Explores the origin and evolution of the Greek concept of nature up until the time of Plato.

_Explores the origin and evolution of the Greek concept of nature up until the time of Plato._.

Places the development of Anaximander's thought within social, political, cosmological, astronomical, and technological contexts.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Plato's Timaeus as Cultural IconGerard NaddafGretchen J. Reydams-Schils, editor. Plato's Timaeus as Cultural Icon. Notre Dame, IN.: University of Notre Dame Press, 2003. Pp. xiv + 334. Cloth, $59.95. Paper, $29.95.This volume emanates from an international conference entitled "Plato's Timaeus as Cultural Icon" held at the University of Notre Dame in 2000. In the introduction, the editor and organizer, Gretchen Reydams-Schils (GRS), contends that the title is meant (...) to communicate the considerable influence of Plato's Timaeus on so many different intellectual traditions and asks "What could account for this philosophical and cultural status?" (1).There are thirteen essays by distinguished specialists in the field. For some reason, a number of the essays do not focus on the general theme of the volume and the question GRS raises, "what could account for this philosophical and cultural status?" is never directly, or even indirectly, addressed. In this short review, I will examine the essays in their order of appearance and make some general comments at the end.Mitchell Miller, in the opening essay, argues that the Timaeus must be understood as addressed to a nonphilosophical audience, although he endeavors to show how the philosophically minded could interpret the Timaeus in light of the god-given method, the longer way, of the Philebus (16c-17a). With this in mind, Miller shows that the constitution of the elements and animals in the Timaeus was in fact determined in light of this method. From this perspective, the Timaeus is addressed not only to a nonphilosophical audience—albeit chiefly to these—but also to a philosophical audience.Kenneth Sayre discusses a number of inconsistencies and incoherences in Plato's description/analysis of the Receptacle and concludes that it is nothing short of a "failed experiment." Personally, I find Plato's analysis rather helpful in a manner analogous to the famous similes he employs in the Republic to help us grasp the Form of the Good. Meanwhile, there is nothing in the essay, as with Miller's essay, to indicate why the Timaeus would constitute a cultural icon (unless as a paradigm for opacity and thus as a catalyst for allegorical interpretation, but again this is not Sayre's intent). [End Page 335]John Dillon, with whom the notion of the Timaeus as a cultural icon begins to emerge, emphasizes that most of the members of the Old Academy, including Speusippus, Xenocrates, and Cantor, maintained (contra Aristotle) that Plato did not hold that the universe was created. While it is true, as he notes, that they were in a better position to interpret the master, the fact remains that they all had different interpretations. There is thus a sense in which Dillon's analysis confirms Miller's position that Plato meant the Timaeus for two very different audiences.Carlos Lévy focuses on the difficulty that Cicero had in translating the Timaeus without reverting to Stoic concepts. He argues that a Latin reader, unfamiliar with the Greek, would assume that transcendence is nonexistent and that mind and matter, as with the Stoics, are one. However, Lévy remains silent on why Cicero would not allow Plato to speak for himself, given that this appears to be the norm with many of his other interlocutors. Moreover, it is difficult again to see why the Timaeus would constitute a "cultural icon."Luc Brisson presents the Timaeus in a radical new light. He shows the extent to which the Timaeus, or more precisely the highly exegetical Middle Platonist interpretation of the work, was the primary reference text for the influential Chaldean Oracles. This is an excellent example of the iconic status of the Timaeus, but it is worth noting that the Chaldean Oracles themselves and their doctrine of salvation may have been historically more influential than the Timaeus itself.David Runia's essay is also an excellent example of the iconic influence of Plato's Timaeus, but unlike Brisson, he focuses on a particular feature of the cosmogonical account rather than the entire treatise: how the Timaeus influenced the debate, including with regard to the opening verses of Genesis, on first principles and the doctrine of creation. Runia... (shrink)

El origen y significado de la “inspiración poética” ha sido siempre objeto de considerable controversia. Lo que los críticos no preguntan muy a menudo es: ¿cuáles son las palabras o frases que los textos poéticos tempranos, previos al Período Clásico, usaron para expresar el genio poético o mousikē que nosotros asociamos con la inspiración en la poesía griega temprana? En este ensayo examino, en primer lugar y principalmente, tanto la terminología empleada por Homero y Hesíodo para expresar la experiencia poética, (...) como el rol del aoidoso cantor/poeta en sus descripciones respectivas. Sostengo no solo que se confunden en Homero y Hesíodo las nociones físicas y figurativas de “inspiración”, es decir, que no son diferenciadas por los poetas de manera consciente, sino que la poesía misma debe haber sido vista por Homero y Hesíodo como un don divino –de acuerdo a la voluntad de los dioses–. También sostengo que diversas etimologías y contextos sugieren fuertemente que un tipo de mania o posesión extática fue una parte importante del proceso poético temprano. El trabajo aquí presentado es una versión abreviada de un proyecto de investigación más amplio que busca examinar el origen y desarrollo de las actitudes pre-platónicas, platónicas y post-platónicas hacia la inspiración y la alegoría. --- “Some Reflections on the Early Greek Notion of Poetic Inspiration”. The origin and meaning of “poetic inspiration” has always been the subject of considerable controversy. What critics rarely ask are: what words or phrases did the early poetic texts use to express the poetic genius or mousikē we associate with inspiration in the early Greek poetry, and thus prior to the Classical period? In this paper, I examine first and foremost both the terminology employed by Homer and Hesiod to express the poetic experience and the role of the aoidos or singer/poet in their respective accounts. I argue that not only are the physical and figurative notions of “inspiration” in Homer and Hesiod confused, that is, they are not consciously distinguished for the poets, but poetry itself for Homer and Hesiod must have been seen as a divine gift –as willed by the gods. I also argue that a number of etymologies and contexts strongly suggest that a type of mania or ecstatic possession was very much a part of the early poetic process. The work presented here is an abridged part of a larger research project that seeks to examine the origin and development of pre-Platonic, Platonic and postPlatonic attitudes toward inspiration and allegory. (shrink)

Much has been written on the famous transition from muthos to logos or from myth to reason. However, there is little on how the proponents of myth responded. They fought back with mutho-logia , that is, with a logos about myth. This rational approach invoked the same logos that is generally associated with philosophia . In fact, philosophia and muthologia are at times so intimately connected that until the Enlightenment period, it is often diffi­cult to distinguish between them. This is (...) due to the spell of myth or more precisely because of the allegorical interpretation of myth. In this essay, I at­tempt to shed some light on the origin and development of this rather unremarked and yet remarkable event in the history of philosophy. (shrink)

To most, myths are merely fantastic stories. But for Luc Brisson, one of the great living Plato scholars, myth is a key factor in what it means to be human – a condition of life for all. Essential and inescapable, myth offers a guide for living, forming the core of belonging and group identity. In 1999 Quebec classicist Louis-André Dorion published a series of French conversations with Brisson on the idea of myth. In Making Sense of Myth Gerard Naddaf offers (...) an extended and updated English translation of these conversations, as well as a new set of discussions between himself and Brisson. Beginning with Brisson's childhood in the village of Saint-Esprit, Quebec, through his education as a gifted child in minor seminaries starting at age eleven, and continuing with his years in Paris, first as a graduate student and later at the Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Brisson tells the story of his escape from an all-encompassing myth – the one promulgated by the Roman Catholic Church. The philosopher situates Quebec society as inseparable from the history of the Catholic Church in Quebec, and argues that this correlation offers a perfect paradigm of myth and mythmaking. Naddaf’s introduction and afterword contextualize the conversations by discussing Brisson’s and Plato’s understanding of the origin and meaning of myth, elaborating on the role of myth in anthropogeny, in the creation of selfhood, and in multiculturalism. Making Sense of Myth promises both a philosophy of myth and a philosophy of life, one inspired by Brisson’s lifelong engagement with the great Western philosopher Plato. (shrink)

The word myth is commonly thought to mean a fictional story, but few know that Plato was the first to use the term _muthos_ in that sense. He also used _muthos_ to describe the practice of making and telling stories, the oral transmission of all that a community keeps in its collective memory. In the first part of _Plato the Myth Maker_, Luc Brisson reconstructs Plato's multifaceted description of _muthos_ in light of the latter's Atlantis story. The second part of (...) the book contrasts this sense of myth with another form of speech that Plato believed was far superior: the _logos_ of philosophy. Gerard Naddaf's substantial introduction shows the originality and importance both of Brisson's method and of Plato's analysis and places it in the context of contemporary debates over the origin and evolution of the oral tradition. "[Brisson] contrasts _muthos_ with the _logos_ found at the heart of the philosophical reading. [He] does an excellent job of analyzing Plato's use of the two speech forms, and the translator's introduction does considerable service in setting the tone."—_Library Journal_. (shrink)

The word myth is commonly thought to mean a fictional story, but few know that Plato was the first to use the term _muthos_ in that sense. He also used _muthos_ to describe the practice of making and telling stories, the oral transmission of all that a community keeps in its collective memory. In the first part of _Plato the Myth Maker_, Luc Brisson reconstructs Plato's multifaceted description of _muthos_ in light of the latter's Atlantis story. The second part of (...) the book contrasts this sense of myth with another form of speech that Plato believed was far superior: the _logos_ of philosophy. (shrink)

Plato's attitude toward the poets and poetry has always been a flashpoint of debate, controversy and notoriety, but most scholars have failed to see their central role in the ideal cities of the Republic and the Laws, that is, Callipolis and Magnesia. In this paper, I argue that in neither dialogue does Plato "exile" the poets, but, instead, believes they must, like all citizens, exercise the expertise proper to their profession, allowing them the right to become full-fledged participants in the (...) productive class. Moreover, attention to certain details reveals that Plato harnesses both positive and negative factors in poetry to bring his ideal cities closer to a practical realization. The status of the poet and his craft in this context has rarely to my knowledge been addressed. (shrink)

Constantineau tente donc de reconstruire la «politique étrangère» de Thucydide, Xénophon, Isocrate, Platon et Aristote. Il nous informe dans son introduction que l’unité des chapitres n’apparaîtra qu’à la conclusion où il proposera alors une «reconstruction générale» de la doctrine classique de la politique étrangère. Les différentes doctrines confondues en une seule apparaîtront, pense-t-il, comme une contribution à une doctrine unifiée et cohérente d’une politique étrangère internationale. Cette mise en garde est utile, car les chapitres sont disparates. Par ailleurs, la classification (...) des régimes politiques, qui constitue un axe majeur du projet, est à peine développée. L’auteur, qui présente son entreprise initialement comme une monographie sur la doctrine de la politique étrangère de Platon, consacre à Thucydide la moitié de son ouvrage et seulement un dixième à Platon. En outre, la majorité de ses affirmations relatives à Platon ont peu de rapport avec une «politique étrangère» à proprement parler. Cependant, cette critique ne remet pas en question la valeur de l’ouvrage. Constantineau offre de subtiles remarques concernant ces cinq théoriciens et sa conclusion spéculative est intéressante autant que brillante. (shrink)