By Mary Margaret McCabe
Plato and his Predecessors considers how Plato represents his philosophical predecessors in a overdue quartet of dialogues: the Theaetetus, the Sophist, the Politicus and the Philebus. those predecessors seem in imaginary conversations; and they're refuted after they fail to guard their philosophical positions in debate. Professor McCabe argues that Plato's reflections on those conversations permit him to boost a brand new account of the rules of cause, and forge a clean view of the simplest life--the lifetime of the thinker.
Read or Download Plato and his Predecessors: The Dramatisation of Reason (The W.B. Stanford Memorial Lectures) PDF
Best greek & roman books
Plato and his Predecessors considers how Plato represents his philosophical predecessors in a overdue quartet of dialogues: the Theaetetus, the Sophist, the Politicus and the Philebus. those predecessors look in imaginary conversations; and they're refuted after they fail to protect their philosophical positions in debate.
The connection among Seneca's prose works and his profession as a first-century Roman statesman is difficult, for whereas he writes within the first individual, he tells little of his exterior lifestyles or of the folk and occasions that shaped its surroundings. during this booklet, Miriam Griffin addresses the matter by means of first reconstructing Seneca's profession utilizing merely outdoor resources and his de Clementia and Apocolocyntosis.
This booklet consolidates rising study on Aristotle's technological know-how and ethics with a view to discover the level to which the innovations, equipment, and practices he constructed for medical inquiry and rationalization are used to enquire ethical phenomena. every one bankruptcy indicates, another way, that Aristotle's ethics is far extra like a technology than it's quite often represented.
Additional resources for Plato and his Predecessors: The Dramatisation of Reason (The W.B. Stanford Memorial Lectures)
What is more, Socrates needs to defend his own peculiar style of argument - the method of considering and testing the opinions of each other. For Protagoras challenges Socrates in Socrates' own terms, familiar from the Apology and the Gorgias: s o c : He will say all these things that we have said in his defence, and yet I think he will come at us, saying contemptuously: 'This Socrates is a fine chap, frightening a little boy by asking whether it is possible for the same person to remember the same thing and not to know it; when the boy, unable to see ahead, said "no", Socrates made me look laughable in his argument.
This objection, indeed, might be one whose force Plato himself felt. 5 So when Plato comes to reconsider the methods of Socrates in later dialogues, and to think once again about the importance of conversation to philosophy, as I shall argue that he does, can he answer the foundationalist objection? Is there any way that either the Socratic doctrine: on this see again Vlastos 1991, and, from a different perspective, Irwin 1994, chs. i-5I adopt here a fairly loose notion of foundationalism. For an ancient approach to this problem, see, of course, Aristotle's discussion at Analytica Posteriora 71017 ff.
G. Euthydemus 283 ff. An anonymous referee for Dialogos suggests that this will be absurd - not only does it deny Protagoras the possibility of constructing the Great Myth of the Protagoras; it also removes from him the possibility of any other speech acts than assertion. Of course the Protagoras of the Theaetetus may well be a relativist of an entirely different sort from his Measuring sincerity 35 This is why everyone is self-sufficient as to wisdom: everyone is relatively right, at any time, because how things appear to someone at a time is how they are for them, at that time.
Plato and his Predecessors: The Dramatisation of Reason (The W.B. Stanford Memorial Lectures) by Mary Margaret McCabe