance and interpretative plausibility. The first part of the study briefly outlines the main characteristics and features of the anti-philosophical literature in antiquity. The second part examines Athenaeus' argumentative methods and techniques of textual criticism. In the following parts of the study, we scrutinise Athenaeus‘s overall critical assessment of Socratic literature and compare it with extant philosophical, biographical and doxographical evidence. In conclusion, we answer the question of to what extent is Athenaeus' critique relevant and substantiated by available textual evidence.","PeriodicalId":53428,"journal":{"name":"Pro-Fil","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pro-Fil","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5817/pf23-1-33931","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The study analyses the critique of the Socratic philosophers in Athenaeus’ The Deipnosophists. The main goal of the study is to assess its overall quality, argumentative structure, historical relevance and interpretative plausibility. The first part of the study briefly outlines the main characteristics and features of the anti-philosophical literature in antiquity. The second part examines Athenaeus' argumentative methods and techniques of textual criticism. In the following parts of the study, we scrutinise Athenaeus‘s overall critical assessment of Socratic literature and compare it with extant philosophical, biographical and doxographical evidence. In conclusion, we answer the question of to what extent is Athenaeus' critique relevant and substantiated by available textual evidence.
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
"一群蛇发怪和飞马"雅典娜《神智论者》中对苏格拉底哲学家的批判
本研究分析了雅典娜的《神知论者》对苏格拉底哲学家的批判。本研究的主要目的是评估其整体质量、论证结构、历史相关性和解释合理性。第一部分简要概述了古代反哲学文学的主要特点和特征。第二部分考察了雅典娜的论证方法和文本批评技巧。在接下来的研究中,我们将仔细审视雅典娜对苏格拉底文学的总体批判性评价,并将其与现存的哲学、传记和文献证据进行比较。最后,我们回答了一个问题,即雅典娜的批判在多大程度上是相关的,并得到了现有文本证据的证实。
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
Pro-Fil
Pro-Fil Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊介绍: Electronic journal of philosophy Pro-Fil is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that publishes articles addressing a whole range of philosophical topics as well as contributions from natural sciences focusing on philosophically relevant issues. We welcome original papers, reviews, polemics, interviews, abstracts, announcements, audio and video recordings of lectures as well as instructional and educational materials in Czech, Slovak, English, and German.
期刊最新文献
“A Crowd of Gorgons and Winged Horses”. A Critique of Socratic Philosophers in Athenaeus’ The Deipnosophists The Spectrality of Shame in Plato’s Menexenus The Social, Therapeutic and Didactic Dimension of Shame in Seneca’s Thinking Heinrich Heine: Předposlední dny bohů Spinoza’s Model of God: Pantheism or Panentheism?
×
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