The Assessment of Knowledge, or Whether We Possess Knowledge or Twofold Ignorance about Our Place in the Universe

Author(s): Pavlo Sodomora,Svitlana Yahelo / Language(s): English Issue: 27/2021

The article aims to investigate the notion and foundation of the concept of knowledge to assess our place in the Universe via understanding of ourselves. The components of knowledge are discussed, aiming at clarifying what exactly the knowledge consists of. Several dialogues of Plato pose certain questions on the nature of knowledge, and here particularly Meno and Alcibiases-1 are taken into consideration, as well as Proclus’ Commentary on Plato’s Alcibiades-1. It is impossible, according to Plato, to learn anything at all if we lack knowledge about ourselves, as it is shown in “Alcibiades-1.” Despite being relatively short, the dialogue is considered by some ancient scholars to be the introduction to the whole philosophy of Plato, according to Proclus’ Commentary on the dialogue. As a result, it has been inferred that there is no proof that gives us the right to assert that we possess any reliable knowledge in general, following the example on the authenticity of the dialogue in particular. This is why a parallel question, the authenticity of Alcibiades-1, is being discussed here on the basis of Proclus’ work in order to define the concept of “lost knowledge” and to consider the possibility of how certain knowledge can become lost. Excerpts from the first Ukrainian translation of the aforementioned Plato’s dialogues (yet to be published) and from Proclus’ Commentary are given to provide proof for given statements. Pavlo Sodomora provides translation from ancient Greek into Ukrainian.

Paradoxical Nature of Language in Terms of its Acquisition and Learning (Based on Plato’s “Cratylus”)

Author(s): Pavlo Sodomora,Oleh Yerchenko / Language(s): English Issue: 26/2021

The process of learning is analogous to the process of motion, as well as it resembles the progress from less to more perfect. Plato, combining two opposites, attempts at reconciliation of the theories of Heraclitus and Parmenides, providing us with his amazing theory of Forms. In light of this, he speaks of language as a means of cognizance of the Universe. In his own turn, and much later, Ludwig Wittgenstein, combining incompatible, speaks of language as the single subject which requires explanation. As well as it can be seen from the history of the development of understanding, those who dared to combine two opposites have come up with amazing discoveries. New discoveries in the field of gravity are likely to throw some light on the solutions to Zeno’s paradoxes and, at the same time, reveal and explain to us the paradoxical nature of language acquisition. The article argues that the phenomenon of language possesses a paradoxical nature that seems not to be unambiguously explained by behavioristic theories. As a result, this view serves to the development and improvement of newer approaches to the learning of a second language, which is completely distinct from the process of primary language acquisition.

Prisjećanje na Protagoru

Author(s): Daniel Bučan / Language(s): Croatian Issue: 02/162/2021

“Πάντων χρημάτων μέτρον ἐστὶν ἄνθρωπος, τῶν μὲν ὄντων ὡς ἔστιν, τῶν δὲ οὐκ ὄντων ὡς οὐκ ἔστιν [Pántôn khrēmátôn métron éstin ánthrôpos, tôn mèn όntôn hôs éstin, tôn dè ouk όntôn hôs ouk éstin]” – “The measure of all things is man; of things that are that they are, of things that are not that they are not”, said Protagoras. He who wants to consider (and to discuss) Protgoras’ statement should first look for the answer to the preliminary question “what man is?” Therefore, first the answer to this question will be sought for (with the help of Aristotle), so that Protagora’s statement be considered from the point of view of those answers, and tested within the scope of two aspects of man’s life – θεωρετικός βίος (theōretikόs bíos) and πολιτικός βίος (politikόs bíos). Finally, if Plato’s interpretation of Protagora’s statement as the affirmation of the principle of relativism (as in his criticism of Protagora in Theaitēt) is accepted, a tentative positioning of relativism and its meaning from the point of view of these two aspects of man’s life, as well as from the point of view of difference between sophism and philosophy (sophist and philosopher) will be proposed. At the end it will be suggested that Protagora’s statement could be interpreted differently, and that each of different interpretations can be meaningful from different philosophical positions.

Sokrat i Epiktet vs. prva i druga generacija sofista

Author(s): Tamara Plećaš / Language(s): Croatian Issue: 02/162/2021

The paper discusses the difference between philosophy and sophistry. More precisely, it discusses the differences between Socrates and Sophists of the first generation, as well as the differences between Epictetus and Sophists of both first and second generation. While Sophists were the first professional teachers and Epictetus one of the greatest Stoic teachers of all times, Socrates, according to Plato, denied being a teacher by any means, despite many who thought otherwise. Sophists were known for their speeches that most attracted those with a wish to be successful politicians. Socrates and Epictetus were also excellent orators surrounded by Athenian and Roman politicians. However, that didn’t make them Sophists. Socrates and Epictetus opted for a life in accordance with excellence (virtue) that could be achieved by philosophy rather than rhetoric. Rhetoric could only have instrumental value, not an intrinsic one.

Rođenje filozofije

Author(s): Giorgio Colli / Language(s): Croatian Issue: 26/2021

Misteriozni su izvori grčke filozofije i s njom sveukupne zapadnjačke misli. U skladu s učenom tradicijom, ona se rodila s Talesom i Anaksimandrom. U 19. stoljeću njezini su se najdublji izvori tražili u legendarnim dodirima s orijentalnim kulturama, s egipatskom i indijskom mišlju. No tim putem nije bilo moguće ništa ustanoviti i zadovoljili su se uspostavom analogija i paralela. Vrijeme izvora grčke filozofije zapravo nam je mnogo bliže. Platon imenuje philosophia, »ljubav prema mudrosti«, vlastito istraživanje, odnosno odgojnu djelatnost povezanu s pisanim izrazom, s literarnim oblikom dijaloga. S obožavanjem gleda Platon u prošlost, u svijet u kojem su doista postojali »mudraci«. S druge pak strane potonja – naša – filozofija nije ništa drugo doli nastavak, razvitak literarnog oblika što ga je inaugurirao Platon. No ipak je nastala kao dekadentna pojava, jer »ljubav prema mudrosti« stoji ispod »mudrosti«. Ljubav prema mudrosti Platonu, naime, nije značila stremljenje prema još nedosegnutom, nego težnju prema opetovanom pridobivanju onoga što je već bilo ostvareno i proživljeno.

Grci

Author(s): Hans-Georg Gadamer / Language(s): Croatian Issue: 26/2021

Mislilac formata Martina Heideggera nudi mnogo aspekata pod kojima možemo vrednovati njegovo značenje i njegov učinak. Tu je njegovo preuzimanje pojma egzistencije Kierkegaardova kova i njegova analiza tjeskobe [Angst] i bitka k smrti [Sein zum Tode], koja je imala duboki učinak napose na protestantsku teologiju dvadesetih godina i utjecala, primjerice, i na prvu recepciju Rilkea. Tu je tridesetih godina Heideggerov »okret« [Kehre] prema Hölderlinu, kojim je od tog njemačkog pjesnika preuzeo gotovo proročku poruku. Tu je veličanstveni nabačaj [Wurf] i protu-nabačaj [Gegen-Wurf] jedinstvenog tumačenja Nietzschea, koje je prvi put mislilo zajedno volju za moć i vječno ponovno vraćanje onog jednakog. Tu je, napose u vrijeme nakon Drugog svjetskog rata, njegovo tumačenje zapadnoeuropske metafizike i njezina istjecanja u razdoblje opće tehnike kao usuda zaboravljenosti bivstvovanja – a iza svega toga stalno osjećamo neku vrst pritajene teologije skrivenog boga. Ma koliko htjeli u pojedinostima prigovarati Heideggerovim tumačenjima, ma koliko odbacivali od sebe i Heideggerovo prevladavanje metafizike, bilo kao sekularnu osionost ili, tome nasuprot, kao zadnje i konačno odgađanje nihilizma – nitko neće poricati da u zadnjih pedeset godina nitko drugi nije toliko izazvao europsku filozofiju kao Heideggerove misaone smionosti. Zbog Heideggerovih misaonih pokušaja, koji slijede gotovo bez predaha, nitko također neće moći zanijekati nutarnju nužnost njegova puta, premda se može mnogima činiti stranputicom preko polja neizrecivosti.

Na putu bez povratka

Author(s): Žarko Paić / Language(s): Croatian Issue: 26/2021

Od mnogih umjetnički dojmljivih pokušaja prikaza veličajnosti, uzvišenosti i ljepote koju su drevni Grci ostavili u nasljeđe zapadnjačkome načinu mišljenja i kazivanja nesumnjivo se izdvaja refeksivni putopis Huga von Hofmannsthala naslovljen Trenuci u Grčkoj 1908. – 1914. Želimo li, naime, pristupiti iskustvu onoga božanskoga kakvo se izvorno pojavilo Grcima u mitu, posve je bjelodano da se u tom događaju nužno otvara odnos između bogova i ljudi posredovanjem umjetničkoga prikazivanja. Bez umjetnosti ovaj bi odnos bio nemoguć. No, umjetnost nije ono samo po sebi pojavljujuće bez začetnoga trenutka nastajanja mitskoga iskustva. Riječ mythos, uostalom, odnosi se u grčkome jeziku na značenje riječi »riječ« i ono što se riječima iskazuje kao »govor«. Otuda je samorazumljiivo da umjetnost koja donosi na vidjelo mitsko odvijanje događaja susreta između bogova i ljudi u izvornome smislu sjedinjuje govor i odjelovljenu sliku.

Onkraj nihilizma: otvoreno polje vječnosti

Author(s): Jonel Kolić / Language(s): Croatian Issue: 1-2/2021

Živimo u vremenu u kojem je filozofija pretežno shvaćena kao apstraktna kontemplacija, čije znanje, u odnosu na ono znanstveno, ne doprinosi razumijevanju konkretnosti života. U društvu zasnovanom na ideji napretka u okvirima fragmentiranog i specijaliziranog znanja, filozofija izgleda kao vrsta »mrtvog« jezika, koji se govori onda kada treba povući generalne zaključke ili objediniti fragmente u prividnu cjelinu. U hrvatskom razgovornom jeziku se čak kaže »ne filozofiraj« osobi koja naizgled bespotrebno komplicira svoj govor.

Gheorghe Vlăduțescu, „Dicționarul” lui Aristotel

Author(s): Savu Totu / Language(s): Romanian Issue: 4/2021

„Dicționarul” lui Aristotel: o reconstrucție liberă a distincției metafizică–ontologie la Gheorghe Vlăduțescu

Author(s): Ion Tănăsescu / Language(s): Romanian Issue: 4/2021

POURRAIT-ON CONVAINCRE PLATON DU BIEN-FONDÉ DE LA PHILOSOPHIE POUR ENFANTS ?

Author(s): Samuel Nepton / Language(s): French Issue: 3/2021

Could Plato be Convinced by the Merits of Philosophy for Children? The exclusion of childhood from the realm of philosophy traditionally dates back to the work of Plato. In his dialogues Gorgias and Republic, the founder of the Western philosophical tradition argues against a childish practice of philosophy: the search for truth is too serious and complex an undertaking for young people. This has led to a persistent presupposition that still hinders the implementation of the practice of philosophy with children. Our objective with this paper is to show that there is in fact a continuity between P4C and philosophy according to Plato. We present another reading of these Platonic reasons to show that they leave an opening for a playful and democratic approach to philosophy.

Jūrinės valstybės mitologizavimas: hodegetinis matmuo

Author(s): Saulius Lileikis / Language(s): Lithuanian Issue: 107/2021

The article discusses the hodegetical dimension of the mythologization of a maritime state. The hagiographer refers to the waters in biblical protology. In the ancient Semitic cosmogony, the primordial ocean is of great significance. The mythological symbolism of the sea is creative. The sea is mythologized by giving it certain meanings and turning it into a significant symbol. The natural attraction towards the sea manifests itself as an archaic universality. At the mythological cosmogonic and psychoanalytic erotic level, man’s affection for the sea encompasses a certain aspect of incest. The ideological mythologization of a maritime state is a hodegetical instrument. Creativity, self-respect, and respect for others inherent to the free spirit of the sea are rarely the subjects of discussions. The mythologization of the maritime state requires an etiological myth about a maritime city that unites the nation and its values. Lithuanian Maritime Academy cherishes maritime traditions that are hodegetically valuable. Noble and meaningful maritime memoirs make the intellectual mythologization of the maritime state possible.

Juokų krėtimas: šmaikštumas ar pašaipumas?

Author(s): Rolandas Bartkus / Language(s): Lithuanian Issue: 107/2021

In this article I present an investigation of ethical questions related to joking: links between laughter and pleasure, wit, temperance, shyness, stupidity, pride and immorality, as well as the boundaries of making jokes – the legality and decency of joking. Using Aristotle’s Principle of the Mean, lack and overabundance of humor are revealed as two poles. Moderate and subtle joking (wit) is to be held a virtue, thus how should a sharp irony or a biting sarcasm be evaluated? Is malevolence always present with ridicule and does shyness express decency? When examining the content of decency in contexts of interplay between values and virtues, nuances of self-control emerge. When self-control arises from fear, shame or inability, it is not decency or virtue. Good things emerge only from good origin. A subtle and noble person is a law for himself or herself: the culture of joking and the inner constitution of such a human being represents decency.

Seneka: apolitinės moralės pamo

Author(s): Aivaras Stepukonis / Language(s): English Issue: 108/2021

The article discusses the place of politics and statesmanship in Seneca’s moral philosophy as it is unfolded in his Ad Lucilium epistulae morales. For Seneca political office holds no intrinsic value. In principle, taking part in the affairs of state can be good and it can be evil. In actuality, however, the world of politics, for Seneca, is a dirty business. Political activities are fraught with so many ways to contract vice that everyone, who has chosen to pursue a life of virtue, should shun them as much as possible. Another reason why Seneca distances himself from active participation in the life of the state is his re-definition of what state, country, homeland really are. He turns away from a political order of human relations to a natural order of things. It is this all-encompassing world-order, driven by destiny, that becomes his true country and state.

Dvasinės pratybos, metaforologija ir filosofinis konsultavimas

Author(s): Lina Vidauskytė / Language(s): Lithuanian Issue: 108/2021

The aim of this article is to analyze the possibilities of applying metaphorology in philosophical counseling, based on the philosophical insights of Hans Blumenberg and Pierre Hadot. Metaphorology, or non-conceptual theory, is a direction marked by Blumenberg. Its possibility of is completely unexplored in philosophical counseling. Hadot is primarily known for his exceptionally original interpretation of Ancient Philosophy and his entrenched conception of spiritual exercises. The concepts are difficult to apply in a specific existential situation, but metaphors focus on human imagery and are a kind of gestalt of reality. Spiritual exercises perceived as a philosophical way of life help to concretize the theory and to apply it in life situations.

PLAYING AND LAUGHING GODS OF PLATO’S DIALOGUES IN THE COMMENTARIES OF PROCLUS

Author(s): Dmitry Kurdybaylo,Inga Kurdybaylo / Language(s): English Issue: 1/2021

“Socrates’ irony” is a well-known topos. Dialogues of Plato contain different modes of humour, from mild self-irony to quite sarcastic tones. Plato’s gods are ‘playful,’ they treat people as those were ‘playthings.’ The best way of mortals’ life is to play also, spending their time in “sacrificing, singing, and dancing.” However, Neoplatonic commentaries to Plato tend to avoid explicit laughter and any direct mode of humour. Proclus, one of the most fruitful commentators of Plato, seems to disregard anything ludicrous in Plato’s writing. The places, where Plato speaks about laughter or playing games, are explained by Proclus as signs to some kind of divine activity towards the material realm. Even smile and laughter of particular humans are interpreted in the same way as symbols (synthēmata) of gods’ providence. What Proclus discusses in minor details, is the dialectics of gods’ procession into the sensible world, causing substantiation of the universe, and retention of the internal bonds that keep it eternal and unchangeable. Similarly, temporary particular beings also benefit from divine providence, which fortifies their vital capabilities. In general, these forms of providence are depicted by “the undying laughter” of gods. In spite of this approach seeming to be superfluously ‘scholastic’ and therefore losing the dramatic perspective of Plato’s writings, we suggest that Proclean interpretation may assume laughter to be related to some theurgic practice. Therefore, reading and interpretation the game- and laughter-related passages of Plato could have been considered themself a kind of theurgic “sacred play.”

ЕДИНОЕ У ЭЛЕЙЦЕВ, ПЛАТОНА И ПЛОТИНА

Author(s): Yaroslav Slinin / Language(s): Russian Issue: 1/2021

The article gives a comparative study of the way the category of the one is interpreted by the Eleatic philosophers, Plato and Plotinus. The Eleatics believe that the one is absolute and it does not permit the many of any kind. Plato in the Parmenides proves that if it is the case, then the one cannot have parts and may not be considered as the unity. As for Plotinus, he believes that the one is not an eidos like Plato believes, nor it is an absolute that excludes the many as the Eleatic philosophers claim. He agrees that the one does not exist as it is shown in the Parmenides, but he goes further. He identifies the one with the good of Plato’s Republic. This identification is Plotinus innovation; it allows him to create his doctrine of the One that does not exist in the usual sense of the word, but does exist supernaturally and mystically and gives birth of everything that is. The one of the Eleatic philosophers excludes the many, but the One of Plotinus, on the contrary, gives rise to the many. Virtually the One is the element of the great set, which embraces the One itself, as well as eidoi and objects that are created by the One.

ДВЕ АНТИЧНЫХ КЛАССИФИКАЦИИ НАУК: АРИСТОТЕЛЬ И ГЕМИН

Author(s): Leonid Zhmud / Language(s): Russian Issue: 1/2021

The paper examines the division of cognitive space in Antiquity as exemplified by the two most influential classifications of sciences, by Aristotle and Geminus, which underlie all subsequent classifications of scientific disciplines until the 18th century. Aristotle, considering the mathēmata in their comparison with the “first” and especially with the “second”, physical philosophy, proceeds from the independence of all three kinds of epistēmai and strives to draw the most rigid boundaries possible both between them and within the field of mathēmata. Geminus’ classification reflects the far-reaching differentiation of sciences at the end of Hellenism, when almost all of them acquired several auxiliary disciplines, theoretical or applied, and when “mathematics” became synonymous with “science.”

«МЕТАФИЗИКА» И «ФЕНОМЕНОЛОГИЯ» У ПЛАТОНА («ФЕДОН»)

Author(s): Irina Protopopova / Language(s): Russian Issue: 1/2021

The article considers the correlation between the ‘metaphysical’ and ‘phenomenological’ approaches in Plato’s “Phaedo”. Here, the ‘metaphysics’ refers to philosophical judgments that are considered as certain external principles that are not directly related to the philosopher’s ‘work of consciousness’. The ‘phenomenology’, on the other hand, refers to the specific philosophical experience of observing one’s own ways of grasping things in the immediate reality of awareness. At the beginning of the dialogue, in the so-called ‘defense of Socrates’, he first offers several premises that are accepted as axioms by his interlocutors and, secondly, he describes a philosophical purification as the ‘gathering of the soul’, which results in a confusion of ideas about the soul as either separated and existing after death or ‘being collected in itself’ in the process of philosophical, metaphorical ‘dying’. The first and the third arguments for the immortality of the soul can be considered as ‘metaphysical’, based on analogies, and the second and the forth, as ‘phenomenological’, based on the practice of contemplation of ‘eide in themselves’ by the soul ‘in itself’. It is concluded that Plato’s eide do not appear due to induction or deduction and are not a doubling of general concepts, as Aristotle believed, but are revealed as a result of some effort to realize one’s own awareness of one’s own grasping of being. This is what is outlined here as the difference between ‘metaphysics’ and ‘phenomenology’.

ЯН АМОС КОМЕНСКИЙ И ЕГО (АНТИ)АРИСТОТЕЛЕВА «ФИЗИКА»: ПРИМЕР ПОПЫТКИ ПРЕОДОЛЕНИЯ АРИСТОТЕЛЯ В НАТУРФИЛОСОФИИ XVII В.

Author(s): Anastasia ZOLOTUKHINA / Language(s): Russian Issue: 1/2021

At the beginning of the 17th century there have been many attempts to overcome Aristotelian physics. One of the trends was the so-called "Mosaic physics" based on Scripture, not on the texts of Aristotle. The “Physicae Synopsis” by J. A. Komensky shows one of the options for such overcoming, with all its difficulties and successes.