childhood as a weapon in the struggle between rhetoric and philosophy in plato's gorgias
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2010 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Childhood & Philosophy (Rio de Janeiro. Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/childhood/article/view/20555 |
Resumo: | This article intends to show how the “sophists,” in their argument with the “philosophers” in Plato’s Gorgias, appropriate the concept of childhood. The goal here is to think how the imputation of the “childish” to the other's discourse, sophist or philosopher, is a key point in the establishment of a victory of one discourse over the other in the history of western thinking. The paper also intends to present the differences between the sophistic and philosophical conceptions of childhood, showing, however, that the discursive goals of these different conceptions aim at the same end point: to make the other assume a status of heteronomy and, therefore, to accept being taught by the victorious discourse—in this case, the one that presumes itself to be adult, not-childish. I begin by locating the notion of childhood in a wider conceptual context than is usual, then consider what it means to “talk like a child” from this more expansive conceptual perspective. I then turn to the Gorgias, and present the concept of childhood as representative of the disqualified argument in the political dispute in Plato’s dialogue over the place of the teacher. I then discuss two conceptions of childhood in the dialogue: the philosophical one, which intends to show how rhetoric deludes itself; and the sophistic one, which intends to show how philosophy is a form of fantasizing. I also analyze two images commonly associated with children in the dialogue’s confrontation of ideas: the image of the “bogeyman,” and the image of play and gaming--the first imputed by sophists to philosophers, and the second imputed by philosophers to sophists. Finally, I address the platonic political-pedagogical project’s need for a concept of childhood as heteronomous, and consider whether this need is or is not a mark of all political-pedagogical projects, and indeed of all political discussion between contesting discourses. Keywords: childhood; political struggle; philosophy; rhetoric; Gorgias |
id |
UERJ-22_9fd7ef8abecd074cc536b08ac0c06b65 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br:article/20555 |
network_acronym_str |
UERJ-22 |
network_name_str |
Childhood & Philosophy (Rio de Janeiro. Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
childhood as a weapon in the struggle between rhetoric and philosophy in plato's gorgiasla lucha pedagógico-política entre retórica y filosofía: en busca de un concepto de infancia para aprisionar al otroa luta pedagógica-política entre retórica e filosofia: em busca de um conceito de infância para aprisionar o outroinfancialucha políticafilosofíaretóricaGorgiaschildhoodpolitical strugglephilosophyrhetoricGorgiasInfâncialuta políticafilosofiaretóricaGórgiasThis article intends to show how the “sophists,” in their argument with the “philosophers” in Plato’s Gorgias, appropriate the concept of childhood. The goal here is to think how the imputation of the “childish” to the other's discourse, sophist or philosopher, is a key point in the establishment of a victory of one discourse over the other in the history of western thinking. The paper also intends to present the differences between the sophistic and philosophical conceptions of childhood, showing, however, that the discursive goals of these different conceptions aim at the same end point: to make the other assume a status of heteronomy and, therefore, to accept being taught by the victorious discourse—in this case, the one that presumes itself to be adult, not-childish. I begin by locating the notion of childhood in a wider conceptual context than is usual, then consider what it means to “talk like a child” from this more expansive conceptual perspective. I then turn to the Gorgias, and present the concept of childhood as representative of the disqualified argument in the political dispute in Plato’s dialogue over the place of the teacher. I then discuss two conceptions of childhood in the dialogue: the philosophical one, which intends to show how rhetoric deludes itself; and the sophistic one, which intends to show how philosophy is a form of fantasizing. I also analyze two images commonly associated with children in the dialogue’s confrontation of ideas: the image of the “bogeyman,” and the image of play and gaming--the first imputed by sophists to philosophers, and the second imputed by philosophers to sophists. Finally, I address the platonic political-pedagogical project’s need for a concept of childhood as heteronomous, and consider whether this need is or is not a mark of all political-pedagogical projects, and indeed of all political discussion between contesting discourses. Keywords: childhood; political struggle; philosophy; rhetoric; GorgiasEste artículo pretende mostrar cómo sofistas y filósofos se apropian del concepto de infancia en el diálogo Gorgias de Platón. El objetivo es pensar cómo la imputación de infantil al discurso del otro, sofista o filósofo, es un punto clave para el establecimiento de la victoria de un discurso sobre el otro en la historia del pensamiento occidental. Se pretende mostrar las diferencias entre las concepciones que sofistas y filósofos tienen de la infancia, mostrando que, a pesar de esa diferencia, el objetivo discursivo de esas diferentes concepciones tiende a un mismo punto: hacer que el otro se considere en un lugar de heteronomía y, así, no pueda prescindir de ser enseñado por otro, en este caso, el discurso que se pretende adulto, no infantil. Inicialmente, introduciremos la discusión que hacemos de la infancia en un mapa conceptual más amplio, dado por los proyectos de investigación que seguimos en nuestro trabajo de maestría. Después, analizamos lo que significa hablar como un niño según esta perspectiva. Después, pasamos al análisis propiamente del diálogo Gorgias, presentando el concepto de infancia como el argumento descalificador en la disputa política por el papel del maestro. A continuación, discutimos las dos concepciones de infancia: la filosófica, que pretende mostrar que la retórica se engaña; y la retórica, que pretende mostrar que la filosofía fantasea. Analizamos, también, dos imágenes infantiles presentes en el confronto de ideas del diálogo, la imagen del bicho feo y la imagen del divertimiento y el juego, la primera imputada por los sofistas a los filósofos, y la segunda, de los filósofos a los sofistas. Finalmente, abordamos la necesidad del concepto de infancia filosófica para el proyecto pedagógico-político platónico e intentamos pensar si esa necesidad del concepto de infancia no es una marca de todo proyecto pedagógico-político, de toda discusión política entre diferentes discursos. Palabras clave: infancia; lucha política; filosofía; retórica; GorgiasEste artigo pretende mostrar como sofistas e filósofos se apropriam do conceito de infância no diálogo Górgias, de Platão. O objetivo aqui é pensar como a imputação de infantil ao discurso do outro, sofista ou filósofo, é um ponto-chave para o estabelecimento de uma vitória de um discurso sobre o outro na história do pensamento ocidental. Pretende-se apresentar as diferenças entre as concepções que sofistas e filósofos têm da infância, mostrando, porém, que o objetivo discursivo dessas diferentes concepções tendem a um mesmo ponto: fazer com que o outro assuma-se num lugar de heteronomia e, assim, não poder prescindir de ser ensinado por outrem, no caso, o discurso que se pretende adulto, não-infantil. De início, introduziremos a discussão que fazemos da infância em um mapa conceitual mais amplo, dado pelo projeto de pesquisa que trabalhamos no mestrado. Em seguida, analisamos o que significa falar como criança dentro dessa perspectiva. Passamos, então, à análise propriamente do diálogo Górgias, apresentando o conceito de infância como o argumento desqualificante da disputa política pelo papel de professor. Depois, discutimos as duas concepções de infância: a filosófica, que pretende mostrar como a retórica se ilude; e a retórica, que pretende mostrar como a filosofia fantasia. Analisamos, também, duas imagens infantis presentes no confronto de ideias do diálogo, a imagem do bicho-papão e a imagem da brincadeira e do jogo, a primeira imputada pelos sofistas aos filósofos e a segunda dos filósofos aos sofistas. Por fim, abordamos a necessidade do conceito de infância filosófica para o projeto pedagógico-político platônico e tentamos pensar se essa necessidade do conceito de infância não é uma marca de todo projeto pedagógico-político, de toda discussão política entre diferentes discursos. Palavras-chave: Infância; luta política; filosofia; retórica; GórgiasUniversidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro2010-07-19info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/childhood/article/view/20555childhood & philosophy; Vol. 6 Núm. 11 (2010): ene./jun.; pp. 21-39childhood & philosophy; v. 6 n. 11 (2010): jan./jun.; pp. 21-39childhood & philosophy; Vol. 6 No. 11 (2010): jan./june; pp. 21-391984-5987reponame:Childhood & Philosophy (Rio de Janeiro. Online)instname:Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ)instacron:UERJporhttps://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/childhood/article/view/20555/14881vicenzi, viniciusinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2018-07-10T19:04:32Zoai:ojs.www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br:article/20555Revistahttps://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/index.php/childhoodPUBhttps://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/index.php/childhood/oaiwokohan@gmail.com || wokohan@gmail.com1984-59871984-5987opendoar:2018-07-10T19:04:32Childhood & Philosophy (Rio de Janeiro. Online) - Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
childhood as a weapon in the struggle between rhetoric and philosophy in plato's gorgias la lucha pedagógico-política entre retórica y filosofía: en busca de un concepto de infancia para aprisionar al otro a luta pedagógica-política entre retórica e filosofia: em busca de um conceito de infância para aprisionar o outro |
title |
childhood as a weapon in the struggle between rhetoric and philosophy in plato's gorgias |
spellingShingle |
childhood as a weapon in the struggle between rhetoric and philosophy in plato's gorgias vicenzi, vinicius infancia lucha política filosofía retórica Gorgias childhood political struggle philosophy rhetoric Gorgias Infância luta política filosofia retórica Górgias |
title_short |
childhood as a weapon in the struggle between rhetoric and philosophy in plato's gorgias |
title_full |
childhood as a weapon in the struggle between rhetoric and philosophy in plato's gorgias |
title_fullStr |
childhood as a weapon in the struggle between rhetoric and philosophy in plato's gorgias |
title_full_unstemmed |
childhood as a weapon in the struggle between rhetoric and philosophy in plato's gorgias |
title_sort |
childhood as a weapon in the struggle between rhetoric and philosophy in plato's gorgias |
author |
vicenzi, vinicius |
author_facet |
vicenzi, vinicius |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
vicenzi, vinicius |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
infancia lucha política filosofía retórica Gorgias childhood political struggle philosophy rhetoric Gorgias Infância luta política filosofia retórica Górgias |
topic |
infancia lucha política filosofía retórica Gorgias childhood political struggle philosophy rhetoric Gorgias Infância luta política filosofia retórica Górgias |
description |
This article intends to show how the “sophists,” in their argument with the “philosophers” in Plato’s Gorgias, appropriate the concept of childhood. The goal here is to think how the imputation of the “childish” to the other's discourse, sophist or philosopher, is a key point in the establishment of a victory of one discourse over the other in the history of western thinking. The paper also intends to present the differences between the sophistic and philosophical conceptions of childhood, showing, however, that the discursive goals of these different conceptions aim at the same end point: to make the other assume a status of heteronomy and, therefore, to accept being taught by the victorious discourse—in this case, the one that presumes itself to be adult, not-childish. I begin by locating the notion of childhood in a wider conceptual context than is usual, then consider what it means to “talk like a child” from this more expansive conceptual perspective. I then turn to the Gorgias, and present the concept of childhood as representative of the disqualified argument in the political dispute in Plato’s dialogue over the place of the teacher. I then discuss two conceptions of childhood in the dialogue: the philosophical one, which intends to show how rhetoric deludes itself; and the sophistic one, which intends to show how philosophy is a form of fantasizing. I also analyze two images commonly associated with children in the dialogue’s confrontation of ideas: the image of the “bogeyman,” and the image of play and gaming--the first imputed by sophists to philosophers, and the second imputed by philosophers to sophists. Finally, I address the platonic political-pedagogical project’s need for a concept of childhood as heteronomous, and consider whether this need is or is not a mark of all political-pedagogical projects, and indeed of all political discussion between contesting discourses. Keywords: childhood; political struggle; philosophy; rhetoric; Gorgias |
publishDate |
2010 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2010-07-19 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/childhood/article/view/20555 |
url |
https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/childhood/article/view/20555 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/childhood/article/view/20555/14881 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
childhood & philosophy; Vol. 6 Núm. 11 (2010): ene./jun.; pp. 21-39 childhood & philosophy; v. 6 n. 11 (2010): jan./jun.; pp. 21-39 childhood & philosophy; Vol. 6 No. 11 (2010): jan./june; pp. 21-39 1984-5987 reponame:Childhood & Philosophy (Rio de Janeiro. Online) instname:Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ) instacron:UERJ |
instname_str |
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ) |
instacron_str |
UERJ |
institution |
UERJ |
reponame_str |
Childhood & Philosophy (Rio de Janeiro. Online) |
collection |
Childhood & Philosophy (Rio de Janeiro. Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Childhood & Philosophy (Rio de Janeiro. Online) - Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
wokohan@gmail.com || wokohan@gmail.com |
_version_ |
1799317590241181696 |