Against the traditional reading of Cynic cosmopolitanism, this essay advances the thesis that Diogenes’ world citizenship is a positive claim supported by philosophical argument and philosophical example. Evidence in favor of this thesis is a new interpretation of Diogenes’ syllogistic argument concerning law (nomos) (D.L. 6.72). Important to the argument are an understanding of Diogenes’ philanthropic character and his moral imperative to ‘re-stamp the currency’. Whereas Socrates understands his care as attached specially to Athens, Diogenes’ philosophical mission and form of (...) care attach not to his native Sinope but to all humanity. An important result is that Diogenes’ Cynicism provides an ancient example of cosmopolitanism that is philanthropic, minimalistic, experimental, and utopian. (shrink)

At the end of the fifth century B.C.E., the character of Odysseus was scorned by most of the Athenians: he illustrated the archetype of the demagogic, unscrupulous and ambitious politicians that had led Athens to its doom. Against this common doxa, the most important disciples of Socrates (Antisthenes, Plato, Xenophon) rehabilitate the hero and admire his temperance and his courage. But it is most surprising to see that, in spite of Odysseus' lies and deceit, these philosophers, who condemn steadfastly the (...) sophists' deceptions, praise his rhetorical ability, his polutropia. The word polutropia is ambiguous: for Antisthenes, it means either "diversity of styles and discourses" or "diversity of dispositions, characters, or souls". It is argued that the same distinction is implicitly at work in Plato's Hippias Minor, where Socrates defends Odysseus' polutropia against the pseudo "simplicity" of Hippias' favourite hero, Achilles. However, whereas Antisthenes tries to clarify these different meanings, Plato's Socrates exploits the ambiguity to confuse his interlocutor. Such a distinction sheds a new light on the Hippias Minor: Odysseus is polutropos in the first (positive) sense, while the simplicity of Achilles should be understood as a bad kind of polutropia. It provides an explanation for the first paradoxical thesis of the dialogue which many commentators do not admit as an expression of the true Socratic view, on the ground of its supposed immorality: that he who voluntary deceives is better than he who errs, for falsehood is, in one case, only in words, while in the other, it is falsehood in the soul itself. It is thus proposed that Odysseus' skill in adapting his logos to his hearers was probably a model for Socrates himself. The analogy between the hero and Socrates is especially clear in Plato's dialogues, which show the philosopher in an Odyssey for knowledge. (shrink)

Hombres y mujeres de un tiempo de crisis, los primeros cínicos representa­ron un verda­dero desafío para sus contemporáneos. Radicalmente opues­tos a los modos de vida y de pensamiento impe­rantes, lejos de apartarse en un retiro indiferente, se mantuvieron conscientemente en el interior de la socie­dad de su tiempo. Lo hicieron ante todo como el mejor modo de realizar el cinismo por ellos descu­bierto, a través del desaprendizaje y desembarazo de todo aquello que está en el origen de la esclavitud y (...) desdicha reales del individuo, y como el mejor modo de confirmar las claves de la verdadera libertad y felici­dad. En ese contexto hostil es donde, como atletas y soldados de la filosofía, se entre­naron y combatieron cotidiana y públicamente, con el objetivo de convertirse en seres autosufi­cientes, libres y felices. Antístenes, Diógenes, Crates, Metrocles y su hermana Hiparquia represen­taron por excelencia ese lado más decidida­mente heroico y desafiante del cinismo antiguo. Poco después otros, como Menipo o Bion, pro­si­guieron este desafío en el mundo helenístico, aunque quizá en su caso se tradujo más en críticas y sátiras literarias que en un compro­miso real de vida. Sin embargo, será sobre todo en época imperial cuando pro­liferará la figura del falso cínico vulgar, que ocultaba los vicios del parásito bajo la apariencia y la indumen­taria del filósofo. (shrink)

En Menipo o Necromancia, el encuentro entre el filósofos cínico Menipo de Gádara y su interlocutor sirve como marco para que este relate su peripecia infernal. En la obra no se especifica dónde tiene lugar dicho encuentro; no obstante, pensamos que el samosatense incluye un sutil juego literario mediante el cual el auditorio podría identificar el escenario de dicho encuentro con la polis beocia de Tebas.