Plato's Disappointment with his Phaedran Characters and its Impact on his Theory of Psychology
In the Phaedrus scientific psychology is an integral part of Plato's outline of scientific rhetoric. An accomplished rhetorician must know all types of human souls (ψυχς γένη, 271b1–2), he must know what kind of soul is affected by what kind of speech, and he must be able to apply this theoreti...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Classical quarterly 2000-12, Vol.50 (2), p.374-383 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 383 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 374 |
container_title | Classical quarterly |
container_volume | 50 |
creator | Tomin, Julius |
description | In the Phaedrus scientific psychology is an integral part of Plato's outline of scientific rhetoric. An accomplished rhetorician must know all types of human souls (ψυχς γένη, 271b1–2), he must know what kind of soul is affected by what kind of speech, and he must be able to apply this theoretical knowledge in front of an audience, so as to achieve the intended persuasion with unfailing certainty. This knowledge is an essential qualification of a philosopher; it enables him to choose a soul of the right type (λαβῲν ψνχήν προσήκουσαν, 276e6) and plant in it words of wisdom. His words, that is the authentic logos, acquire new life in the soul of the recipient, who in his turn sows their progeny in other suitable souls (276e5–277a3). In the dialogue, Socrates implants the words of wisdom in the soul of Phaedrus, and wishes that Phaedrus may similarly influence Lysias (257ab). Socrates’ work on Phaedrus permeates the whole dialogue, giving it its dramatic unity, and yet interpreters disagree on it. The late dating of the dialogue, which has been accepted as axiomatic throughout this century, stands in the way of seeing it clearly. Phaedrus in the Protagoras and in the Symposium does not appear like a man who would appropriate the exalted ideal raised before him in the Phaedrus. The majority of modern interpreters therefore cannot see Phaedrus’ conversion to philosophy in the Phaedrus as anything but ironic. I shall argue that Plato in the dialogue does enact his Phaedran ideal of the authentic communication of philosophy, and that this precludes the ironical reading of the dialogue. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1093/cq/50.2.374 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1035924552</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1093_cq_50_2_374</cupid><jstor_id>1558896</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>1558896</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-2cd2b7d23b50f640981fe41a8274e181fddafd6b81cf3ed943a3d9b3db0dd54f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkN1rFDEUxYMouLY--epDEEFBZpvPmcxjWe0HLHUL1QcfDJkk08k6M5lNsuj-92a7xYXiU7g5v3s49wDwBqM5RjU905szjuZkTiv2DMwwq3BRCsaegxlCqC4EFeIleBXjGiFMOEEz8HPVq-Q_RPjZRTVN3o1psGOCv13qYOciXHXKmqBGuOhUUDrZEKEaDXQpwuthyj_Qjw_kXWd92EHfwlXc6c73_n53Cl60qo_29eN7Ar5dfLlbXBXLr5fXi_NloRmuU0G0IU1lCG04akuGaoFby7ASpGIW58EY1ZqyEVi31JqaUUVN3VDTIGM4a-kJ-HjwnYLfbG1McnBR275Xo_XbKDGivCaMc5LRd0_Qtd-GMaeTBOGyogTvoU8HSAcfY7CtnIIbVNhlJ7mvWuqN5EgSmavO9PtHSxW16ttcl3bxuIJLzPAee3vA1jH5cJQ5F6Ius1wcZBeT_fNPVuGXzKkqLsvLW_njAt0u0dWN_H7ktRqa4My9PV7yv5R_ASyTpXk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>201673212</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Plato's Disappointment with his Phaedran Characters and its Impact on his Theory of Psychology</title><source>Cambridge Journals Online</source><source>JSTOR All Journals</source><creator>Tomin, Julius</creator><creatorcontrib>Tomin, Julius</creatorcontrib><description>In the Phaedrus scientific psychology is an integral part of Plato's outline of scientific rhetoric. An accomplished rhetorician must know all types of human souls (ψυχς γένη, 271b1–2), he must know what kind of soul is affected by what kind of speech, and he must be able to apply this theoretical knowledge in front of an audience, so as to achieve the intended persuasion with unfailing certainty. This knowledge is an essential qualification of a philosopher; it enables him to choose a soul of the right type (λαβῲν ψνχήν προσήκουσαν, 276e6) and plant in it words of wisdom. His words, that is the authentic logos, acquire new life in the soul of the recipient, who in his turn sows their progeny in other suitable souls (276e5–277a3). In the dialogue, Socrates implants the words of wisdom in the soul of Phaedrus, and wishes that Phaedrus may similarly influence Lysias (257ab). Socrates’ work on Phaedrus permeates the whole dialogue, giving it its dramatic unity, and yet interpreters disagree on it. The late dating of the dialogue, which has been accepted as axiomatic throughout this century, stands in the way of seeing it clearly. Phaedrus in the Protagoras and in the Symposium does not appear like a man who would appropriate the exalted ideal raised before him in the Phaedrus. The majority of modern interpreters therefore cannot see Phaedrus’ conversion to philosophy in the Phaedrus as anything but ironic. I shall argue that Plato in the dialogue does enact his Phaedran ideal of the authentic communication of philosophy, and that this precludes the ironical reading of the dialogue.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0009-8388</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-6844</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/cq/50.2.374</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Classical rhetoric ; Disappointment ; Forensic rhetoric ; Greco-Roman antiquity ; Historical studies (History of philosophy. History of ideas) ; Oratory ; Philosophers ; Philosophy ; Plato ; Platonism ; Political rhetoric ; Psychology ; Scientific discourse ; Socratic philosophy ; Soul ; Tyranny</subject><ispartof>Classical quarterly, 2000-12, Vol.50 (2), p.374-383</ispartof><rights>Copyright © The Classical Association 2000</rights><rights>Copyright 2000 Oxford University Press</rights><rights>2001 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Oxford University Press(England) 2000</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-2cd2b7d23b50f640981fe41a8274e181fddafd6b81cf3ed943a3d9b3db0dd54f3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/1558896$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0009838800032365/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,315,781,785,804,27926,27927,55630,58019,58252</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=1161414$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Tomin, Julius</creatorcontrib><title>Plato's Disappointment with his Phaedran Characters and its Impact on his Theory of Psychology</title><title>Classical quarterly</title><addtitle>The Class. Q</addtitle><description>In the Phaedrus scientific psychology is an integral part of Plato's outline of scientific rhetoric. An accomplished rhetorician must know all types of human souls (ψυχς γένη, 271b1–2), he must know what kind of soul is affected by what kind of speech, and he must be able to apply this theoretical knowledge in front of an audience, so as to achieve the intended persuasion with unfailing certainty. This knowledge is an essential qualification of a philosopher; it enables him to choose a soul of the right type (λαβῲν ψνχήν προσήκουσαν, 276e6) and plant in it words of wisdom. His words, that is the authentic logos, acquire new life in the soul of the recipient, who in his turn sows their progeny in other suitable souls (276e5–277a3). In the dialogue, Socrates implants the words of wisdom in the soul of Phaedrus, and wishes that Phaedrus may similarly influence Lysias (257ab). Socrates’ work on Phaedrus permeates the whole dialogue, giving it its dramatic unity, and yet interpreters disagree on it. The late dating of the dialogue, which has been accepted as axiomatic throughout this century, stands in the way of seeing it clearly. Phaedrus in the Protagoras and in the Symposium does not appear like a man who would appropriate the exalted ideal raised before him in the Phaedrus. The majority of modern interpreters therefore cannot see Phaedrus’ conversion to philosophy in the Phaedrus as anything but ironic. I shall argue that Plato in the dialogue does enact his Phaedran ideal of the authentic communication of philosophy, and that this precludes the ironical reading of the dialogue.</description><subject>Classical rhetoric</subject><subject>Disappointment</subject><subject>Forensic rhetoric</subject><subject>Greco-Roman antiquity</subject><subject>Historical studies (History of philosophy. History of ideas)</subject><subject>Oratory</subject><subject>Philosophers</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><subject>Plato</subject><subject>Platonism</subject><subject>Political rhetoric</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Scientific discourse</subject><subject>Socratic philosophy</subject><subject>Soul</subject><subject>Tyranny</subject><issn>0009-8388</issn><issn>1471-6844</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNptkN1rFDEUxYMouLY--epDEEFBZpvPmcxjWe0HLHUL1QcfDJkk08k6M5lNsuj-92a7xYXiU7g5v3s49wDwBqM5RjU905szjuZkTiv2DMwwq3BRCsaegxlCqC4EFeIleBXjGiFMOEEz8HPVq-Q_RPjZRTVN3o1psGOCv13qYOciXHXKmqBGuOhUUDrZEKEaDXQpwuthyj_Qjw_kXWd92EHfwlXc6c73_n53Cl60qo_29eN7Ar5dfLlbXBXLr5fXi_NloRmuU0G0IU1lCG04akuGaoFby7ASpGIW58EY1ZqyEVi31JqaUUVN3VDTIGM4a-kJ-HjwnYLfbG1McnBR275Xo_XbKDGivCaMc5LRd0_Qtd-GMaeTBOGyogTvoU8HSAcfY7CtnIIbVNhlJ7mvWuqN5EgSmavO9PtHSxW16ttcl3bxuIJLzPAee3vA1jH5cJQ5F6Ius1wcZBeT_fNPVuGXzKkqLsvLW_njAt0u0dWN_H7ktRqa4My9PV7yv5R_ASyTpXk</recordid><startdate>20001201</startdate><enddate>20001201</enddate><creator>Tomin, Julius</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><general>Oxford University Press</general><general>Cambridge University press</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>C18</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20001201</creationdate><title>Plato's Disappointment with his Phaedran Characters and its Impact on his Theory of Psychology</title><author>Tomin, Julius</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-2cd2b7d23b50f640981fe41a8274e181fddafd6b81cf3ed943a3d9b3db0dd54f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Classical rhetoric</topic><topic>Disappointment</topic><topic>Forensic rhetoric</topic><topic>Greco-Roman antiquity</topic><topic>Historical studies (History of philosophy. History of ideas)</topic><topic>Oratory</topic><topic>Philosophers</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><topic>Plato</topic><topic>Platonism</topic><topic>Political rhetoric</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Scientific discourse</topic><topic>Socratic philosophy</topic><topic>Soul</topic><topic>Tyranny</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Tomin, Julius</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Humanities Index</collection><jtitle>Classical quarterly</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Tomin, Julius</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Plato's Disappointment with his Phaedran Characters and its Impact on his Theory of Psychology</atitle><jtitle>Classical quarterly</jtitle><addtitle>The Class. Q</addtitle><date>2000-12-01</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>50</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>374</spage><epage>383</epage><pages>374-383</pages><issn>0009-8388</issn><eissn>1471-6844</eissn><abstract>In the Phaedrus scientific psychology is an integral part of Plato's outline of scientific rhetoric. An accomplished rhetorician must know all types of human souls (ψυχς γένη, 271b1–2), he must know what kind of soul is affected by what kind of speech, and he must be able to apply this theoretical knowledge in front of an audience, so as to achieve the intended persuasion with unfailing certainty. This knowledge is an essential qualification of a philosopher; it enables him to choose a soul of the right type (λαβῲν ψνχήν προσήκουσαν, 276e6) and plant in it words of wisdom. His words, that is the authentic logos, acquire new life in the soul of the recipient, who in his turn sows their progeny in other suitable souls (276e5–277a3). In the dialogue, Socrates implants the words of wisdom in the soul of Phaedrus, and wishes that Phaedrus may similarly influence Lysias (257ab). Socrates’ work on Phaedrus permeates the whole dialogue, giving it its dramatic unity, and yet interpreters disagree on it. The late dating of the dialogue, which has been accepted as axiomatic throughout this century, stands in the way of seeing it clearly. Phaedrus in the Protagoras and in the Symposium does not appear like a man who would appropriate the exalted ideal raised before him in the Phaedrus. The majority of modern interpreters therefore cannot see Phaedrus’ conversion to philosophy in the Phaedrus as anything but ironic. I shall argue that Plato in the dialogue does enact his Phaedran ideal of the authentic communication of philosophy, and that this precludes the ironical reading of the dialogue.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/cq/50.2.374</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0009-8388 |
ispartof | Classical quarterly, 2000-12, Vol.50 (2), p.374-383 |
issn | 0009-8388 1471-6844 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1035924552 |
source | Cambridge Journals Online; JSTOR All Journals |
subjects | Classical rhetoric Disappointment Forensic rhetoric Greco-Roman antiquity Historical studies (History of philosophy. History of ideas) Oratory Philosophers Philosophy Plato Platonism Political rhetoric Psychology Scientific discourse Socratic philosophy Soul Tyranny |
title | Plato's Disappointment with his Phaedran Characters and its Impact on his Theory of Psychology |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-17T22%3A50%3A51IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Plato's%20Disappointment%20with%20his%20Phaedran%20Characters%20and%20its%20Impact%20on%20his%20Theory%20of%20Psychology&rft.jtitle=Classical%20quarterly&rft.au=Tomin,%20Julius&rft.date=2000-12-01&rft.volume=50&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=374&rft.epage=383&rft.pages=374-383&rft.issn=0009-8388&rft.eissn=1471-6844&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/cq/50.2.374&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E1558896%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=201673212&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1093_cq_50_2_374&rft_jstor_id=1558896&rfr_iscdi=true |