The Other Plato: The Tübingen Interpretation of Plato's Inner-Academic Teachings (SUNY series in Ancient Greek Philosophy)
Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub
Collected writings on Plato’s unwritten teachings.
Offering a provocative alternative to the dominant approaches of Plato scholarship, the Tübingen School suggests that the dialogues do not tell the full story of Plato’s philosophical teachings. Texts and fragments by his students and their followers—most famously Aristotle’s Physics—point to an “unwritten doctrine” articulated by Plato at the Academy. These unwritten teachings had a more systematic character than those presented in the dialogues, which according to this interpretation were meant to be introductory. The Tübingen School reconstructs a historical, critical, and systematic account of Plato that takes into account testimony about these teachings as well as the dialogues themselves. The Other Plato collects seminal and more recent essays by leading proponents of this approach, providing a comprehensive overview of the Tübingen School for English readers.
X.257–262; Iamblichus, Protrepticus 6, 38.11–14; cf. TP 33–38). The dimensional reduction is not explicitly discussed in Plato’s extant texts, although hints at it may be seen in the Timaeus, where Plato speaks about the constitution of the three dimensions of bodies in the cosmos according to a numerical proportion that connects four terms (Tim. 32A–B). The reduction thus begins with the physical, then moves to the geometrical, where at each step the dimension of the figure is reduced by one, up
201b16–26). Yet, this motion has to be associated with physical things, because in Plato there is neither a clear indication of a distinction between the two kinds of matter, physical and intelligible, or geometrical (cf. Tim. 48E–53A), nor construction of geometrical figures by motion. The four ideal numbers are thus patterns for the dimensional sequence of unit–line–plane–solid, where each entity is defined by the corresponding number of points as its defining limits: two points define line,
of a linguistic arrangement that now allows the ironist Socrates—who continuously tends to understate, and never overstate, formulations and evaluations—to pick up a “daemonic” hyperbole? And what shall we have gained, if we annul the ἔτι ἐπέκειναstatement by understanding the hyperbole rhetorically, when four further 136 THE OTHER PLATO hyperboles, which are not at all meant rhetorically, remain in the text: ἔτι κάλλιον, ἔτι μειζόνως τιμητέον, ὑπὲρ ταῦτα κάλλει, and ἀμήχανον κάλλος? Even
convincing answer to the problem in question. 12. Gadamer 1978, 21: “To grasp directly the good itself and to want to know it like a μάθημα appears to be impossible on account of its nature. One should take this inexpressibility, this ἄρρητον as soberly as possible.” In the text of the Republic no ἄρρητον is ever mentioned. Gadamer probably had in mind the Seventh Letter, 341C: ῥητὸν γὰρ οὺδαμῶς ἔστιν ὡς ἄλλα μαθήματα. 13. Hegel 1995, vol. 2, 22. 14. L. Brisson considers 509B9 in isolation in
principle does not have the properties of the things of which it is the principle”). For this, see Halfwassen 1992, 281ff., also 339ff., 356ff., 393ff. 20. Plato, Rep. 511B6: τὸ ἀνυπόθετον. 21. Ibid., 510B7: ἀνυπόθετος ἀρχή. 22. Ibid., 511B7: ἡ τοῦ παντὸς ἀρχή. 23. Ibid., 511B. 24. Ibid., 511B, 533C. 25. Ibid., 476A5–7: πάντων τῶν εἰδῶν πέρι ὁ αὐτὸς λόγος, αὐτὸ μὲν ἓν ἕκαστον εἶναι, τῇ δὲ τῶν πράξεων καὶ σωμάτων καὶ ἀλλήλων κοινωνίᾳ πανταχοῦ φανταζόμενα πολλὰ φαίνεσθαι ἕκαστον (“The same argument