Platos Phaedrus: dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2017 |
Tipo de documento: | Tese |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
Texto Completo: | https://doi.org/10.11606/T.8.2019.tde-17102018-145857 |
Resumo: | Plato thought that dialectic is the method of philosophical inquiry. Yet there is no agreement between scholars regarding Plato\'s view of dialectic. The dominant interpretation, dating back to Robinson\'s Plato\'s Earlier Dialectic, which I call the \"discontinuous\" interpretation (DI), assumes a significant gap between Plato\'s account of dialectic as it is presented in the course of the dialogues. As such, although Plato considered dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry, the term \'Dialectic\' is just a façon de parler conveying the method he deemed most suitable at different moments. One should note that (DI) entails the following trilemma: Plato\'s dialectic, as the method of philosophical inquiry, must be identified with either Elenchus (E), Hypothesis (H) or Collection & Division (C&D). For example, Irwin (1988:7) argues that one should identify dialectic with (E) while Benson (2015:238) argues that one should identify dialectic with (H). In contrast with (DI), the goal of this dissertation is to defend a \"continuous\" interpretation (CI): Plato introduced a unified view of dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry in the Phaedrus. My argument supporting (CI) relies on three main premises: (1) The so-called three methods, (E), (H) and (C&D), are three different procedures of one διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη; (2) Plato\'s διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη is both a method of communication and a method of discovering truth; and (3) The Phaedrus (261a-266b) contains Plato\'s unified view of διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη, conceived as an amalgam of (E), (H) and (C&D), and a method of communication and a method of discovering truth. |
id |
USP_a1d53088704c8573c3ef0269280bbeb0 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:teses.usp.br:tde-17102018-145857 |
network_acronym_str |
USP |
network_name_str |
Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
repository_id_str |
2721 |
spelling |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis Platos Phaedrus: dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry O Fedro de Platão: dialética como o método de investigação filosófica 2017-12-13Marco Antonio de Avila ZinganoRoberto Bolzani FilhoFernando Maciel GazoniDaniel Rossi Nunes LopesAlfonso Correa MottaAdriana Madriñan MolinaUniversidade de São PauloFilosofiaUSPBR Collection (συναγωγή) and division (διαίρεσις) Dialectic Dialética Elenchus Elenchus Hipótese Hypothesis Method of philosophical inquiry Método de investigação filosófica O Fedro Phaedrus Platão Plato Reunião (συναγωγή) e divisão (διαίρεσις) Plato thought that dialectic is the method of philosophical inquiry. Yet there is no agreement between scholars regarding Plato\'s view of dialectic. The dominant interpretation, dating back to Robinson\'s Plato\'s Earlier Dialectic, which I call the \"discontinuous\" interpretation (DI), assumes a significant gap between Plato\'s account of dialectic as it is presented in the course of the dialogues. As such, although Plato considered dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry, the term \'Dialectic\' is just a façon de parler conveying the method he deemed most suitable at different moments. One should note that (DI) entails the following trilemma: Plato\'s dialectic, as the method of philosophical inquiry, must be identified with either Elenchus (E), Hypothesis (H) or Collection & Division (C&D). For example, Irwin (1988:7) argues that one should identify dialectic with (E) while Benson (2015:238) argues that one should identify dialectic with (H). In contrast with (DI), the goal of this dissertation is to defend a \"continuous\" interpretation (CI): Plato introduced a unified view of dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry in the Phaedrus. My argument supporting (CI) relies on three main premises: (1) The so-called three methods, (E), (H) and (C&D), are three different procedures of one διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη; (2) Plato\'s διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη is both a method of communication and a method of discovering truth; and (3) The Phaedrus (261a-266b) contains Plato\'s unified view of διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη, conceived as an amalgam of (E), (H) and (C&D), and a method of communication and a method of discovering truth. Platão pensou que a dialética é o método de investigação filosófica. No entanto, não há consenso entre os estudiosos a respeito da sua visão da dialética. A interpretação dominante, que se remonta ao trabalho de Robinson Plato\'s Earlier Dialectic, que eu chamo de interpretação \"descontínua\" (ID), pressupõe que há uma ruptura na visão de Platão sobre a dialética no decorrer dos seus diálogos. Isto significa que ele considerou a dialética como o método de investigação filosófica, mas o termo \'dialética\' é apenas uma façon de parler para se referir ao método que considerou mais adequado em diferentes momentos. Portanto, (ID) implica o seguinte trilema: Devese identificar a visão de Platão sobre a dialética, enquanto o método de investigação filosófica, com o Elenchus (E), com a Hypotesis (H), ou com a Coleção & Divisão (C&D)? Por exemplo, Irwin (1988: 7) afirma que a dialética deve ser identificada com (E), enquanto Benson (2015: 238) afirma que a dialética deve ser identificada com (H). Em contraste com (ID), o objetivo do presente trabalho é defender uma interpretação \"contínua\" (IC): No Fedro Platão introduz uma visão unificada da dialética como método de investigação filosófica. Meu argumento para defender (IC) está baseado em três premissas: (1) os chamados três métodos, (E), (H) e (C&D) são realmente três procedimentos diferentes de uma διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη; (2) a τέχνη διαλεκτικὴ de Platão é o método de comunicação e descoberta da verdade; e (3) o Fedro (261a-266b) contém a visão unificada de Platão sobre a διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη, concebida como uma amálgama de (E), (H) e (C e D), e o método de comunicação e descoberta da verdade. https://doi.org/10.11606/T.8.2019.tde-17102018-145857info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessengreponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USPinstname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USP2023-12-21T19:14:53Zoai:teses.usp.br:tde-17102018-145857Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertaçõeshttp://www.teses.usp.br/PUBhttp://www.teses.usp.br/cgi-bin/mtd2br.plvirginia@if.usp.br|| atendimento@aguia.usp.br||virginia@if.usp.bropendoar:27212023-12-22T12:49:25.289695Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false |
dc.title.en.fl_str_mv |
Platos Phaedrus: dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry |
dc.title.alternative.pt.fl_str_mv |
O Fedro de Platão: dialética como o método de investigação filosófica |
title |
Platos Phaedrus: dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry |
spellingShingle |
Platos Phaedrus: dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry Adriana Madriñan Molina |
title_short |
Platos Phaedrus: dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry |
title_full |
Platos Phaedrus: dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry |
title_fullStr |
Platos Phaedrus: dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry |
title_full_unstemmed |
Platos Phaedrus: dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry |
title_sort |
Platos Phaedrus: dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry |
author |
Adriana Madriñan Molina |
author_facet |
Adriana Madriñan Molina |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.advisor1.fl_str_mv |
Marco Antonio de Avila Zingano |
dc.contributor.referee1.fl_str_mv |
Roberto Bolzani Filho |
dc.contributor.referee2.fl_str_mv |
Fernando Maciel Gazoni |
dc.contributor.referee3.fl_str_mv |
Daniel Rossi Nunes Lopes |
dc.contributor.referee4.fl_str_mv |
Alfonso Correa Motta |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Adriana Madriñan Molina |
contributor_str_mv |
Marco Antonio de Avila Zingano Roberto Bolzani Filho Fernando Maciel Gazoni Daniel Rossi Nunes Lopes Alfonso Correa Motta |
description |
Plato thought that dialectic is the method of philosophical inquiry. Yet there is no agreement between scholars regarding Plato\'s view of dialectic. The dominant interpretation, dating back to Robinson\'s Plato\'s Earlier Dialectic, which I call the \"discontinuous\" interpretation (DI), assumes a significant gap between Plato\'s account of dialectic as it is presented in the course of the dialogues. As such, although Plato considered dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry, the term \'Dialectic\' is just a façon de parler conveying the method he deemed most suitable at different moments. One should note that (DI) entails the following trilemma: Plato\'s dialectic, as the method of philosophical inquiry, must be identified with either Elenchus (E), Hypothesis (H) or Collection & Division (C&D). For example, Irwin (1988:7) argues that one should identify dialectic with (E) while Benson (2015:238) argues that one should identify dialectic with (H). In contrast with (DI), the goal of this dissertation is to defend a \"continuous\" interpretation (CI): Plato introduced a unified view of dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry in the Phaedrus. My argument supporting (CI) relies on three main premises: (1) The so-called three methods, (E), (H) and (C&D), are three different procedures of one διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη; (2) Plato\'s διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη is both a method of communication and a method of discovering truth; and (3) The Phaedrus (261a-266b) contains Plato\'s unified view of διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη, conceived as an amalgam of (E), (H) and (C&D), and a method of communication and a method of discovering truth. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv |
2017-12-13 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis |
format |
doctoralThesis |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://doi.org/10.11606/T.8.2019.tde-17102018-145857 |
url |
https://doi.org/10.11606/T.8.2019.tde-17102018-145857 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade de São Paulo |
dc.publisher.program.fl_str_mv |
Filosofia |
dc.publisher.initials.fl_str_mv |
USP |
dc.publisher.country.fl_str_mv |
BR |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade de São Paulo |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP) instacron:USP |
instname_str |
Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
instacron_str |
USP |
institution |
USP |
reponame_str |
Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
collection |
Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP - Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
virginia@if.usp.br|| atendimento@aguia.usp.br||virginia@if.usp.br |
_version_ |
1794502818435956736 |