Πλάτων: ο άνθρωπος και το έργο του

by A.E. Taylor

Το βιβλίο αυτό προσφέρει μια ανάλυση των πλατωνικών διαλόγων και όχι συστηματική ταξινόμηση του περιεχομένου τους κατά θέματα. Ο συγγραφέας αποφεύγει την υποταγή σε σχήματα και απόψεις που προσπαθούν να επιβάλλουν μια συγκεκριμένη οπτική στη μελέτη των έργων του Πλάτωνα. Ιδιαίτερη προσοχή δίνει στη χρονολόγηση των διαλόγων και στη σκιαγράφηση του ιστορικού πλαισίου και της εποχής, δεδομένου ότι η κατανόηση των πλατωνικών κειμένων προϋποθέτει τη γνωριμία του αναγνώστη με τα πρόσωπα των διαλόγων, τα περισσότερα από τα οποία έπαιξαν σημαίνοντα ρόλο στα πολιτικά πράγματα της Αθήνας του 5ου και του 4ου αιώνα.

Περιεχόμενα
ΠΡΟΛΟΓΟΣ
Α' Η ΖΩΗ ΤΟΥ ΠΛΑΤΩΝΑ
Β' ΤΑ ΠΛΑΤΩΝΙΚΑ ΕΡΓΑ
Γ' ΕΛΑΣΣΟΝΕΣ ΣΩΚΡΑΤΙΚΟΙ ΔΙΑΛΟΓΟΙ: ΙΠΠΙΑΣ ΜΕΙΖΩΝ, ΙΠΠΙΑΣ ΕΛΑΣΣΩΝ, ΙΩΝ, ΜΕΝΕΞΕΝΟΣ
Δ' ΕΛΑΣΣΟΝΕΣ ΣΩΚΡΑΤΙΚΟΙ ΔΙΑΛΟΓΟΙ: ΧΑΡΜΙΔΗΣ, ΛΑΧΗΣ, ΛΥΣΙΣ
Ε' ΕΛΑΣΣΟΝΕΣ ΣΩΚΡΑΤΙΚΟΙ ΔΙΑΛΟΓΟΙ: ΚΡΑΤΥΛΟΣ, ΕΥΘΥΔΗΜΟΣ
ΣΤ' ΣΩΚΡΑΤΙΚΟΙ ΔΙΑΛΟΓΟΙ: ΓΟΡΓΙΑΣ, ΜΕΝΩΝ
Ζ' ΣΩΚΡΑΤΙΚΟΙ ΔΙΑΛΟΓΟΙ: ΕΥΘΥΦΡΩΝ, ΑΠΟΛΟΓΙΑ, ΚΡΙΤΩΝ
Η' ΦΑΙΔΩΝ
Θ' ΣΥΜΠΟΣΙΟΝ
Ι' ΠΡΩΤΑΓΟΡΑΣ
ΙΑ' ΠΟΛΙΤΕΙΑ
ΙΒ' ΦΑΙΔΡΟΣ
ΙΓ' ΘΕΑΙΤΗΤΟΣ
ΙΔ' ΠΑΡΜΕΝΙΔΗΣ
ΙΕ' ΣΟΦΙΣΤΗΣ, ΠΟΛΙΤΙΚΟΣ
ΙΣΤ' ΦΙΛΗΒΟΣ
ΙΖ' ΤΙΜΑΙΟΣ ΚΑΙ ΚΡΙΤΙΑΣ
ΙΗ' ΝΟΜΟΙ ΚΑΙ ΕΠΙΝΟΜΙΣ
ΙΘ' Ο ΠΛΑΤΩΝ ΣΤΗΝ ΑΚΑΔΗΜΙΑ - ΟΙ ΙΔΕΕΣ ΚΑΙ ΟΙ ΑΡΙΘΜΟΙ
ΣΥΜΠΛΗΡΩΜΑ
ΠΑΡΑΡΤΗΜΑ: ΝΟΘΑ ΠΛΑΤΩΝΙΚΑ ΚΕΙΜΕΝΑ
ΧΡΟΝΟΛΟΓΙΚΟΣ ΠΙΝΑΚΑΣ
ΣΗΜΕΙΩΣΕΙΣ
ΕΥΡΕΤΗΡΙΟ

Genres: Philosophy, Biography, Nonfiction, History, Classics

704 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1926

About the author

Alfred Edward Taylor was a British idealist philosopher. He was born in 1869, the son of a Wesleyan minister. Among many distinguished appointments, he held the chair of Moral Philosophy at Edinburgh from 1924 to 1941. His main interests were Platonic philosophy and the theology of Christianity, and his contributions in both these fields have been of far-reaching importance. "Does God Exist?" was his last considerable work on the philosophy of religion before his death in 1945.

Reviews

[Erick · Rating 4 out of 5]

I think most attentive readers of Plato's dialogues will find themselves in one of two camps: those who believe that Plato carried on the spirit of Socrates' philosophy, and those who believe he carried on the letter of Socrates' philosophy. There will certainly be some overlap here. Those who believe Plato carried on the spirit will acknowledge that dialogues such as the Apology are probably a fairly accurate account of what Socrates said on a particular occasion; those who believe he carried on the letter will have to acknowledge that dialogues such as the Parmenides could not be an accurate account of a historical encounter. A. E. Taylor is certainly more in the Socratic letter camp. I must admit that I'm more in the Socratic spirit camp.

My issue with the Socratic philosophical letter is that it makes Plato far too dependent on Socrates and accords to him very little philosophical originality. We are left with a philosopher that was little more than Socrates' stenographer. That, for me, pushes beyond the realm of credibility. Taylor balks at the notion that Plato would have used Socrates as a mouthpiece for anything he didn't really say. I agree we have to be careful here. I seriously doubt that Plato would have had Socrates say anything that would be at odds with what he knew Socrates' sensibilities were. But I don't believe the majority of the dialogues are anything approaching actual historical dialogic encounters. Taylor apparently thinks that Xenophon simply lifted his ideas from Plato for his own Socrates and gives his Memorabilia almost no credence. I can't accept that that is a reasonable appraisal. While Xenophon's Socrates and Plato's Socrates are indeed similar, one must acknowledge one fundamental difference: Xenophon's Socrates is on the whole far more concerned with ethics and isn't concerned with metaphysics hardly at all. Indeed, Xenophon goes out of his way to say that Socrates eschewed metaphysics. A way to reconcile these two versions might be to take a clue from Plato's dialogues that metaphysics were more an interest of Socrates' youth. This might explain why dialogues like the Timaeus and Parmenides largely utilize other speakers to put forth the Eleatic and Pythagorean ideas that they contain. Still, Plato's Socrates is undeniably a teacher of metaphysics aside from that. I don't doubt in the slightest that Socrates taught the essential features of the doctrine of forms/ideas, but I think Plato took these further than Socrates had. Socrates probably accepted that the forms were transcendent in some sense, but he was probably far more concerned with their practical application than their theoretical numinous features. I think Plato probably went further with Socrates' views on the soul (psyche) as well. I personally feel that the Phaedo is probably a fairly accurate account of what Socrates said on that particular occasion. The Phaedrus I don't think is. I find it interesting that Plato only mentions himself once in his dialogues, i.e. The Phaedo, and that is to stipulate that he was not present for this exchange. In my humble opinion, Plato did this to let the reader know that he is not pretending to always give historical testimony to what Socrates actually said. In his mind, that freed him to explore further some of the implied aspects of Socrates' philosophy concerning the things I just listed. When the ideas Plato wanted to explore were clearly more compatible with another school, he used other speakers that were affiliated with those schools. Taylor seems to accord to Plato originality in only very late dialogues like the Laws. I just can't go along with that. I admit that Aristotle does seem to confirm that some of the Platonic dialogues were expounding Socrates' own ideas. Often when he quotes them he attributes the thought to Socrates. Whether this is due to Aristotle receiving Plato's own confirmation that the very words were Socrates', or just the ideas, isn't manifest. Aristotle may have simply recognized that the dialogues used Socrates' as the mouthpiece for certain ideas and he respected Plato's desire to not take credit for them.

While some may see me accepting Xenophon's testimony as totally undermining Plato's, I see it more as a matter of according to Plato an originality of thought that is due him. Obviously, he was influenced by Socrates, but he was also influenced by the Eleatics, the Pluralists, the Orphics and the Pythagoreans as well. I would like to believe (and I believe there is some textual evidence for this) that Plato added something that was original to the preceding schools.

With the above being said, I think this was quite a good book. Some of Taylor's discussions I will certainly revisit in the future, namely, those on the Theaetetus, the Parmenides, the Republic, the Sophist, the Protagoras and his discussion on the early Academy. I recommend the book, but would encourage the reader to not accept Taylor's implicit attempt to marginalize Plato's originality.

[ζανλίκ · Rating 4 out of 5]

Οπωσδήποτε απαραίτητο για κάποιον που ακολουθεί πλατωνικές σπουδές ή σπουδές αρχαίας φιλοσοφίας εν γένει, αλλά είναι αρκετά ευανάγνωστο και για κάποιον που απλά ενδιαφέρεται για λεπτομέρειες πάνω στο πλατωνικό corpus. Ίσως από τα καλύτερα και πιο καθοδηγητικά βιβλία που έχω διαβάσει όσο είμαι φοιτήτρια.

[Tim · Rating 3 out of 5]

A serviceable introduction to the dialogues and synopsis of each, but Taylor maintains strenuously that the theory of forms, etc., were Socrates’ and that Plato never put anything into Socrates’ mouth that didn’t come from Socrates. So caveat emptor – this is a novel theory outside the mainstream of Platonic scholarship, which considers the early dialogues essentially Socratic, with transitional, mid and late ones becoming increasingly Platonic. It’s hard to take this theory seriously considering the picture of Socrates we get from Plato’s early dialogues combined with those of other Socratic dialogue writers, including Xenophon. If Plato’s epistemology, ontology and metaphysics came from Socrates, why don’t the other writers indicate anything about them? Oddly, this hardly mars the analysis and commentary. But if anyone (i.e., Pete) has a suggestion for another good overview of the dialogues, I’m all ears.

[Erik Graff · Rating 3 out of 5]

I took at least three courses focused on ancient Greek philosophy while at Loyola University Chicago. Two were specifically about Plato, courses which got me to read a good deal of A.E. Taylor and his near contemporary, Cornford.
This book is notable for being a sympathetic study of Plato's thought. Taylor was a bit of an idealist himself and tended also to take Plato's representation of Socrates as coherent and substantially accurate.

[Gabriel Gioia Ávila Oliveira · Rating 3 out of 5]

A ideia aqui foi amarrar a minha experiência de 6 diálogos de Platão que li com uma análise mais moderna de sua obra e filosofia. Como uma análise, esse livro é mais do que suficiente. São discutidos absolutamente todas as obras, posicionadas na sua ordem mais provável, é delineada a evolução de Platão como autor e todos os conceitos principais de sua filosofia são destrinchados. A.E. Taylor, um acadêmico de primeira, ainda tem um carinho especial pelo aspecto teológico da filosofia platônica, o que também tem tudo a ver comigo.

Dito isso, foi talvez a leitura mais árida da minha vida. Cada página custou a virar, e a sensação foi de estar me atrasando em relação a tudo que já poderia estar lendo. Mas como me propus a terminar, terminei. Saio satisfeito, porque apesar de ter sido a um preço muito alto, tive o fechamento de Platão que buscava. Mas recomendo apenas para quem está disposto a encarar muita etimologia grega, muita articulação de conceitos abstratos, e páginas a fio sobre o mesmo tema.

[A.J. McMahon · Rating 5 out of 5]

The reader is advised to be careful with Taylor's presentation of Plato. Taylor was the son of a Methodist or Baptist minister, I forget which, and he comes across as having something of an agenda of his own in his interpretation of Plato's philosophy, i. e. he bends and twists much of what Plato says towards a Christian end. Furthermore, this book has numerous flaws, such as his commentary on the Parmenides, which is extremely misleading. Why then do I give him five stars? Because to anyone who wants an introduction to Plato, this is the best introduction I know of. What Taylor has done is to give an overview of both Plato's life and all his philosophical works in such a concise way that by the end of it the reader has been given a bird's eye view, so to speak, of Plato. No one else seems to have done this, as far as I am aware. So I can recommend this as an introduction to Plato provided that the reader has been suitably forewarned about Taylor's not-so-hidden agenda.

[Argiris Fakkas · Rating 3 out of 5]

A thorough book that contains summaries and analyses for all the dialogues that belong in the platonic corpus. The analysis is comprehensive but at the same time a little dull and tiring. It's not an easy book to read, that's for sure, but it is nevertheless an essential one, in the platonic studies.

I think it would be very useful to read the corresponding chapter before or while you are reading the actual philosophical works of Plato. You would have a much better understanding on some difficult subjects that the Athenian philosopher covers, especially in his later and more demanding dialogues.

[Gille Liath · Rating 3 out of 5]

Published in 1926, this is essentially a pre-Penguin study of Plato - from the days before good English translations of his work were easily and cheaply available. The bulk of it is devoted to telling you simply what his books say. There is no attempt to synthesise the material into a system - Taylor specifically avoids that - or even to compare the different dialogues, and little comment on it. Now, of all great philosophers Plato is the easiest to read. If you can't understand him without the benefit of a 'York notes', you probably shouldn't be studying or reading philosophy at all.

[David Coody · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of my favorite books now. It comes with me wherever I go. It provides instruction and inspiration for the simple
man to begin his journey towards the good. The sincerity, humility, and love of God that Plato speaks with comes through even more clearly with AE Taylor.

[James Henderson · Rating 3 out of 5]

An idiosyncratic and thorough interpretation of Plato's thought. Using a review of the dialogues, Taylor covers a tremendous amount of ideas and concepts presented in the Platonic corpus. With contextual commentary this is a useful adjunct to any serious reading of Plato's dialogues.

[Jesse Whyte · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wonderful work. I haven't really read anything better, even anything written in the considerable time since it was published. Accounts for his contemporaries well, but obviously not much since then.