In Plato's "Letters" , Ariel Helfer provides to readers, for the first time, a highly literal translation of the Letters , complete with extensive notes on historical context and issues of manuscript transmission. His analysis presents a necessary perspective for readers who wish to study Plato's Letters as a work of Platonic philosophy. Centuries of debate over the provenance and significance of Plato's Letters have led to the common view that the Letters is a motley collection of jewels and scraps from within and without Plato's literary estate. In a series of original essays, Helfer describes how the Letters was written as a single work, composed with a unity of purpose and a coherent teaching, marked throughout by Plato's artfulness and insight and intended to occupy an important place in the Platonic corpus. Viewed in this light, the Letters is like an unusual epistolary novel, a manner of semifictional and semiautobiographical literary-philosophic experiment, in which Plato sought to provide his most demanding readers with guidance in thinking more deeply about the meaning of his own career as a philosopher, writer, and political advisor. Plato's "Letters" not only defends what Helfer calls the "literary unity thesis" by reviewing the scholarly history pertaining to the Platonic letters but also brings out the political philosophic lessons revealed in the Letters. As a result, Plato's "Letters" recovers and rehabilitates what has been until now a minority view concerning the Letters , according to which this misunderstood Platonic text will be of tremendous new importance for the study of Platonic political philosophy.
Plato (Greek: Πλάτων), born Aristocles (c. 427 – 348 BC), was an ancient Greek philosopher of the Classical period who is considered a foundational thinker in Western philosophy and an innovator of the written dialogue and dialectic forms. He raised problems for what became all the major areas of both theoretical philosophy and practical philosophy, and was the founder of the Platonic Academy, a philosophical school in Athens where Plato taught the doctrines that would later become known as Platonism. Plato's most famous contribution is the theory of forms (or ideas), which has been interpreted as advancing a solution to what is now known as the problem of universals. He was decisively influenced by the pre-Socratic thinkers Pythagoras, Heraclitus, and Parmenides, although much of what is known about them is derived from Plato himself. Along with his teacher Socrates, and Aristotle, his student, Plato is a central figure in the history of philosophy. Plato's entire body of work is believed to have survived intact for over 2,400 years—unlike that of nearly all of his contemporaries. Although their popularity has fluctuated, they have consistently been read and studied through the ages. Through Neoplatonism, he also greatly influenced both Christian and Islamic philosophy. In modern times, Alfred North Whitehead famously said: "the safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato."
I have discussed this book on pages ii and iii of the 2024 preface to my 1971 master's essay, "The Teaching of Plato’s Seventh Letter: https://www.academia.edu/22999496/The....
My rating is really a reflection of my enjoyment and not the author's knowledge, skill and purpose. While I thoroughly appreciated reading ancient Greek ἐπιστολαί, regardless of who wrote them, the fact remains I just don't like Plato. I don't find his philosophy interesting and I do find him to be self-important, self-serving and a bore. I thought reading the book would help me better understand Sicily in the time of the tyrants and to a minor extent it did. The book is much more useful to a reader who cares deeply about Platonism. To those readers this book is likely a 5.
This book, alongside being an excellent translation (with oh so many footnotes!) and including an informative interpretive essay, makes a persuasive case for the authenticity of the Letters. One question that I think the reader is left with, though, is of the importance of promoting philosophy (this is a question for the dialogues themselves too). Why would the philosopher, who seems to care most about their own activity, try and cultivate other philosophers? You could say that it’s a matter of desiring friendship, but I don’t think this accounts for the desire to cultivate philosophy posthumously. That was something on my mind, at least.