A passage in Plato’s Laws (719c) offers a fresh look at Plato’s theory of poetry and art. Only here does Plato call poetry both mimêsis “imitation, representation,” and the product of enthousiasmos “inspiration, possession.” The Republic and Sophist examine poetic imitation; the Ion and Phaedrus (with passages in Apology and Meno) develop a theory of artistic inspiration; but Plato does not confront the two descriptions together outside this paragraph. After all, mimêsis fuels an attack on poetry, while enthousiasmos is sometimes (...) used to attack it, sometimes to praise it. The explanation evidently lies in Plato’s understanding of drama, which in the Laws has grown more precise, from simply the presentation of characters to the presentation of multiple characters engaged in dramatic conflict. (shrink)

In Plato’s Ion, inspiration functions in contradistinction to technē. Yet, paradoxically, in both cases, there is an appeal to divination. I interrogate this in order to show how these two disparate accounts can be accommodated. Specifically, I argue that Socrates’ appeal to Theoclymenus at Ion 539a-b demonstrates that Plato recognizes the existence of intuitive seers who defy his own distinction between possession and technical divination. Such seers provide an epistemic model for Ion; that he does not notice this confirms he (...) is not an exemplary rhapsode. (shrink)

Las numerosas acusaciones formuladas por Platón contra la poesía aparecen a lo largo de toda su obra, referidas tanto al contenido como a la forma, y se basan en diversos supuestos éticos, políticos y metafísicos. Sin embargo, tales ataques no son lanzados con-tra la poesía como tal, sino contra la poesía tradicional y su importante presencia en el ámbito educativo griego. Frente a la tradición poética y frente a las distintas corrientes intelectuales que se disputan el espacio educativo de su (...) tiempo, Platón elabora una nueva poesía sometida a la filosofía, que no solo resulta agradable sino también útil. (shrink)