Pub Date : 2019-11-04DOI: 10.4324/9780367854140-19
H. Kallen
{"title":"The Time of Our Lives as We Live Them Out","authors":"H. Kallen","doi":"10.4324/9780367854140-19","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367854140-19","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":179691,"journal":{"name":"Creativity, Imagination, Logic","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128529492","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this paper, I analyze the connections between Plato’s Sophist and Gorgias’ On Not-Being or On Nature. I argue that the Sophist is best construed as a reaction to Gorgias’ oration, based on the dramatic context of the dialogue, hints in other dialogues, and the two works’ parallel argumentative concerns and structures. I further argue that this interpretation undermines some traditional claims about the Sophist, including the thesis that the Sophist marks a major revision or even abandonment of Plato’s earlier views. I then offer my own view that the dialogue is an exercise in intellectual purification, supporting this view with the dramatic elements of the Sophist. This view coheres well with my claim that Plato wrote the dialogue as a refutation of Gorgias and further supports my claims about developmental interpretations of the Sophist. Like many other Platonic dialogues, the Sophist displays a manifest concern for the question of what it means to be a philosopher. The Sophist is unique, however, in containing Plato’s longest sustained inquiry into what the philosopher is not—namely, a sophist. Plato’s portrayal of sophistry is, of course, more than a mere literary device for making the portrait of the philosopher clearer. Plato’s discussion of sophistry throughout the dialogues is intimately connected with the historical phenomenon of sophistry and its intellectual forefathers— particularly Gorgias. In fact, Plato polemically targets Gorgias and his teachings in twelve different dialogues. Given this conspicuous interest in Gorgias’ teachings, it is reasonable to assume that Plato read Gorgias’ widely known attack on Parmenidean philosophy, On Not-Being or On Nature. Therefore, in interpreting the Sophist, which deals extensively with Parmenides’ arguments, it would be prudent to investigate the connections between the philosophical content of the dialogue and Gorgias’ oration. In the following paper, I argue that one of Plato’s chief concerns in the Sophist is the refutation of the arguments found in Gorgias’ On Not-Being. I will first cite evidence in favor of this view, drawing from other dialogues as well as the dramatic elements in the Sophist itself. I will then show how the specific arguments in On Not-Being are both appropriated and addressed in the Sophist. Afterwards, I will show how my view informs 1 An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Steven Humphrey Student Philosophy Colloquium at University of Louisville on November 12, 2010, under the title “Plato contra Gorgias: Gorgias’ On Not-Being and the Philosophical Context of the Sophist.” Another early draft was presented under its current title at the SUNY Oneonta 16 Annual Undergraduate Philosophy Conference, which occurred April 28-30, 2011. 2 For a list of these occurrences, see Scott Consigny, Gorgias: Sophist and Artist (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 2001), 37, and especially 217n. 5. Note that not all of these occurrences explicitly menti
{"title":"Ex Nihilo","authors":"Horace M. Kallen","doi":"10.4324/9780367854140-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367854140-1","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, I analyze the connections between Plato’s Sophist and Gorgias’ On Not-Being or On Nature. I argue that the Sophist is best construed as a reaction to Gorgias’ oration, based on the dramatic context of the dialogue, hints in other dialogues, and the two works’ parallel argumentative concerns and structures. I further argue that this interpretation undermines some traditional claims about the Sophist, including the thesis that the Sophist marks a major revision or even abandonment of Plato’s earlier views. I then offer my own view that the dialogue is an exercise in intellectual purification, supporting this view with the dramatic elements of the Sophist. This view coheres well with my claim that Plato wrote the dialogue as a refutation of Gorgias and further supports my claims about developmental interpretations of the Sophist. Like many other Platonic dialogues, the Sophist displays a manifest concern for the question of what it means to be a philosopher. The Sophist is unique, however, in containing Plato’s longest sustained inquiry into what the philosopher is not—namely, a sophist. Plato’s portrayal of sophistry is, of course, more than a mere literary device for making the portrait of the philosopher clearer. Plato’s discussion of sophistry throughout the dialogues is intimately connected with the historical phenomenon of sophistry and its intellectual forefathers— particularly Gorgias. In fact, Plato polemically targets Gorgias and his teachings in twelve different dialogues. Given this conspicuous interest in Gorgias’ teachings, it is reasonable to assume that Plato read Gorgias’ widely known attack on Parmenidean philosophy, On Not-Being or On Nature. Therefore, in interpreting the Sophist, which deals extensively with Parmenides’ arguments, it would be prudent to investigate the connections between the philosophical content of the dialogue and Gorgias’ oration. In the following paper, I argue that one of Plato’s chief concerns in the Sophist is the refutation of the arguments found in Gorgias’ On Not-Being. I will first cite evidence in favor of this view, drawing from other dialogues as well as the dramatic elements in the Sophist itself. I will then show how the specific arguments in On Not-Being are both appropriated and addressed in the Sophist. Afterwards, I will show how my view informs 1 An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Steven Humphrey Student Philosophy Colloquium at University of Louisville on November 12, 2010, under the title “Plato contra Gorgias: Gorgias’ On Not-Being and the Philosophical Context of the Sophist.” Another early draft was presented under its current title at the SUNY Oneonta 16 Annual Undergraduate Philosophy Conference, which occurred April 28-30, 2011. 2 For a list of these occurrences, see Scott Consigny, Gorgias: Sophist and Artist (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 2001), 37, and especially 217n. 5. Note that not all of these occurrences explicitly menti","PeriodicalId":179691,"journal":{"name":"Creativity, Imagination, Logic","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115052719","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：