Tragedy and the philosophical life: a response to Martha Nussbaum 3 Phaedrus and Symposium
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Buch |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Lewiston [u.a.]
Mellen
2006
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| Beschreibung: | XXI, 489 S. |
| ISBN: | 0773458581 9780773458581 |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 cc4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV022270688 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20070523 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 070214s2006 xxu |||| 00||| eng d | ||
| 020 | |a 0773458581 |9 0-7734-5858-1 | ||
| 020 | |a 9780773458581 |9 978-0-7734-5858-1 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)635160905 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV022270688 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a eng | |
| 044 | |a xxu |c US | ||
| 049 | |a DE-29 | ||
| 084 | |a 5,1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Beck, Martha C. |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Tragedy and the philosophical life |b a response to Martha Nussbaum |n 3 |p Phaedrus and Symposium |c Martha C. Beck |
| 264 | 1 | |a Lewiston [u.a.] |b Mellen |c 2006 | |
| 300 | |a XXI, 489 S. | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 600 | 0 | 7 | |a Plato |d v427-v347 |t Symposium |0 (DE-588)4135938-0 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 600 | 0 | 7 | |a Plato |d v427-v347 |t Phaedrus |0 (DE-588)4138647-4 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Plato |d v427-v347 |t Phaedrus |0 (DE-588)4138647-4 |D u |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 689 | 1 | 0 | |a Plato |d v427-v347 |t Symposium |0 (DE-588)4135938-0 |D u |
| 689 | 1 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |w (DE-604)BV022270671 |g 3 |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m V:DE-604 |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015481178&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-015481178 | ||
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1804136274658852864 |
|---|---|
| adam_text | TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE: DR. PATRICK HENRY XI FOREWORD: DR. MARK MOES
XIII FOREWORD: DR. ELIZABETH HOPPE XVII ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
XIX I. INTRODUCTION 1 11. NUSSBAUM S POSITION. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 A. PLATO S
REJECTION OFTRAGEDY 6 B. PLATO S WRITING STYLE IS LINKED TO A VIEW
OFHUMAN RATIONALITY THAT IS DETACHED FROM EMOTIONS 8 C. PLATO VS.
ARISTOTIE ON THE NATURE OF HUMAN REASON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
III. RESPONSE TO NUSSBAUM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 13 A. RESPONSE # 1 . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 13 B.
RESPONSE#2 14 1. SOME BASIC ASPECTS OFA TRAGIC WORLDVIEW .. . . . . 14
2. DOES ARISTOTLE S POETICS PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE DEFINITION OF TRAGEDYAS
LITERATURE? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .. 17 3. TRAGEDYAS LITERATURE 18 A. ARISTOTIE: PLOT IS THE MOST
IMPORTANT ASPECT OF TRAGEDY . . . . . . .. 18 B. WHAT IS THE PLOT IN
THESE DIALOGUES? , 19 C. THE TRAGIC CONTEXT OFPLATO S DIALOGUES . . . .
. . . . . 19 D. ARISTOTLE S OTHER CRITERIA FOR TRAGEDY AND PLATO S
DIALOGUES . .. 26 E. ARE PLATO S DIALOGUES TRAGIC/TRAGEDIES? . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .. 30 C. RESPONSE #3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
37 1. PLATO S DIALOGUES AND THE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM AT THE ACADEMY . ..
38 2. POWERS (DUNAMAI) IN PLATO S DIALOGUES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .. 39 II 3. BEINGS AS POWERS IN THE SOPHIST, THE IDEA OFTHE
GOOD, AND THE POWERS OF KNOWING AND BEING KNOWN IN THE REPUBLIC . . . .
. . . . .. 40 4. TBE POWER OFDIVINE MIND IN THE PHAEDO 40 5. THE POWERS
OFTHE HUMAN SOUL IN THE REPUBLIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 42 6.
THE CORRUPTION OFTHE SOUL IN THE REPUBLIC: THE LOW ROAD . . . . .. 44 7.
THE EDUCATION OFTHE SOUL IN THE REPUBLIC: THE HIGH ROAD , 45 8. PLATO S
DIALOGUES ARE THE EDUCATION OF ALL THE POWERS OFSOUL IN THE WAY THAT
LEADS TO WISDOM 48 9. THE CHARACTER OFSOCRATES EMBODIES THE PATH OFTHE
PHILOSOPHICAL SOUL AND OFBEING THROUGHOUT ALL FOUR DIALOGUES 50 10. THE
LOW ROAD: THE VARIOUS KINDS OFUNPHILOSOPHICAL SOULS IN ALL FOUR
DIALOGUES 57 11. TBE APPEAL TO IMAGINATION IN ALL FOUR DIALOGUES 66 12.
THE USE OF LRONY IN PLATO S DIALOGUES ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. 68 13. REVERSAL AND RECOGNITION IN ALL FOUR DIALOGUES . . . . . . . .
. . . . . .. 70 14. IS PLATO ANTI-TRAGIC? ..... . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 70 IV. THE PHAEDRUS. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .. 73 A. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 73 1. READING EACH OFPLATO S
DIALOGUES AS PARTS OF A UNIFIED WHOLE . .. 75 2. THE DIALOGUE AS A
WHOLE: THE RELATION BETWEEN DIALECTIC, THE SOUL, AND REALITY . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 76 B. TBE
THREE PARTS OFTHE DIALOGUE 80 1. THE METAPHYSICAL FOUNDATION FOR
PHILOSOPHICAL FRIENDSHIPS: MYTH VS. PHYSICAL CAUSATION IN THE SCIENCES
80 2. SOCRATES MYTH: GENERAL REMARKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .. 82 3. SOCRATES REJECTION OF A LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF
THE MYTHOLOGICAL TRADITION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .. 84 4. SOCRATES EXPANSION OFTHE REALM OFMYTH: THE
PLACE BEYOND THE HEAVENS 86 III 5. SOCRATES MYTH AND FREE WILL: LITERAL
VS. ALLEGORICAL INTERPRETATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 6. GREEK GODS AND GODDESSES
AS PERSONIFICATIONS OFTHE FORMS .. 89 7. THE HIERARCHY OFSOULS 92 8.
THE STRUGGLE BETWEEN SOCRATES AND LYSIAS FOR PHAEDRUS SOUL 97 9. THE
RELATION BETWEEN NATURE AND CULTURE: IN THE SETTING AND
INTHETOPICOFCONVERSATION 101 10. PART ONE: LYSIAS SEDUCTION SPEECH:
LYSIAS ASSUMES THE HUMAN SOUL IS BY NATURE IRRATIONAL 103 11. SOCRATES
RESPONSE: COMPETING WITH LYSIAS FOR PHAEDRUS SOUL. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
107 12. SOCRATES SHAMEFUL SPEECH: THE NATURE OFLOVE IN A SOUL
CONTROLLED BY LOGISTIKOS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .. 110 13. SOCRATES ATONEMENT: LOVE AS A DIVINE MADNESS IN
THE PHILOSOPHICAL LIFE 114 14. PART TWO: SOCRATES MYTH: THE
MYTHOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PHILOSOPHER S LOVE OFWISDOM AND BEAUTY
116 15. THE PHILOSOPHICAL STRUGGLE BETWEEN GOOD AND EVIL 119 16. THE
THREE-PART SOUL AND THE ONE-PART SOUL: PHAEDRUS VS. REPUBLIC VI 120 17.
THE DRAMATIC CONTEXT OFTHIS MYTH: SOCRATES USE OF PHILOSOPHICAL
RHETORIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. 122 18. THE MODEL OFTHE SOUL IN THE PHAEDRUS MYTH VS. REPUBLIC IV 124
19. THE SOUL IN THE PHAEDRUS MYTH VS. REPUHLIC IX 126 20. PART THREE:
PHILOSOPHICAL AND UNPHILOSOPHICAL RHETORIC; RHETORIC VS. DIALECTIC;
KNOWING THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SUBJECT . .. 127 21. RHETORIC VS. DIALECTIC:
THE SOCIAL CONTEXT OF SPEECH 128 22. TEACHING PHAEDRUS HOW TO ANALYZE
SPEECHES 130 23. USING LANGUAGE AS A MEDICINE FOR THE SOUL 131 IV 24.
HOW TO BECOME A GOOD RHETORICIAN: THE HIGH ROAD AND THE LOW ROAD . . . .
. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
132 25. SYSTEMATIC THINKING AND EDUCATION THROUGHOUT PLATO S DIALOGUES
.,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .. 134 26. THE ART OFRHETORIC; SOCRATES USE OFDIALECTICAL
RHETORIC 136 27. DIALECTICAL EDUCATION: THE LIMITATIONS OFTHE WRITTEN
WORD 138 28. DIALECTICAL EDUCATION: THE LIMITATIONS OFTHE SPOKEN WORD
140 29. THE REALITY UNDERLYING ALL SPEECH 142 C. PATTERNS IN THE
PHAEDRUS, PROTAGORAS, AND REPUBLIC . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 143 1. THE
TWO ROADS 143 2. THE IMAGE OF THE CAVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 144 3. THE PHAEDRUS AND THE DIVIDED
LINE 145 4. THE PHAEDRUS AND TRAGEDY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .. 146 5. THE TRAGEDY OFMISUNDERSTANDING APHRODITE
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 147 6. HUMANKIND: RADICAL INSECURITY
.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 148 7. THE BLINDNESS
OFLYSIAS .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
149 8. PHAEDRUS BLINDNESS AND THE IGNORANCE OFTHE YOUTH. . . . . . . .
. .. 150 9. SOCRATES AND THE CURSE OF HONESTY . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .. 151 10. SOCRATES AND THE CORRUPTION OFTHE YOUTH
151 11. TRAGEDY IS NOT INEVITABLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .. 152 12. THE ATHENIANS MISTAKEN NOTIONS OF
JUSTICE AND INJUSTICE ..... 152 13. SOCRATES ATHEISM : THE PORTRAYAL
OFGODS AND GODDESSES IN THE PHAEDRUS 152 14. THE PHAEDRUS AS TRAGIC
LITERATURE , .. 153 15. THE PHAEDRUS AS PART OF AN EDUCATION IN RATIONAL
INTUITION (NOUS): THE NATURE OFSPEECH; PHILOSOPHICAL AND UNPHILOSOPHICAL
SPEECH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .. 159 V. THE SYMPOSIUM. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... .. . . . . .. 169 A. FRAME
DIALOGUE ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .. 169 I. THE SYMPOSIUM AND THE DEMOCRATIC PERSONALITY 175
V 2. THE SYMPOSIUM, EROS, AND THE DISRUPTION OF CONVENTIONAL BEHAVIOR .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .. 178 3. THE EDUCATION OF AGATHON 181 4. ERYXIMACHUS RULES
FOR THE PARTY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182 5. PHAEDRUS
AND THE CONTEXT OFTHE SPEECHES 184 6. THE SPEECHES: HEARING THEM
THROUGH THE EARS OF SOCRATES . . . . .. 187 7. HESIOD S MYTH OFTHE
ORIGIN OFTHE UNI VERSE 189 8. PHAEDRUS SPEECH: FOLLOWING ARES, THE GOD
OFWAR 191 9. PHAEDRUS SPEECH AND THE SPIRIT OFTHE TIMES IN ATHENS 195
10. PHAEDRUS: THE ABUSE OF AUTHORITY AMONG THE ELDERS AND THE REBELLION
OF A YOUTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . .. 198 11. PAUSANIAS SPEECH: THE SECULAR PURSUIT OF SEXUAL
PLEASURE 199 12. PHAEDRUS AND PAUSANIAS: A REJECTION OF THE MYTHOLOGICAL
TRADITION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .. 200 13. PAUSANIAS AND THE DEMOCRATIC
PERSONALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 203 14. PAUSANIAS
IDEALIZATION OFEROS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 206 15.
PAUSANIAS AND LYSIAS 207 16. PAUSANIAS DISCUSSION OFTHE LAWS OF ATHENS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 207 17. PAUSANIAS SPEECH AND THE
CORRUPTION OF ATHENIAN SOCIETY ..... 211 18. CONCLUSION: THE FIRST TWO
SPEECHES: THE IDEALIZATION OF SEX AND AGGRESSION. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 213 19.
ERYXIMACHUS SPEECH: EROS AS THE HARMONIZER . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
215 20. EDUCATING THE SOUL TO ACHIEVE HARMONY: THE EDUCATION OF HABITS
217 21. ERYXIMACHUS AND THE DEMOCRATIC PERSONALITY . . . . . . . .. 219
22. ERYXIMACHUS SPEECH AND THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM IN THE REPUBLIC ....
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . .. 222 23. ERYXIMACHUS SPEECH AND THE PRACTICE OFMEDICINE IN THE
REPUBLIC 225 24. ERYXIMACHUS MATERIALISM VS. THE PHILOSOPHICAL LIFE ..
. . . . . . .. 226 VI 25. ERYXIMACHUS IDEALIZATION OFEROS 228 26.
ARISTOPHANES SPEECH: EROS AS A MINDLESS LONGING FOR WHAT ONE LACKS. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . .. 230 27. ARISTOPHANES IDEALIZATION OFEROS 232 28. ARISTOPHANES
VS. SOCRATES: THE MYTH OFTHE PHAEDRUS 234 29. THE FIRST FOUR SPEECHES IN
THE SYMPOSIUM AND THE PHAEDRUS MYTH 238 30. TAMING THE DARK HORSE : THE
PHAEDRUS MYTH VS. THE SYMPOSIUM SPEECHES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 240 31. ARISTOPHANES COMEDY AND
THE CORRUPTION OF ATHENIAN SOCIETY .. 244 32. THE FIRST FOUR SPEECHES
AND SELF-EXAMINATION 247 33. AGATHON S SPEECH: IDEALIZING PHYSICAL
BEAUTY 249 34. EROS AS THE PURSUIT OFPHYSICAL PLEASURE 252 35. AGATHON
AND THE TYRANNICAL SOUL: THE OVERTHROW OFTRADITIONAL VALUES 255 36.
AGATHON AND PARIS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .. 258 37. AGATHON: CUTTING OFFTHE GENITALS OFTHE
FATHERS . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 260 38. THE DRAMATIC CONTEXT OF
AGATHON S SPEECH 263 39. SOCRATES SPEECH: EROS AS A NEED 266 40.
SOCRATIC EROS: THE DESIRE TO KNOW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .. 270 41. THE PERVASIVENESS OFEROS 272 42. THE EROS OFTHE
PHILOSOPHICAL SOUL 273 43. DIOTIMA AND SOCRATES: EDUCATING EROS 275 44.
THE EDUCATION OF EROS IN THE SYMPOSIUM AND THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM IN
REPUBLIC VI AND VII 281 45. ALCIBIADES SPEECH: THE TYRANNICAL SOUL 285
46. ALCIBIADES LOVE OFSOCRATES 288 47. ALCIBIADES AND THE CORRUPTION
OFTHE MOST TALENTED YOUTH 291 48. SOCRATIC EROS AND THE DISRUPTION
OFTRADITION 294 49. SOCRATES EFFORT TO EDUCATE THE YOUTH 298 VII 50.
SOCRATES AS THE GREATEST LOVER 301 51. DIALECTICAL EDUCATION AND THE
RELATION BETWEEN NATURE AND CULTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 305 B.
RECURRING THEMES IN THE PROTAGORAS, REPUBLIC, PHAEDRUS, AND SYMPOSIUM. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .. 306 1. THE TWO ROADS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 306 2. THE DIVIDED UNE 307
3. THE IMAGE OFTHE CAVE 308 4. THE NATURE AND POWER OFEROS 310 5. THE
PLACE OFMYTH IN EDUCATION; MYTH AS PHILOSOPHICAL RHETORIC 310 6. SOLON
AND THE CULTIVATION OF THE LOVE OF LEARNING IN ALL CITIZENS 313 7. THE
THREE-PART SOUL AND THE ONE-PART SOUL 314 8. THE DELUSIONS OFTHE
ATHENIANS 315 C. THE SYMPOSIUM AS A TRAGEDY 317 1. THE SERIOUS QUESTIONS
317 2. THE CHARACTERS 318 3. POETRY AND HISTORY . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 319 4. MISTAKES IN
JUDGMENT: PITY, FEAR, AND CATHARSIS 319 A. PHAEDRUS TRAGIC ERROR . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 320 B. PAUSANIAS
TRAGIC ERROR 320 C. ERYXIMACHUS TRAGIC ERROR 321 D. ARISTOPHANES
TRAGIC ERROR 322 E. AGATHON S TRAGIC ERROR 323 F. ALCIBIADES TRAGIC
ERROR 324 G. THE ATHENIANS TRAGIC ERROR 325 5. THE LIGHT OFTHE MIND 326
A. THE WAY OUT OFTRAGEDY 326 B. ART AND EDUCATION ..... . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 327 6. THE SYMPOSIUM AND
KAUFMANN S FIVE CRITERIA 328 VIII 7. THE SYMPOSIUM AND NOETIC EDUCATION:
PHILOSOPHICAL EROS IS IMPLICIT THROUGHOUT THE DIALOGUE 331 VI. RESPONSE
TO NUSSBAUM: THE SPEECH OF ALCIBIADES: A READING OFTHE SYMPOSIUM 341
A. THE SETTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 341 B. NUSSBAUM ON THE NATURE
OFDIOTIMA S EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM 344 C. DIOTIMA S EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM:
NUSSBAWN VS. BECK 345 D. DIOTIMA ON TURNING THE SOUL AROUND EMOTIONALLY:
NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349 E. DIOTIMA ON TURNING
THE SOUL AROUND INTELLECTUALLY: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 350 F. DIOTIMA S
ELITISM: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 352 G. DIOTIMA ON THE RELATION BETWEEN
UNIVERSAL AND PARTICULAR: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 353 H. DIOTIMA ON
PHILOSOPHICAL FRIENDSHIPS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . .. 355 I.
DIOTIMA S VIEW AND THE REPUBLIC: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 356 J. PLATO AND
TRAGEDY: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 357 K. THE NATURE AND VALUE OFA SOCRATIC WAY
OFLIFE: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 358 L. LOVE OFTHE
INDIVIDUAL: VIASTOS AND NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . .. 361 M. ARISTOPHANES
SPEECH: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 363 N. ALCIBIADES SPEECH: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK
369 O. DIOTIMA S VIEW OFPASSIONATE LOVE: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 375 P. THE
TWO ROADS IN LIFE: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 377 Q. THE PATH OFSOCRATES:
NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 380 R. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PHILOSOPHY AND POETRY
IN THE SYMPOSIUM: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 383 S. THE PATH OF ALCIBIADES:
NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 384 VII.
NUSSBAUM ON PHAEDRUS 389 A.
INTRODUCTION.............................................. 389 IX B.
REASON AND DESIRE IN REPUBLIC IV: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 391 C. REASON AND
DESIRE IN THE SYMPOSIUM AND PHAEDRUS . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 393 D.
NUSSBAUM VS. BECK ON PLATO S RECANTATIONS: #1: APPETITES AS BLIND ANIMAL
FORCES 394 E. NUSSBAUM VS. BECK ON PLATO S RECANTATIONS: #2: THE
APPETITES AS TENDING TO EXCESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 398 F. NUSSBAUM VS. BECK ON
PLATO S RECANTATIONS #3: PASSION AND COGNITION . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 400
G. NUSSBAUM VS. BECK ON PLATO S RECANTATIONS #4: THE DISEMBODIED MIND .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 400 H.
FIRST TWO SPEECHES IN THE PHAEDRUS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK. . . . . . . . ..
401 1. THE PHAEDRUS MYTH: IS EROS A GOD OR A NEED?: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK.
404 J. THE PHAEDRUS MYTH ON HUMAN RELATIONSHIPS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK ..
410 K. THE THREE-PART SOUL IN THE REPUBLIC AND PHAEDRUS: NUSSBAUM VS.
BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 411 L. THE SOUL S PRENATAL EXPOSURE TO THE
FORMS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . .. 413 M. INTELLECT AND PASSION IN THE
PHAEDRUS MYTH: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . .. 415 N. NUSSBAUM ON IDEAL HUMAN
RELATIONSHIPS: TEACHER-STUDENT RELATIONSHIPS VS. OTHER KINDS OFINTIMACY
420 O. THE PLACE OFPERSONAL VIRTUE IN THE QUALITY OFINTERPERSONAL
RELATIONSHIPS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 422 P. THE LOVE OFTRUTH AND THE QUALITY
OFINTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 424 Q. INTUITION
AND THE QUALITY OF INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS: NUSSBAUM VS. PLATO AND
BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . .. 425 R. SEXUALITY AND THE QUALITY OFINTERPERSONAL
RELATIONSHIPS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 426 S. WISDOM
AND THE QUALITY OFINTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 430 X
T. POETRY AND PHILOSOPHY IN PLATO: DOES PLATO CHANGE HIS MIND? NUSSBAUM
VS. BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .. 433 U. SOCRATES USE OFDIALECTICAL RHETORIC IN ALL THE
DIALOGUES: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 435 V. PLATO S RELATIONSHIP TO DION:
NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 439 W. SOCRATES RELATIONSHIP TO PLATO: NUSSBAUM VS.
BECK 442 X. DID PLATO CHANGE HIS MIND? NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .. 444 Y. PUTTING OURSELVES IN PHAEDRUS PLACE: NUSSBAUM VS.
BECK 446 Z. THE VALUE OFLYSIAN SEX: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 449 AA. READING
PLATO S DIALOGUES AS A REMINDER OFWHAT WE ALREADY KNOW: NUSSBAUM VS.
BECK 451 BB. PLATO S DIALOGUES AND THE FALL OF ATHENS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK
453 CE. THE NATURE OFIDEAL RELATIONSHIPS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 456 DD.
NUSSBAUM VS. BECK ON PLATO: CONCLUSIONS 461 BIBLIOGRAPHY 463 GENERAL
INDEX 479 INDEX OF PASSAGES 485
|
| adam_txt |
TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE: DR. PATRICK HENRY XI FOREWORD: DR. MARK MOES
XIII FOREWORD: DR. ELIZABETH HOPPE " XVII ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
XIX I. INTRODUCTION 1 11. NUSSBAUM'S POSITION. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 A. PLATO'S
REJECTION OFTRAGEDY 6 B. PLATO'S WRITING STYLE IS LINKED TO A VIEW
OFHUMAN RATIONALITY THAT IS DETACHED FROM EMOTIONS 8 C. PLATO VS.
ARISTOTIE ON THE NATURE OF HUMAN REASON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
III. RESPONSE TO NUSSBAUM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 A. RESPONSE # 1 . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 B.
RESPONSE#2 14 1. SOME BASIC ASPECTS OFA TRAGIC WORLDVIEW . . . . . 14
2. DOES ARISTOTLE'S POETICS PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE DEFINITION OF TRAGEDYAS
LITERATURE? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 17 3. TRAGEDYAS LITERATURE 18 A. ARISTOTIE: PLOT IS THE MOST
IMPORTANT ASPECT OF TRAGEDY . . . . . . . 18 B. WHAT IS THE PLOT IN
THESE DIALOGUES? , 19 C. THE TRAGIC CONTEXT OFPLATO'S DIALOGUES . . . .
. . . . . 19 D. ARISTOTLE'S OTHER CRITERIA FOR TRAGEDY AND PLATO'S
DIALOGUES . . 26 E. ARE PLATO'S DIALOGUES TRAGIC/TRAGEDIES? . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . 30 C. RESPONSE #3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
37 1. PLATO'S DIALOGUES AND THE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM AT THE ACADEMY . .
38 2. POWERS (DUNAMAI) IN PLATO'S DIALOGUES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 39 II 3. BEINGS AS POWERS IN THE SOPHIST, THE IDEA OFTHE
GOOD, AND THE POWERS OF KNOWING AND BEING KNOWN IN THE REPUBLIC . . . .
. . . . . 40 4. TBE POWER OFDIVINE MIND IN THE PHAEDO 40 5. THE POWERS
OFTHE HUMAN SOUL IN THE REPUBLIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 6.
THE CORRUPTION OFTHE SOUL IN THE REPUBLIC: THE LOW ROAD . . . . . 44 7.
THE EDUCATION OFTHE SOUL IN THE REPUBLIC: THE HIGH ROAD , 45 8. PLATO'S
DIALOGUES ARE THE EDUCATION OF ALL THE POWERS OFSOUL IN THE WAY THAT
LEADS TO WISDOM 48 9. THE CHARACTER OFSOCRATES EMBODIES THE PATH OFTHE
PHILOSOPHICAL SOUL AND OFBEING THROUGHOUT ALL FOUR DIALOGUES 50 10. THE
LOW ROAD: THE VARIOUS KINDS OFUNPHILOSOPHICAL SOULS IN ALL FOUR
DIALOGUES 57 11. TBE APPEAL TO IMAGINATION IN ALL FOUR DIALOGUES 66 12.
THE USE OF"LRONY" IN PLATO'S DIALOGUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 68 13. REVERSAL AND RECOGNITION IN ALL FOUR DIALOGUES . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 70 14. IS PLATO ANTI-TRAGIC? . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 IV. THE PHAEDRUS. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 73 A. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 1. READING EACH OFPLATO'S
DIALOGUES AS PARTS OF A UNIFIED WHOLE . . 75 2. THE DIALOGUE AS A
WHOLE: THE RELATION BETWEEN DIALECTIC, THE SOUL, AND REALITY . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 B. TBE
THREE PARTS OFTHE DIALOGUE 80 1. THE METAPHYSICAL FOUNDATION FOR
PHILOSOPHICAL FRIENDSHIPS: MYTH VS. PHYSICAL CAUSATION IN THE SCIENCES
80 2. SOCRATES' MYTH: GENERAL REMARKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 82 3. SOCRATES' REJECTION OF A LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF
THE MYTHOLOGICAL TRADITION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 84 4. SOCRATES' EXPANSION OFTHE REALM OFMYTH: THE
PLACE BEYOND THE HEAVENS 86 III 5. SOCRATES' MYTH AND FREE WILL: LITERAL
VS. ALLEGORICAL INTERPRETATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 6. GREEK GODS AND GODDESSES
AS PERSONIFICATIONS OFTHE "FORMS" . 89 7. THE HIERARCHY OFSOULS 92 8.
THE STRUGGLE BETWEEN SOCRATES AND LYSIAS FOR PHAEDRUS' SOUL 97 9. THE
RELATION BETWEEN NATURE AND CULTURE: IN THE SETTING AND
INTHETOPICOFCONVERSATION 101 10. PART ONE: LYSIAS' SEDUCTION SPEECH:
LYSIAS ASSUMES THE HUMAN SOUL IS BY NATURE IRRATIONAL 103 11. SOCRATES'
RESPONSE: COMPETING WITH LYSIAS FOR PHAEDRUS' SOUL. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
107 12. SOCRATES' SHAMEFUL SPEECH: THE NATURE OFLOVE IN A SOUL
CONTROLLED BY LOGISTIKOS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 110 13. SOCRATES' ATONEMENT: LOVE AS A DIVINE MADNESS IN
THE PHILOSOPHICAL LIFE 114 14. PART TWO: SOCRATES' MYTH: THE
MYTHOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PHILOSOPHER'S LOVE OFWISDOM AND BEAUTY
116 15. THE PHILOSOPHICAL STRUGGLE BETWEEN GOOD AND EVIL 119 16. THE
THREE-PART SOUL AND THE ONE-PART SOUL: PHAEDRUS VS. REPUBLIC VI 120 17.
THE DRAMATIC CONTEXT OFTHIS MYTH: SOCRATES' USE OF PHILOSOPHICAL
RHETORIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 122 18. THE MODEL OFTHE SOUL IN THE PHAEDRUS MYTH VS. REPUBLIC IV 124
19. THE SOUL IN THE PHAEDRUS MYTH VS. REPUHLIC IX 126 20. PART THREE:
PHILOSOPHICAL AND UNPHILOSOPHICAL RHETORIC; RHETORIC VS. DIALECTIC;
KNOWING THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SUBJECT . . 127 21. RHETORIC VS. DIALECTIC:
THE SOCIAL CONTEXT OF SPEECH 128 22. TEACHING PHAEDRUS HOW TO ANALYZE
SPEECHES 130 23. USING LANGUAGE AS A MEDICINE FOR THE SOUL 131 IV 24.
HOW TO BECOME A GOOD RHETORICIAN: THE HIGH ROAD AND THE LOW ROAD . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
132 25. SYSTEMATIC THINKING AND EDUCATION THROUGHOUT PLATO'S DIALOGUES
.,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 134 26. THE ART OFRHETORIC; SOCRATES' USE OFDIALECTICAL
RHETORIC 136 27. DIALECTICAL EDUCATION: THE LIMITATIONS OFTHE WRITTEN
WORD 138 28. DIALECTICAL EDUCATION: THE LIMITATIONS OFTHE SPOKEN WORD
140 29. THE REALITY UNDERLYING ALL SPEECH 142 C. PATTERNS IN THE
PHAEDRUS, PROTAGORAS, AND REPUBLIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 1. THE
TWO ROADS 143 2. THE IMAGE OF THE CAVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 3. THE PHAEDRUS AND THE DIVIDED
LINE 145 4. THE PHAEDRUS AND TRAGEDY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 146 5. THE TRAGEDY OFMISUNDERSTANDING APHRODITE
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 6. HUMANKIND: RADICAL INSECURITY
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 7. THE BLINDNESS
OFLYSIAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
149 8. PHAEDRUS' BLINDNESS AND THE IGNORANCE OFTHE YOUTH. . . . . . . .
. . 150 9. SOCRATES AND THE CURSE OF HONESTY . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . 151 10. SOCRATES AND THE CORRUPTION OFTHE YOUTH
151 11. TRAGEDY IS NOT INEVITABLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . 152 12. THE ATHENIANS' MISTAKEN NOTIONS OF
JUSTICE AND INJUSTICE . 152 13. SOCRATES' "ATHEISM": THE PORTRAYAL
OFGODS AND GODDESSES IN THE PHAEDRUS 152 14. THE PHAEDRUS AS TRAGIC
LITERATURE , . 153 15. THE PHAEDRUS AS PART OF AN EDUCATION IN RATIONAL
INTUITION (NOUS): THE NATURE OFSPEECH; PHILOSOPHICAL AND UNPHILOSOPHICAL
SPEECH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 V. THE SYMPOSIUM. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 A. FRAME
DIALOGUE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 169 I. THE SYMPOSIUM AND THE DEMOCRATIC PERSONALITY 175
V 2. THE SYMPOSIUM, EROS, AND THE DISRUPTION OF CONVENTIONAL BEHAVIOR .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 178 3. THE EDUCATION OF AGATHON 181 4. ERYXIMACHUS' RULES
FOR THE PARTY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182 5. PHAEDRUS
AND THE CONTEXT OFTHE SPEECHES " 184 6. THE SPEECHES: HEARING THEM
THROUGH THE EARS OF SOCRATES . . . . . 187 7. HESIOD'S MYTH OFTHE
ORIGIN OFTHE UNI VERSE 189 8. PHAEDRUS' SPEECH: FOLLOWING ARES, THE GOD
OFWAR 191 9. PHAEDRUS' SPEECH AND THE SPIRIT OFTHE TIMES IN ATHENS 195
10. PHAEDRUS: THE ABUSE OF AUTHORITY AMONG THE ELDERS AND THE REBELLION
OF A YOUTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 198 11. PAUSANIAS' SPEECH: THE SECULAR PURSUIT OF SEXUAL
PLEASURE 199 12. PHAEDRUS AND PAUSANIAS: A REJECTION OF THE MYTHOLOGICAL
TRADITION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 200 13. PAUSANIAS AND THE DEMOCRATIC
PERSONALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203 14. PAUSANIAS'
IDEALIZATION OFEROS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206 15.
PAUSANIAS AND LYSIAS 207 16. PAUSANIAS' DISCUSSION OFTHE LAWS OF ATHENS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 17. PAUSANIAS' SPEECH AND THE
CORRUPTION OF ATHENIAN SOCIETY . 211 18. CONCLUSION: THE FIRST TWO
SPEECHES: THE IDEALIZATION OF SEX AND AGGRESSION. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 19.
ERYXIMACHUS' SPEECH: EROS AS THE HARMONIZER . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
215 20. EDUCATING THE SOUL TO ACHIEVE HARMONY: THE EDUCATION OF HABITS
217 21. ERYXIMACHUS AND THE DEMOCRATIC PERSONALITY . . . . . . . . 219
22. ERYXIMACHUS' SPEECH AND THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM IN THE REPUBLIC .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 222 23. ERYXIMACHUS' SPEECH AND THE PRACTICE OFMEDICINE IN THE
REPUBLIC 225 24. ERYXIMACHUS' MATERIALISM VS. THE PHILOSOPHICAL LIFE .
. . . . . . . 226 VI 25. ERYXIMACHUS' IDEALIZATION OFEROS 228 26.
ARISTOPHANES' SPEECH: EROS AS A MINDLESS LONGING FOR WHAT ONE LACKS. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 230 27. ARISTOPHANES' IDEALIZATION OFEROS 232 28. ARISTOPHANES
VS. SOCRATES: THE MYTH OFTHE PHAEDRUS 234 29. THE FIRST FOUR SPEECHES IN
THE SYMPOSIUM AND THE PHAEDRUS MYTH 238 30. "TAMING THE DARK HORSE": THE
PHAEDRUS MYTH VS. THE SYMPOSIUM SPEECHES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240 31. ARISTOPHANES' COMEDY AND
THE CORRUPTION OF ATHENIAN SOCIETY . 244 32. THE FIRST FOUR SPEECHES
AND SELF-EXAMINATION 247 33. AGATHON'S SPEECH: IDEALIZING PHYSICAL
BEAUTY 249 34. EROS AS THE PURSUIT OFPHYSICAL PLEASURE 252 35. AGATHON
AND THE TYRANNICAL SOUL: THE OVERTHROW OFTRADITIONAL VALUES 255 36.
AGATHON AND PARIS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 258 37. AGATHON: CUTTING OFFTHE GENITALS OFTHE
FATHERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260 38. THE DRAMATIC CONTEXT OF
AGATHON'S SPEECH 263 39. SOCRATES' SPEECH: EROS AS A NEED 266 40.
SOCRATIC EROS: THE DESIRE TO KNOW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 270 41. THE PERVASIVENESS OFEROS 272 42. THE EROS OFTHE
PHILOSOPHICAL SOUL 273 43. DIOTIMA AND SOCRATES: EDUCATING EROS 275 44.
THE EDUCATION OF EROS IN THE SYMPOSIUM AND THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM IN
REPUBLIC VI AND VII 281 45. ALCIBIADES' SPEECH: THE TYRANNICAL SOUL 285
46. ALCIBIADES' LOVE OFSOCRATES 288 47. ALCIBIADES AND THE CORRUPTION
OFTHE MOST TALENTED YOUTH 291 48. SOCRATIC EROS AND THE DISRUPTION
OFTRADITION 294 49. SOCRATES' EFFORT TO EDUCATE THE YOUTH 298 VII 50.
SOCRATES AS THE GREATEST LOVER 301 51. DIALECTICAL EDUCATION AND THE
RELATION BETWEEN NATURE AND CULTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305 B.
RECURRING THEMES IN THE PROTAGORAS, REPUBLIC, PHAEDRUS, AND SYMPOSIUM. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 306 1. THE TWO ROADS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306 2. THE DIVIDED UNE 307
3. THE IMAGE OFTHE CAVE 308 4. THE NATURE AND POWER OFEROS 310 5. THE
PLACE OFMYTH IN EDUCATION; MYTH AS PHILOSOPHICAL RHETORIC 310 6. SOLON
AND THE CULTIVATION OF THE LOVE OF LEARNING IN ALL CITIZENS 313 7. THE
THREE-PART SOUL AND THE ONE-PART SOUL 314 8. THE DELUSIONS OFTHE
ATHENIANS 315 C. THE SYMPOSIUM AS A TRAGEDY 317 1. THE SERIOUS QUESTIONS
317 2. THE CHARACTERS 318 3. POETRY AND HISTORY . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319 4. MISTAKES IN
JUDGMENT: PITY, FEAR, AND CATHARSIS 319 A. PHAEDRUS' TRAGIC ERROR . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320 B. PAUSANIAS'
TRAGIC ERROR 320 C. ERYXIMACHUS' TRAGIC ERROR 321 D. ARISTOPHANES'
TRAGIC ERROR 322 E. AGATHON'S TRAGIC ERROR 323 F. ALCIBIADES' TRAGIC
ERROR 324 G. THE ATHENIANS' TRAGIC ERROR 325 5. THE LIGHT OFTHE MIND 326
A. THE WAY OUT OFTRAGEDY 326 B. ART AND EDUCATION . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327 6. THE SYMPOSIUM AND
KAUFMANN'S FIVE CRITERIA 328 VIII 7. THE SYMPOSIUM AND NOETIC EDUCATION:
PHILOSOPHICAL EROS IS IMPLICIT THROUGHOUT THE DIALOGUE 331 VI. RESPONSE
TO NUSSBAUM: "THE SPEECH OF ALCIBIADES: A READING OFTHE SYMPOSIUM" 341
A. THE SETTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341 B. NUSSBAUM ON THE NATURE
OFDIOTIMA'S EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM 344 C. DIOTIMA'S EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM:
NUSSBAWN VS. BECK 345 D. DIOTIMA ON TURNING THE SOUL AROUND EMOTIONALLY:
NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349 E. DIOTIMA ON TURNING
THE SOUL AROUND INTELLECTUALLY: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 350 F. DIOTIMA'S
ELITISM: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 352 G. DIOTIMA ON THE RELATION BETWEEN
UNIVERSAL AND PARTICULAR: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353 H. DIOTIMA ON
PHILOSOPHICAL FRIENDSHIPS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . . 355 I.
DIOTIMA'S VIEW AND THE REPUBLIC: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 356 J. PLATO AND
TRAGEDY: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 357 K. THE NATURE AND VALUE OFA SOCRATIC WAY
OFLIFE: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358 L. LOVE OFTHE
INDIVIDUAL: VIASTOS AND NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . 361 M. ARISTOPHANES'
SPEECH: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 363 N. ALCIBIADES' SPEECH: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK
369 O. DIOTIMA'S VIEW OFPASSIONATE LOVE: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 375 P. THE
TWO ROADS IN LIFE: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 377 Q. THE PATH OFSOCRATES:
NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 380 R. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PHILOSOPHY AND POETRY
IN THE SYMPOSIUM: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 383 S. THE PATH OF ALCIBIADES:
NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 384 VII.
NUSSBAUM ON PHAEDRUS 389 A.
INTRODUCTION. 389 IX B.
REASON AND DESIRE IN REPUBLIC IV: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 391 C. REASON AND
DESIRE IN THE SYMPOSIUM AND PHAEDRUS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 393 D.
NUSSBAUM VS. BECK ON PLATO'S RECANTATIONS: #1: APPETITES AS BLIND ANIMAL
FORCES 394 E. NUSSBAUM VS. BECK ON PLATO'S RECANTATIONS: #2: THE
APPETITES AS TENDING TO EXCESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398 F. NUSSBAUM VS. BECK ON
PLATO'S RECANTATIONS #3: PASSION AND COGNITION . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400
G. NUSSBAUM VS. BECK ON PLATO'S RECANTATIONS #4: THE DISEMBODIED MIND .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400 H.
FIRST TWO SPEECHES IN THE PHAEDRUS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK. . . . . . . . .
401 1. THE PHAEDRUS MYTH: IS EROS A GOD OR A NEED?: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK.
404 J. THE PHAEDRUS MYTH ON HUMAN RELATIONSHIPS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK .
410 K. THE THREE-PART SOUL IN THE REPUBLIC AND PHAEDRUS: NUSSBAUM VS.
BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 411 L. THE SOUL'S PRENATAL EXPOSURE TO THE
FORMS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . 413 M. INTELLECT AND PASSION IN THE
PHAEDRUS MYTH: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . 415 N. NUSSBAUM ON IDEAL HUMAN
RELATIONSHIPS: TEACHER-STUDENT RELATIONSHIPS VS. OTHER KINDS OFINTIMACY
420 O. THE PLACE OFPERSONAL VIRTUE IN THE QUALITY OFINTERPERSONAL
RELATIONSHIPS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 422 P. THE LOVE OFTRUTH AND THE QUALITY
OFINTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424 Q. INTUITION
AND THE QUALITY OF INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS: NUSSBAUM VS. PLATO AND
BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 425 R. SEXUALITY AND THE QUALITY OFINTERPERSONAL
RELATIONSHIPS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 426 S. WISDOM
AND THE QUALITY OFINTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 430 X
T. POETRY AND PHILOSOPHY IN PLATO: DOES PLATO CHANGE HIS MIND? NUSSBAUM
VS. BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 433 U. SOCRATES' USE OFDIALECTICAL RHETORIC IN ALL THE
DIALOGUES: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435 V. PLATO'S RELATIONSHIP TO DION:
NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 439 W. SOCRATES' RELATIONSHIP TO PLATO: NUSSBAUM VS.
BECK 442 X. DID PLATO CHANGE HIS MIND? NUSSBAUM VS. BECK . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 444 Y. PUTTING OURSELVES IN PHAEDRUS' PLACE: NUSSBAUM VS.
BECK 446 Z. THE VALUE OFLYSIAN SEX: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 449 AA. READING
PLATO'S DIALOGUES AS A "REMINDER" OFWHAT WE ALREADY KNOW: NUSSBAUM VS.
BECK 451 BB. PLATO'S DIALOGUES AND THE FALL OF ATHENS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK
453 CE. THE NATURE OFIDEAL RELATIONSHIPS: NUSSBAUM VS. BECK 456 DD.
NUSSBAUM VS. BECK ON PLATO: CONCLUSIONS 461 BIBLIOGRAPHY 463 GENERAL
INDEX 479 INDEX OF PASSAGES 485 |
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| any_adam_object_boolean | 1 |
| author | Beck, Martha C. |
| author_facet | Beck, Martha C. |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Beck, Martha C. |
| author_variant | m c b mc mcb |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV022270688 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)635160905 (DE-599)BVBBV022270688 |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01452nam a2200385 cc4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV022270688</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20070523 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">070214s2006 xxu |||| 00||| eng d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">0773458581</subfield><subfield code="9">0-7734-5858-1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9780773458581</subfield><subfield code="9">978-0-7734-5858-1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)635160905</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV022270688</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="044" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">xxu</subfield><subfield code="c">US</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-29</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">5,1</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Beck, Martha C.</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Tragedy and the philosophical life</subfield><subfield code="b">a response to Martha Nussbaum</subfield><subfield code="n">3</subfield><subfield code="p">Phaedrus and Symposium</subfield><subfield code="c">Martha C. Beck</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Lewiston [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="b">Mellen</subfield><subfield code="c">2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">XXI, 489 S.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="600" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Plato</subfield><subfield code="d">v427-v347</subfield><subfield code="t">Symposium</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4135938-0</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="600" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Plato</subfield><subfield code="d">v427-v347</subfield><subfield code="t">Phaedrus</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4138647-4</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Plato</subfield><subfield code="d">v427-v347</subfield><subfield code="t">Phaedrus</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4138647-4</subfield><subfield code="D">u</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Plato</subfield><subfield code="d">v427-v347</subfield><subfield code="t">Symposium</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4135938-0</subfield><subfield code="D">u</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="w">(DE-604)BV022270671</subfield><subfield code="g">3</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">V:DE-604</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015481178&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-015481178</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| id | DE-604.BV022270688 |
| illustrated | Not Illustrated |
| index_date | 2024-07-02T16:46:03Z |
| indexdate | 2024-07-09T20:53:48Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 0773458581 9780773458581 |
| language | English |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-015481178 |
| oclc_num | 635160905 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-29 |
| owner_facet | DE-29 |
| physical | XXI, 489 S. |
| publishDate | 2006 |
| publishDateSearch | 2006 |
| publishDateSort | 2006 |
| publisher | Mellen |
| record_format | marc |
| spelling | Beck, Martha C. Verfasser aut Tragedy and the philosophical life a response to Martha Nussbaum 3 Phaedrus and Symposium Martha C. Beck Lewiston [u.a.] Mellen 2006 XXI, 489 S. txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier Plato v427-v347 Symposium (DE-588)4135938-0 gnd rswk-swf Plato v427-v347 Phaedrus (DE-588)4138647-4 gnd rswk-swf Plato v427-v347 Phaedrus (DE-588)4138647-4 u DE-604 Plato v427-v347 Symposium (DE-588)4135938-0 u (DE-604)BV022270671 3 V:DE-604 application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015481178&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| spellingShingle | Beck, Martha C. Tragedy and the philosophical life a response to Martha Nussbaum Plato v427-v347 Symposium (DE-588)4135938-0 gnd Plato v427-v347 Phaedrus (DE-588)4138647-4 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4135938-0 (DE-588)4138647-4 |
| title | Tragedy and the philosophical life a response to Martha Nussbaum |
| title_auth | Tragedy and the philosophical life a response to Martha Nussbaum |
| title_exact_search | Tragedy and the philosophical life a response to Martha Nussbaum |
| title_exact_search_txtP | Tragedy and the philosophical life a response to Martha Nussbaum |
| title_full | Tragedy and the philosophical life a response to Martha Nussbaum 3 Phaedrus and Symposium Martha C. Beck |
| title_fullStr | Tragedy and the philosophical life a response to Martha Nussbaum 3 Phaedrus and Symposium Martha C. Beck |
| title_full_unstemmed | Tragedy and the philosophical life a response to Martha Nussbaum 3 Phaedrus and Symposium Martha C. Beck |
| title_short | Tragedy and the philosophical life |
| title_sort | tragedy and the philosophical life a response to martha nussbaum phaedrus and symposium |
| title_sub | a response to Martha Nussbaum |
| topic | Plato v427-v347 Symposium (DE-588)4135938-0 gnd Plato v427-v347 Phaedrus (DE-588)4138647-4 gnd |
| topic_facet | Plato v427-v347 Symposium Plato v427-v347 Phaedrus |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015481178&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| volume_link | (DE-604)BV022270671 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT beckmarthac tragedyandthephilosophicallifearesponsetomarthanussbaum3 |