Filone di Larissa e l’Assioco

This short paper is a critical note of the recent volume on the pseudo-Platonic dialogue Axiochus edited by A. Beghini ([Platone], Assioco. Saggio introduttivo, edizione critica, traduzione e commento, Baden-Baden: Academia Verlag, 2020). This scholar assumes the possibility of attributing the dialogue to Philo of Larissa or his circle. This hypothesis, although well argued in the book, faces some exegetical difficulties concerning the content of the dialogue and the hardly reconstructible philosophy of Philo himself. In this note I will critically discuss the conclusions reached by Beghini in his prestigious book starting from the (alleged) sceptical vein which would be present in the pseudo-Platonic work, whose dating likely presupposes (also) the Epicurean conception of death.

PLATONIC DIALOGUE AND GADAMERIAN HERMENEUTICS

This paper will elaborate the different Platonic elements of dialogue as philosophical basis for Gadamerian hermeneutical structures. The intersubjective cross-examination found in Plato’s Dialogue shows that the real meaning comes from the real encounters between speakers; or in Gadamer’s term: encounters between text and the reader. For Gadamer, it is always important in this pursuit of meaning and truth that we examine our own prejudice. Cross-examining our own claim of truth and belief is an essential element in Gadamer’s hermeneutics. I argue that we can see how the Platonic model of dialogue is easily aligned with the Gadamerian positive approach towards ‘traditions.’ There is a constant dialogue at work in interpretation, a dialogue between the past and the present, between different traditions and points of view. Dialogue is an important keyword for both Plato and Gadamer in their efforts to their existential quest of wisdom.

A Neo-Platonic Dialogue on the Ethics of Love*

In his classic paper on “The Individual as an Object of Love in Plato” Gregory Vlastos denied that according to Plato’s Diotima in the Symposium a human individual can ever be the proper object of one’s erotic desire, because what one (should) be enamoured with is the Form of Beauty. For the true Platonic lover, the beauty of an individual is only the starting-point for one to understand that beauty can reside also in more abstract levels. Hence, Vlastos argues that the beloved individual is for his lover only a means to an end, so that the lover recollects and attains to true Beauty, and that this is morally objectionable. The systematic Neoplatonic philosopher Proclus (412–485 AD) had already given an answer to this accusation. I will first present the altruistic side of Eros as an ontological entity in Proclus’s metaphysical system. My guide in this will be Socrates, as well as the Platonic Demiurge from the Timaeus and Republic’s philosopher-king. It will be shown that, according to Proclus’s interpretation of various Platonic texts, Vlastos was wrong to accuse Plato of the abovementioned “instrumentality” on the erotic field. However, my paper will close with a critical engagement with Proclus too, since I discern that in his view of Platonic love another sort of instrumentality, one which is akin to Stoic ethics, arises. Vlastos was wrong, but we do not need to be wholeheartedly sympathetic to Proclus.

Theophrastus on Plato’s Theory of Vision

In paragraphs 5 and 86 of the De sensibus Theophrastus gives a brief report of Plato’s views on the sense of vision and its object, i. e. colour, based on the Timaeus. Interestingly enough, he presents the Platonic doctrine as a third alternative to the extramission and intromission theories put forward by other ancient philosophers. In this article I examine whether or not Theophrastus’ account is impartial. I argue that at least some of his distortive departures from the Platonic dialogue are due to his Aristotelian inheritance, even though they do not always represent Aristotle’s expressed views.

Heidegger’s Reading(s) of the Phaedrus

In the 1920s and 30s, Heidegger developed three explicit readings of Plato’s Phaedrus. These readings emphasize different dimensions of Plato’s dialogue and, at times, seem even to contradict one another. Though Heidegger pursues quite different interpretations of the dialogue, he remains steadfast in praising this Platonic dialogue above all others. I argue that these explicit readings provide fertile ground for reconsidering Heidegger’s engagement with Plato and not just with Platonism. I further develop an argument that a fourth, implicit reading of Phaedrus can be found in Heidegger’s own dialogical text from the late 1940s, “das abendländische Gespräch”. I suggest that it is in this conversational text, where Plato’s name is never once mentioned, that Heidegger manages his most authentic engagement with the Platonic dialogue and with Plato himself.

The anthropological model (καλὸς κἀγαθός) in the Platonic dialogue Charmides

In this study we investigate the extract 154b8–156c9 from the introductory chapters of the Platonic dialogue Charmides so that to examine how the terms of Aesthetics are formed, which focuses on the selfhood and makes it the core of dialectics. Specifically, we structure our study in two chapters each of which includes two subchapters. In the first subchapter we focus on the soul, which in the Platonic text appears to be the criterion for moral perfectness. In the second subchapter, which systematizes the former, we show how Socrates contrives to do the transition from subjective judgments to logical propositions and the terms of the authentic Aesthetics. In the third subchapter, paying attention to the first communication between Socrates and Charmides, we discuss how the Athenian philosopher sets beauty within its true boundaries and activates the logical part of the soul. In the fourth subchapter, we follow the introduction in dialectics, which will lead anyone involved in truth. The main contribution of our study is that we show how in this dialogue Plato succeeds to go from vulgar hedonism to the beauty of the soul, which is a requirement for the inner transformation of selfhood.

La forma del dialogo platonico nel De poetis di Aristotele

The analysis of the testimonia of Aristotle’s De poetis fr. 73 Rose suggests a new interpretation of the meaning of the literary category of medietas, attributed by Aristotle to the Platonic dialogue.