notes in **interpreting plato's dialogues**

27
Interpreting Plato’s Dialogues by J. Angelo Corlett &a description and ways of approachin the articulation an interpreting the Pl &a philosophical work Chapter 1 – Introduction: Approaching Plato’s Dialogues On having a taxonomy Different from Robert Interpretation in Plato’s Dialogues: New Studies and Interpretation Ideal approach: it mak es sense of the Plato s works; takes in works{without this, a f e s not rely on an overly p to in compo sing his writi A disputed writing The Seventh Letter may provide on what characters spok

Upload: elevic-pernis

Post on 04-Apr-2015

131 views

Category:

Documents


4 download

DESCRIPTION

This is my notes of the content of the book **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues** by Prof. J. Angelo CorlettIn this book, he argues against the orthodox Mouthpiece Interpretation of Plato's Dialogues and advances the Socratic (anti-mouthpiece) Interpretation.I read this book in order to prepare myself in reading Plato's dialogues as well as fiction containing dialogues of philosophic nature. If I haven't read this book, I would have read Plato in a manner akin to the Mouthpiece Interpretation. Thanks to this book, I have an arsenal of frameworks by which to attack the Platonic Corpus.Elevichttp://elevicpernis.com

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

Interpreting Plato’s Dialogues by J. Angelo Corlett

…a description and critical evaluation of variousways of approaching Plato’s dialogues, along withthe articulation and defense of a new paradigm forinterpreting the Platonic corpus

…a philosophical work

Chapter 1 – Introduction: Approaching Plato’sDialogues

On having a taxonomy of interpretive approaches

Different from Robert Brumbaugh’s “Four Types of PlatoInterpretation” in Plato’s Dialogues: New Studies and

Interpretation

Ideal approach: it makes sense of the contents of the entirety ofPlato’s works; takes into account the various features of Plato’sworks{without this, a fallacy of misattribution is committed}; doesnot rely on an overly prejudiced understanding of what Plato is up

to in composing his writings

A disputed writing The Seventh Letter may provide some answeron what characters spoke for Plato, but its authorship is disputed

Page 2: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

We can never for sure that the following approaches do justice toPlato. We have to assume that our writings of Plato at hand is all

there is to it, i.e. there are no non-extant writings

Final desideratum: a plausible approach must be able to explainwhy competing approaches are less plausible to itself…..so we

analyze competing approaches

A TAXONOMY OF THE PLATONIC QUESTION

This is complex….according to secondary sources, Antistheneswas probably the most important follower of Socrates; if we want toknow more about Socrates, we may have to study his writings morethan Plato’s but we know that we have more of Plato’s writings thanhis….Antisthenes is regarded as the father of the Cynic philosophy

The Mouthpiece Interpretation

Authorial Intentionality and Unintentionality in the MouthpieceInterpretation: his dialogues are a product of every ideas held byPlato

….one proponent of this is Kahn [Plato and the Socratic Dialogue]

Some believe that his dialogues contain Plato’s mindunintentionally. They believe that Plato’s aim in creating thesedialogues was to create “philosophical and literary masterpieces”

The Theoretical, Doctrinal, and Doxatic MouthpieceInterpretations

Page 3: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

Theoretical Interpretation: “the Platonic corpus intentionally orunintentionally contains Plato’s philosophical theories aboutknowledge, reality, justice, love, and so forth.” p.5

…most popular version of this attributes to Plato a Theory ofForms

Doctrinal Interpretation: his doctrines are contained in thePlatonic corpus intentionally or not

….its distinction from the theoretical interpretation lies that it’sabout Plato’s deeply held convictions and not a full blown theory

Dogmatic Mouthpiece Interpretation: contents reflectintentionally or not Plato’s own beliefs…..this is milder than thefirst two….also known as Doxatic

These three types assume that Plato’s mind is in the Platoniccorpus; the question is up to what extent?

Local, Moderate, and Global Unity

The theoretical and dogmatic interpretations raise the question ofwhether there’s a unity of Plato’s thoughts in his writings

Unity Thesis: there is a conceptual unity in Plato’s thought…seefootnote 15 in pp. 5-6

Local Unity Thesis: This unity is obtained within a particulardialogue.

Moderate Unity Thesis: This unity is obtained within a selectionof particular dialogues.

Page 4: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

Global Unity Thesis: This unity is obtained within the entirePlatonic corpus.

Local, Moderate, and Global Development

Developmental Thesis: Plato wrote dialogues that show theongoing changing of his theories, doctrines, and/or beliefs.

Local Developmentalism: There can be a development of theconcept of x from one part of a dialogue to another part of it.

Moderate Developmentalism: There can be a development of aconcept of x from one dialogue to another.

Global Developmentalism: There is a development of a conceptx throughout the Platonic corpus.

Developmentalist approaches depend on the classification ofPlato’s writings into “early,” “middle,” and/or “late” periods.

Developmentalists just assume this, and seem to provide nojustification for this classification.

Further Complexities

Mixing and considering the plausibility of these approaches showhow complex the task of approaching Plato is.

Dialogues should be read as dialogues, not treatises. Themouthpiece interpreters make this hermeneutical mistake.

Page 5: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

The Anti-Mouthpiece Interpretation

…holds the question of how to read the Platonic dialogues isintimately bound up with the even more evasive question of whyPlato employed the dialogue format in his philosophical writings

…it denies that Plato’s theories or doctrines can be deduced fromhis writings

…but it does not deny that we can understand Plato’s way ofdoing philosophy

…it denies that anything we can gain from reading his works aresubstantive

Plato surely had views and theories, but it is certain that he didnot compose his dialogues with the aim of communicating them

Until external evidence can be found in favor of a mouthpieceinterpretation, the mouthpiece interpretation does not hold.

The author will seek to elaborate and defend on the SocraticInterpretation approach

The moderate mouthpiece interpretation combines mouthpieceand anti-mouthpiece approaches

Page 6: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

Chapter 2 – The Mouthpiece InterpretationPlatonic Question: How ought Plato’s writings to beinterpreted, and why?

Mouthpiece interpretation = Plato’s dialoguescommunicate his ideas; to different degree based on theextend that his dialogues are his mouthpiece

…unclear on what they meant that this theories ordoctrines are expresses in his dialogues

ASSESSING THE MOUTHPIECEINTERPRETATION

JUSTIFICATIONS FOR IT

Whatever philosophical gaps or contradictions there arein the dialogues, they are due to the lack of Plato’sphilosophical acumen

There is a development of Plato’s thought over time

Page 7: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

There are also esoteric interpretators who hold thatPlato’s ideas are not found within his dialogues

…instead, they are communicated to his students in theAcademy such as Aristotle

Starting on p23 onwards, author will examine more recentarguments for the Mouthpiece Interpretation. Unless hisobjections can be met, the alternative interpretation, i.e.anti-Mouthpiece, must be accepted

More specifically, the Socratic Interpretation: one oughtto interpret Plato’s works as dialogues and that Platowas deeply committed to the Socratic method ofdoing philosophy

…that his commitment to the philosophical dialectic is sostrong that it is near impossible to extract from his writingshis actual views or doctrines

Therefore, we ought not to ascribe directly to Platowhatever views that any of the characters in his dialoguesutter……………….in the absence of sufficient reason todo so

Page 8: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

The basic reason to reject the Mouthpiece Interpretation:It lacks sufficient rational support p24

Key hermeneutical points of mutual agreementbetween mouthpiece and anti-mouthpieceinterpreters: p24

1. Plato writes several dialogues, but no treatises2. There are certain views propounded by certain

dialogical characters in the Platonic corpus3. Plato writes dialogues for a purpose, or a set of

purposes, one of which is to guide readers tophilosophical and objective truths

4. Plato indeed has philosophical views, howevertentatively held

5. There are better and worse ways to read Plato’sdialogues

Notwithstanding these agreements, there are manydisagreements between the two camps.

Doctrines and theories attributed to Plato presuppose theMouthpiece Interpretation.

Page 9: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

P25

SOME RECENT ARGUMENTS FOR THE MOUTHPIECEINTERPRETATION

Richard Kraut argues that the anti-MouthpieceInterpretation holds the mistaken view that Plato is adramatist

…if he were so, such view is valid

He addresses #2 and #3. His distinction of Plato and thedramatist is insightful but begs the question on whetherPlato’s goal is different from that of a dramatist

If Plato’s goal is the Truth, this does not necessitate thathe infuse his unique thoughts in his dialogues

Kraut also provides another argument that Plato’sconvictions are held to some extend in some of hisdialogues

…but his chain of thought cannot discount the validity ofthe anti-Mouthpiece Interpretation

Page 10: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

In other words, Kraut presumes the MouthpieceInterpretation as innocent of errors till proven guilty

Terence Irwin attributes Aristotle’s interpretations ofPlato’s Dialogues as “ancient evidence” that they werereally Plato’s mouthpiece

…Aristotle is external evidence, but this should becorroborated by internal evidence within the PlatonicCorpus; unfortunately, it isn’t

Deeper reason why Irwin’s reasoning is problematic: Oneought to accept the Aristotle as external guide to Platoview unless sufficient reason can be found in thedialogues against it

….but the dialogue form being internal and primaryevidence is against this view by Irwin

Furthermore, we cannot always rely on Aristotle preciselybecause he does not always agree with Plato; worse hemay actually misunderstood what Plato meant

Page 11: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

We can concede that we cannot NOT consult Aristotle forgreater understanding of Plato. But the silence ofdialogues for Mouthpiece Interpretation as well as itsdialogue forms are sure internal evidence against it

…p29

Even if we suppose that Aristotle is a reliable guide toPlato, it does not follow that he is the best externalwitness

P31 Irwin cannot be clear to have uttered a strongargument for support of the Mouthpiece Interpretation

Julia Annas argues that the anti-Mouthpiece Interpretationmakes Plato a sceptic

….this is merely an assumption

She appeals to AUTHORITY…SEXTUS

Page 12: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

All that is need to support at first glance the anti-Mouthpiece Interpretation is to neutralize or underminethe Mouthpiece Interpretation

….this makes the anti-Mouthpiece Interpretation plausible

P34

Michael Frede thinks The Sophist is Plato’s mostdogmatic dialogue

Granted, are these sufficient grounds for the MouthpieceInterpretation?

Reasons the Mouthpiece Interpretation Fails toSatisfy the Desiderata of Plausible Approach to Plato

1. It fails to account for the dramatic and Socratic featuresof most of Plato’s writings

2. Failure to account for these features has led to manyfundamental attribution errors

3. It prohibited from answering the Platonic Question

Page 13: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

Chapter 3 – The Anti-Mouthpiece Interpretation…to discuss in this chapter two leading alternatives to theMouthpiece Interpretation:

1. The Dramatic (Anti-Mouthpiece) Interpretation2. The Socratic (Anti-Mouthpiece) Interpretation

THE DRAMATIC INTERPRETATION

Plato is the invisible author of his dialogues

…never appearing as a participant

He used the dialogue form in order to make SocraticInquiry lively

Philosophical Inspiration for the Dramatic Interpretationcame from John Dewey’s reflections on Plato

Taking the dramatic elements seriously in no way discountthe philosophical analysis embed in the Dialogues

Page 14: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

Gerald A. Press sets forth three hermeneutical principlesfor the dramatic study of Plato’s Dialogues:

1. Holism = the unit of study is the whole dialogue2. Contextualism = sensitivity to…

a. …languageb. …culturec. …politics

3. Organicism = “to see how, as in an organic body, allparts work together to a common end”

Press’s principles rest on the following assumptions:

1. Plato wrote dialogues (not treatises) and they ought tobe interpreted as such

2. Plato employed the dialogue form deliberately and fora specific end

3. “each dialogue is thoroughly unified and essentiallyindependent of all other dialogues…each of thegenuine dialogues can be read sensibly withoutknowing anything about the content or action of anyother dialogue”

4. The Dialogues of Plato are works of literary art of thehighest caliber

From Principles of Dramatic and Non-Dogmatic PlatoInterpretation

Page 15: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

The Socratic Interpretation agrees on Press’s principles onsome points

It differs however on the principle of holism in that it couldalso be followed by a mouthpiece or dogmatic interpreteras much as by a Socratic interpreter

The Socratic Interpretation adopts a stronger version ofholism: that each dialogue of Plato must be construed inlight of its dramatic contents and in light of the claim that,as far as we know, Plato never speaks in his own name inthe dialogues

But Socratic Interpretation assumes no specific view inwhich they are to be read, expect with the view that theyare philosophical discussions which engage the readers ina dialectic among various subjects

The Socratic Interpretation allows for a broader reading ofeach dialogue

You don’t need to consider the true or original intentbehind the dialogue when you begin to state your views orinterpretations regarding it.

Page 16: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

Another proponent of the Dramatic Interpretation is HenryG. Wolz, arguing that the dialogues offer “indirection” sothat readers may themselves seek the Truth

Mitchell Miller favors the Dramatic Interpretation byclaiming that there is a four-part structure to the PlatonicDialogue:

1. Elicitation = wherein he who leads the philosophicaldiscussion draws out an interlocutor’s view

2. Refutation = wherein the view is shown to rest onproblematic foundations

3. Reorienting Insight = wherein the one leading thediscussion recommends how to resolve the problemat hand

4. Return = wherein the insight is shed upon the originalissue

However, not all dialogues follow such dramatic form

Page 17: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

READING PLATO SOCRATICALLYOne of the fundamental errors of the MouthpieceInterpretation is its neglect of the depth of the Socraticinfluence on Plato in composing the dialogues

e.g. one must view them as Plato’s way of teaching how tolive the examined life

They act as if understanding Plato had nothing to dobeyond the text of the Platonic corpus

…no different from Christian Fundamentalism

The general purpose of the dialogues is to achievephilosophical enlightenment.

…the reader must take the primary burden of doingphilosophy

Page 18: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

THE SOCRATIC “METHOD”It is generally agreed that Plato was heavily influenced mySocrates’ method of doing philosophy.

It is crucial to delineate the Socratic “Method” in order toexplain the plausibility of the Socratic Interpretation

…by taking into account that philosophy is an incessantsearch for truth and love of wisdom rather than a hardand fast method of systematizing ideas

Plato seems able to teach us how Socrates conceived ofthe nature and value of philosophical inquiry.

There is no formalized Socratic Method. Although trying toapply it will rid us of pretense of wisdom.

Socrates rejects the notion that philosophers are wise menendowed with special insight that must be followed by allmen. He shows ignorance in order to attain trueknowledge

Page 19: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

The Socratic Method is nearly identical with philosophy,i.e. follow where philosophy leads if you care for your soul

The best light of reason must be the true guide of thephilosopher.

It features open-mindedness

But one must value good opinions rather than bad ones

Socrates repeats the claim that there is a right way to dophilosophy.

Humility is an important aspect of his method.

See p53 excerpt of Nozick

Socratic dialogues involves other people

P54

Not only is the Socratic Method open-minded, sincere,persistent, courageous, optimistic, and epistemicallyhumble, it is just.

Page 20: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

Humor is recognized to lighten the seriousness of anydiscussion….Socratic humor

OBJECTIONS TO THE SOCRATICINTERPRETATION AND REPLIES

They say that it is an unfalsifiable thesis.

But the truth is it could also be refuted.

….if there exists textual evidence in prose that Platointended to have his thoughts be reflected in his dialogues

They may argue that Socratic Interpretation would makereading Plato’s dialogues a subjective matter, as if Platohad no ideas of his own

But it does not deny that Plato had any ideas of his own

Socratic Interpretation is not and should not be taken assubjective

Page 21: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

Socratic Interpretation denies that the Platonic Corpus andtext outside it provide objective information on what Platoprivately believed

It’s like trying to extract Hume’s ideas from DialoguesConcerning Natural Religion without his treatises backingup whatever can be found there

They may also argue that the Socratic Interpretation is anattempt to distinguish it from the MouthpieceInterpretation, but it fails in its attempt because it attributesto Plato a commitment to use the Socratic Method.

…but this attribution of dogmatism in Socratic Method isminimal; it does not assume much unlike the MouthpieceInterpretation

Rutherford characterizes Plato/Socrates as an eternalskeptic-questioner, which ignores recurring themes etc.This is going too far he claims

Difficulties with his objections:

1. Socrates not Plato is depicted

Page 22: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

2. By saying that Socrates goes too far is a “disturbinglydiminished” picture of Plato

3. Recurrence of certain themes in his dialogues in noway makes Plato subscribe to them

4. Only by presuming the validity of the MouthpieceInterpretation could one say that the perpetualquestioning in the dialogues constitute a “disturbinglydiminished picture of Plato”

5. It is assuming that “perpetually questioning” issues athand is the only lesson that Plato wants to deliver

It might also be objected that the Socratic Interpretationwould reduce Plato in his Dialogues to a kind ofphilosophical indifference

Why it’s in error:

1. It does not follow in the anti-Mouthpiece Interpretationthat Plato is indifferent to the conclusions that readersmay arrive at

2. Not true that the anti-Mouthpiece Interpretation musthold that the Dialogues were not intended to movereaders into a certain direction

3. No one is entitled to ascribe to Plato the view that, ifhe were not indifferent, then he did adhere to certainclaims

Page 23: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

4. Mouthpiece Interpretation holds on a ColossalMistake to take Aristotle as guide

5. If Plato intended to write dialogues instead oftreatises, the objection the Plato is hidden observermerely states the position of the Anti-MouthpieceInterpretation

a. It does not follow that by Plato hiding in thedialogues making him without views

b. This is the fallacy of bifurcation

It may be argued against the Socratic Interpretation thegross inequality between the characters of Socrates, theEleatic visitor, and their respective interlocutors seem tosuggest that the Mouthpiece Interpretation is plausible

Good criticism but not quite:1. Not obvious if Socrates only engaged intellectual

inferiors. In some dialogues, Socrates can be seen tobe engaging equal or superior foes

2. The Socratic exchanges may only be highlights of thebest encounters that Socrates had

3. Fails to debunk anti-Mouthpiece Interpretation; fails tosupport Mouthpiece Interpretation

Page 24: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

On p64, the author does not say that we have to acceptthe Socratic Interpretation until refuted. Rather, he finds itwith little difficulty compared to the MouthpieceInterpretation. Thus, it should be shown more attentionthan it currently had.

A search for what is “philosophically interesting” in Plato’sdialogues depends on how a person interprets them

Keep in mind Paul Woodruff’s reminder: “[R]eading Platois hard work and inevitably frustrating: totalsatisfaction in interpretation eludes us.”

From “Reply to Ronal Polansky’s ‘Reading Plato” inPlatonic Writings: Platonic Readings, edited by Griswold

P65 discusses why Socratic Interpretation satisfies thedesiderata for interpreting Plato’s Dialogues

Next chapter is about how a Socratic Interpreter can andought to perform textual exegesis concerning a majorconcept found in Plato’s works

Page 25: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

Chapter 4 – A Socratic Interpretation of theConcept of Art as Mimesis

…example of how to use Socratic Interpretation inunderstanding what Plato wrote about in his dialogues

…more specifically, about art as mimesis or imitation inThe Republic

Written word is only a copy of knowledge, not knowledgeitself

One must not take whatever he is writing in an OVERLYserious way……he must be wary that the written word isalso susceptible to error as that of the spoken word

Socrates condemns the type of writing that poses as truthbut cannot defend itself; his condemnation is not anti-research

There are uses of misesis outside the usual artisticexpression

Page 26: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

The kind of imitation that is problematic philosophicallyand ethically is that based on the imitator’s ignorance, notknowledge

Mouthpiece Interpreters argue that Plato condemnsmimesis

But this ignores the fact that there are good forms ofimitation

The term mimesis in the context of The Republic iscomplex

The author will argue that The Republic has not deliveredan aesthetic theory of art as Mouthpiece Interpreterssuppose

THE MOUTHPICE INTERPRETATION

The passages of THE REPUBLIC cited in pp70-73 andrelated dialogues are “proof” that THE REPUBLIC had amimetic theory of art….so say mouthpiece interpreters

Page 27: Notes in **Interpreting Plato's Dialogues**

My notes in this chapter shall stop here; see the book; it’sabout the thinking processes that Socratic Interpretersmay use

Chapter 5 – Conclusion: Appreciating Plato’sDialogues

This chapter summarizes what the book is about

Conclusion: It is not only the Mouthpiece Interpretationthat could make substantive insights of Plato’s Dialogues,but also the Socratic Interpretation which the author of thisbook advances. It is both informative and interpretive.

Prepared by Elevic Pernis

http://elevicpernis.com