The Relationships Among Eros, Techne, and Philosophy in Plato’s Symposium and Phaedrus (With a Critical Emphasis on the Views of Vlastos and Nussbaum)
Subject Areas : Geneology of philosophical schools and IdeasJavid Kazemi 1 , Seyyed Mohammad Hakak 2 * , Ali Naqi Baqershahi 3 , Mohammad Raayat Jahromi 4
1 - PhD in candidate of Philosophy, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran,
2 - Associate Professor, Philosophy Department, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran,
3 - Associate Professor, Philosophy Department, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran
4 - Associate Professor, Philosophy Department, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran
Keywords: Plato, techne, Symposium, Phaedrus, Eros, philosophy, dialectics,
Abstract :
Eros, the Greek god of love, in addition to its different meanings in the pre-Socratic mythological and philosophical history, has been used in Plato’s philosophy in different senses. This diversity has misled its interpreters in translating it into erroneous meanings such as love. The present paper examines the meaning of eros in Plato’s two Dialogs of Symposium and Phaedrus and then explores its relationship with philosophy and techne. In the dialog of Symposium, after being used in some different meanings, Eros is used in the sense of the longing and desire for observing absolute beauty, which is the same philosophy. This is because in Plato’s philosophy, the difference between the Idea of the good (philosophy is a motive for viewing it) and the Idea of beauty is mentally-posited. In other words, the Ideas of the good and absolute beauty are the same truth that is viewed from two points of view. Now that dialectics – an activity in which multiple details are recognized from the one and the one from multiple details – is introduced in the dialog of Phaedrus as an instrument of techne, it can be concluded that the Platonic lover, and the philosopher cannot perceive the Idea of beauty (or the good) unless through techne. The major problems in this paper are discussed based on the views of two interpreters of Plato, Gregory Velastos and Martha Nussbaum.
افلاطون (1380) مجموعه آثار، ترجمة محمدحسن لطفی، تهران: خوارزمی.
پنج‌تني، منيره (1388) زيبايی و فلسفۀ هنر در گفتگو: افلاطون، تهران: فرهنگستان هنر.
تاتارکیویچ، ووادیسواف (1392) تاریخ زیباشناختی، ترجمة سیدجواد فندرسکی، تهران: علم.
شابو، پاسگال (1397) زیباشناسی و فلسفه هنر، ترجمة محمود بهفروزی، تهران: پژواک کیوان.
گاتری، دبلیو.کی.سی (1969) سقراط، ترجمة حسن فتحی، تهران: فکرروز.
گامبريچ، ارنست هانس (1388) تحولات ذوق هنرى در غرب، ترجمة محمدتقي فرامرزي، تهران: مؤسسة متن.
گوتر، اران (1393) فرهنگ زیباشناسی، ترجمة محمدرضا ابوالقاسمی، تهران: ماهی.
نوسباوم، مارتا (1392) «خطابة آلکیبیادس: قرائتی از رسالة مهمانی افلاطون»، ترجمه آرش نراقی، دربارۀ عشق، تهران، نشر نی: ص25ـ96.
یگر، ورنر (1393الف) پایدیا، ترجمة محمدحسن لطفی، تهران: خوارزمی.
Buchanan, Scott (1978), The Portable Plato, NewYork: Pengui, Grosart, B. Alexander, 2009. The Complete Poems of Sir Phlip Sidney, South Carolina: Biblio Bazar.
Friis Johansen, Karsten (1998), A History Of Ancient Philosophy, Translated by Henrik Rosenmeier; Londen & New York: Routledge.
Pappas, N (2016), “Plato’s Aesthetics”,in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Plato (1997) edited, with introduction and notes, by John M. Cooper,Library of Congress Cataloging-in Publication Data.
Soble, A (1990), The Structure of Love, Yale University Press.
Taylor, A.E (2001), “The Man and His Works”, London.
Taylor, G (1976), “Love”, Proceeding of The Aristotelian Society, pp 64-147.
Vlastos, G (1973), “The Individual as Object of Love in Plato’s Dialogues”, in Platonic Studies, pp.1-34.
Yunis, H (2010), “Eros in Plato’s Phaedrus and the Shape of Greek Rhetoric”, in Humanities and the Classics, Third Series, Vol. 13, No. 1 (Spring - Summer, 2010), pp. 101-126.