Platonic myth

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Platonic myth is the name given to the mythical narratives that Plato inserted into his literary philosophical works. They are called “Platonic” because Plato partly invented them himself, partly adapted them for his purposes by redesigning existing mythical material. Plato's relationship to myth is ambivalent: on the one hand, he criticizes the traditional, generally widespread myths in terms of content; on the other hand, he considers telling myths he has invented to be a legitimate way of conveying insights within the framework of a philosophical didactic. His conception of the meaning and truth content of philosophical myths and of their role as a supplement to dialectical argumentation in philosophical dialogue is a much discussed topic of modern research in the history of philosophy.

Definition and grouping

Plato regards the myth as an alternative and supplement to the logos (the reason-based consideration and argumentative comprehensible investigation). On the one hand, he lets the characters in his dialogues treat the two expressions like opposing terms; on the other hand, he does not clearly delimit them from one another in terms of terminology. This corresponds to the often ambiguous use of language by earlier and contemporary authors. He also points out a subjective aspect of the distinction: what is irrelevant mythical fable for one, another finds it so coherent and plausible that he assigns it to the area of ​​the logos. It is therefore not always possible to determine with certainty which parts of the text in Plato's works belong to the “Platonic myths”. Various content-related or formal criteria for determining these parts have been considered in the research literature.

According to current research, a combination of several features is characteristic of the Platonic myth. Glenn Most follows a discursive approach in that he starts from the respective communication situation. He worked out eight features that make up the characteristic, but it is not necessary that all eight must be given in each individual case:

1. Monological presentation: In contrast to the dialogical character of the dialectical conversation, the myth is always presented by only one speaker, usually without interruption by the audience.

2. Social rank of the speaker: The speaker is usually an elderly person of respect who is an authority for their relatively young audience.

3. Appeal to an alleged oral source: The lecturer claims - even with the myths that Plato undoubtedly invented - that he reproduces what has been passed down orally, and shares something about his alleged source.

4. Lack of verifiability: The focus is always on topics which, according to their nature, completely elude empirical verification. Either there is talk of a very distant past or of the fate of the soul after death.

5. Authority of tradition: an attempt is made to make the narrative appear as an authentic report. Their authority rests on the tradition to which the speaker invokes. In some cases the question of credibility is addressed - be it that the possibility of doubt is addressed, be it that the belief in the myth is asserted.

6. Desired emotional impact: the myth is perceived by the audience as entertaining and appeals to the emotions. It should encourage a desired attitude and behavior or instill confidence in their correctness.

7. Structure: In contrast to dialectics, the structure of which consists of the sequence of logical steps, the myth has a structure that is determined by the temporal sequence of elements of action or in some cases by the spatial nature of a described place.

8th position: Plato always places the myth either at the beginning or at the end of a dialectical discussion. Either a fresh start should be made in the endeavor to gain knowledge or it is a matter of a memorable illustration of thoughts that have already been put forward speculatively or argued.

The myths can be grouped into "Socratic" and "Non-Socratic" according to their narrator. Socratic myths are the ones that Plato puts in the mouth of his teacher Socrates . This Socrates, who appears in the Platonic dialogues , is a figure shaped literarily by Plato; his views differ at least in part from those of the historical Socrates. Hence he is known as the "Platonic Socrates". Another grouping criterion is content- related : A distinction is made between aitiological myths, which trace current circumstances back to a historical origin in a mythical past, and myths about the afterlife or eschatological myths, which deal with the fate of the soul after death.

The individual platonic myths

The emergence of civilization

Plato lets this myth relate to the title character, the sophist Protagoras , in his dialogue Protagoras . The core may go back to the historical Protagoras. According to the myth, the gods commissioned the brothers Prometheus and Epimetheus to provide the newly created mortal creatures with everything they needed to survive. Epimetheus looked after the animals, but neglected people, whereupon Prometheus took care of people and taught them how to use fire. The initially scattered people came together to protect themselves against wild animals in settlements, but were not able to cope with the resulting social tensions. Only when the gods gave them the qualities of “shame” (ability to respect fellow citizens) and “right” (sense of justice, sense of legal behavior) did an orderly, permanent coexistence become possible.

Zalmoxis

The Platonic Socrates presented this myth to his young interlocutor Charmides in Dialogue Charmides . He reports on his encounter with a Thracian doctor who, with reference to the legendary God-King Zalmoxis, taught a holistic healing art that heals the body starting from the soul.

The afterlife according to the apology

Plato's Apology for Socrates is a literary version of the defense speech that Socrates gave as the defendant. Here Plato has his teacher give a brief, optimistic description of the hoped-for fate of the soul after death. The Platonic Socrates refers to an orally transmitted myth. He hopes to meet important personalities in the realm of the dead and is confident that he will be treated fairly there - an expectation that he contrasts with the injustice of earthly justice.

The islands of the Blessed and Tartaros

At the end of Gorgia's dialogue , the Platonic Socrates tells an afterlife myth. According to this, the souls of righteous people end up on the paradise islands of the blessed after death , those of the unrighteous in Tartarus . They used to be judged by living judges on the day they died, while they were still alive. This led to misjudgments as the judges could not properly assess the souls covered by the bodies. So Zeus ordered a change. Since then the souls appear naked (disembodied) before their disembodied judges, who are sons of Zeus. As a result, the judges see them for who they really are and judge them fairly.

The barrel and the sieve

This short myth is presented by the Platonic Socrates in Gorgia's dialogue . Here is the famous metaphor of the body as the grave of the soul. After their death in Hades (underworld), insatiable people carry water with a leaky sieve into a holey barrel. This activity symbolizes the fruitlessness of their endeavors.

The transmigration of souls

Dialog Menon of the Platonic Socrates wears his anamnesis before -Teaching, a metaphysical theory of knowledge that presents as well as mythical investiture he both arguments justified. He interprets all learning and cognition as a memory of an already existing, but temporarily forgotten knowledge that the soul brings with it from its prenatal existence. Since she has already gained a lot of experience in the course of the transmigration of souls , she has a wealth of knowledge.

The afterlife according to Phaedo

In Dialogue Phaedo , on the day he died in prison, Socrates had a conversation with some friends about the immortality of the soul. Finally, in a myth, he describes in detail the different paths and whereabouts of souls in the various areas of the world of the dead. In this myth of the hereafter, too, the dependence of the fate of souls on their deeds is emphasized. The one who is purified through love of wisdom (philosophy) is given the prospect that his soul will leave the process of transmigration of souls and will lead a body-free existence for all future times.

The afterlife report of the Er

This famous myth, which forms the end of the Politeia dialogue , occupies a special position due to the unusual way it is presented and authenticated. The Platonic Socrates refers to the representation of a brave warrior from Pamphylia named Er, who fell in battle. This man's immortal soul left his body, but returned on the twelfth day after his death. So he came to life again and then reported on the conditions in the areas of the disembodied souls and on the experiences of his soul there. The focus of the representation is the retribution of earthly deeds after death. Those who philosophize “in a healthy way” can not only live happily on earth, but can also expect a happy existence after death. However, the stay in the hereafter is limited in time, as the souls return to earth to start a new life there ( transmigration of souls ). Every soul is responsible for its earthly fate itself, since it chooses the body into which it will enter and its living conditions before birth. In making this choice, follow her habits and inclinations that she brings with her from her previous life.

The earthborn

The myth of the "earth-born" or autochthonous is also found in the Politeia . Although conventional mythical material is used here, the Platonic Socrates makes it clear from the outset that this is a story invented for educational purposes. The earth is represented as the mother of men. The god who formed human beings mixed different metals into them: some gold, others silver, others iron and ore. The innate individual properties and abilities result from this addition of metals. In an ideal state, everyone should work in accordance with their disposition within the framework of a tripartite class order , whereby the class affiliation should be justified with the respective addition of metal.

The Ring of Gyges

In the Politeia , Plato's brother Glaukon tells a version of the famous myth, also passed down elsewhere, of the seizure of power by the Lydian king Gyges , the founder of the Mermnaden dynasty. Gyges was originally a simple shepherd. He found a corpse in a crevice with a gold ring on its hand. Gyges appropriated this. He found out that he could use the ring to make himself invisible. He used the magical power he gained to gain a position at the king's court and to seduce his wife into adultery. Finally he killed the king and usurped the rule. With this story Glaukon wants to illustrate his conviction that power corrupts in general and that no one can escape temptation when an opportunity to abuse power arises.

The chariot of the soul

In the dialogue Phaedrus , the Platonic Socrates describes the chariot of the soul. This myth shows allegorical features and thus resembles the parables . In order to illustrate the essence of the soul, Socrates makes a comparison with a team. The souls, like the gods, are winged charioteers. Each charioteer drives a team of two winged horses. The gods only have good horses, but human souls have one good and one bad. With intact wings the human team can soar into the sky, but if the plumage is lost, the immortal soul falls to earth, where it takes on a mortal body. In a heavenly procession some souls can ascend following the gods to the “heavenly place”. There they see the platonic ideas , especially the idea of ​​the beautiful. On the journey, however, the souls encounter great difficulties, as their team is difficult to steer due to the diversity of their horses. The bad horse, if it is not very well trained, strives downwards, which creates a conflict in the team and the plumage is damaged and ultimately lost. The souls that have fallen to earth can rise again when the lost plumage grows back. This regrowth is made possible through philosophical activity and a love of beauty.

The cicadas

Socrates tells the short myth of the cicadas in a dialogue with Phaedrus . The cicadas were once people who were so delighted with singing that they forgot to eat and drink while singing and thus perished. As cicadas, the Muses endowed them with the ability to live without food from birth and to sing incessantly. When they die, they go to the Muses and tell them which people the individual Muses worship.

Theuth

Socrates tells the myth of the invention of writing by the Egyptian god Theuth in a dialogue with Phaedrus . When Theuth had invented various arts, including writing, he went to Thamus, the king of Egypt, to teach him and through him the people the relevant skills. Thamus didn’t want to accept anything unchecked. He was extremely skeptical about the script. He feared it would do more harm than good. Writing and reading not only lead to a weakening of the memory, but are also unsuitable for imparting wisdom; this can only be done through oral lessons.

The spherical people

→ Main articles: Globemen and Androgynos

In the Dialog Symposium , Plato lets six participants give speeches about eros and eroticism . Among them is the comedy writer Aristophanes , who tells the myth of the spherical prehistoric men in his speech. Humans originally had spherical torsos and four hands and feet and two faces. There were three genders: a purely male, a purely female, and one with a male and a female half (the andrógynoi ). After a failed revolt against the gods, Zeus cut the spherical people in two halves. These halves are today's two-legged people. They suffer from their incompleteness and are on the lookout for their lost other halves. This longing for the lost wholeness manifests itself in the form of erotic desire aimed at union. Depending on the nature of the original spherical person, erotic love is directed towards one's own sex or towards the opposite sex.

The birth of Eros

As the last of the six speakers at the symposium , Socrates took the floor. He tells of a conversation in which the priestess Diotima from Mantineia taught him about Eros , in which she told a myth. In Diotima's myth, Eros is not - as in a widespread tradition - the son of the goddess Aphrodite , but his mother is Penia , the personified poverty, his father Poros ("pathfinder"), the personification of resourcefulness. To compensate for her need, Penia wanted to conceive a child from Poros. So it came to the creation of Eros. In his nature, Eros combines the qualities of his father with those of his mother.

The world ages

→ Main article: Golden Age

In Dialog Politikos , an authority figure, the “stranger from Elea ”, describes the periodic alternation of two (according to another interpretation three) mythical world ages. The change is associated with a reversal of the circular movement of the cosmos and an overturning of the earthly living conditions. The narrator particularly goes into the paradisiacal conditions in the former Golden Age. Back then, humankind lived carefree in deep peace under the care of the caring god Kronos , and even among animals there was no conflict ( animal peace ).

Atlantis

→ Main article: Atlantis

The Atlantis myth depicted in the dialogues Timaeus and Critias is the best-known Platonic myth. Plato describes the sea power Atlantis, a huge island empire in the Atlantic Ocean, which in the distant past ruled North Africa and a large part of Europe. Nine millennia ago, however, the expansive great power was defeated by what was then ancient Athens in a great war and then pushed back to the west. After all, both states fell victim to a natural disaster, and the island of Atlantis sank into the sea. This myth, elaborated in detail by Plato, was intended to glorify Athens' past. It has given rise to numerous speculative hypotheses about a possible historical core.

The creation of the world

→ Main article: Timaeus

In the Timaeus dialogue , the Pythagorean Timaeus of Lokroi describes in detail the step-by-step creation and shaping of the cosmos by the demiurge (god of creation). According to his description, creation ( cosmogony ) took place in the interaction of divine reason with necessity. Cosmogony is represented in myth as an event in the past. This contradicts the idea of ​​the eternity of the cosmos that was widespread in antiquity - also among the Platonists . Therefore, the question of whether the myth should be understood literally in the sense of a temporal beginning of the world was very controversial in antiquity. Numerous Platonists advocated a metaphorical interpretation. According to this interpretation, Plato did not mean an act of creation at a certain point in time, but only wanted to vividly express a timeless dependence of the eternal world on the equally eternal deity. The question remains unanswered; In modern research, the non-literal interpretation is predominantly advocated.

The reign of Kronos

In Plato's Dialogue Nomoi , a late work, an unnamed Athenian tells a version of the myth of the Golden Age. According to his description, the god Kronos, who ruled then, recognized that absolute power corrupts every human ruler. Therefore, he did not entrust the administration of human affairs to any human being, but entrusted this task to benevolent demons. These ensured peace, harmony and good laws.

The divine world control according to the Nomoi

In the Nomoi , the Athenian puts forward “some myths” which he considers necessary to convince doubters of the perfection of divine control of the world ( theodicy ). Here, too, it is emphasized that people create their own happy or unhappy fate with their deeds. Hence the gods cannot be accused of negligence in running the world. Anyone who thinks they are neglected is actually to blame for their own fate. He does not overlook the divine planning, which not only has the individual souls - small particles of the cosmos - but also the whole in view. Each soul always receives its due place.

The function of the platonic myth

Plato dealt intensively with the problem of the relationship between myth and logos and also influenced the development of the relevant terminology. No other Greek thinker has used myths as often and as vividly as he to illustrate and supplement philosophical statements.

In particular, Plato keeps coming back to his assumption of an otherworldly justice , which he cannot make plausible with the means of philosophical argumentation and which is therefore thematized in the soul myths. There he goes into the fate of the individual souls, who in the hereafter receive fair treatment corresponding to their merits or atrocities. The mythical painting of the judgment of the dead , the future rewards and punishments are intended to encourage a just life. Such myths bring consolation and hope to the righteous; they are intended to induce thoughtfulness for those who are not established in righteousness. At the end of the Politeia , the Platonic Socrates insisted , after he had communicated the afterlife report of Er, that this myth could “also preserve us if we obey it”. Anyone who draws the necessary consequences for his life from this will not stain his soul, but will always stick to the way up and be friends with himself and the gods. His virtues are richly rewarded.

While the logos addresses reason, the myth also addresses the irrational areas in the soul, which must also be aligned with the philosophical goal.

Modern research is based on the knowledge that in the Platonic myths a claim to truth is apparently mixed with jokes and games, and tries to determine the relationship between these two elements more precisely. A differentiated picture emerges from the various references in Plato's works. On the one hand, his sharp criticism of the popular myths, primarily conveyed by Homeric poetry, shows that he considered a critical examination of the mythical tradition to be absolutely necessary from the point of view of the question of truth. On the other hand, his very impartial handling of the mythical material, which he safely converted for his own purposes or created himself, shows that he was not at all about truth in the sense of historical or natural historical facts.

The apparent contradiction dissolves against the background of the Platonic doctrine of ideas . According to this teaching, it is not the innumerable individual things that are essential in the sensually perceptible world, but only their archetypes, the imperishable, perfect ideas . The ideas form an independent, objectively existing, purely spiritual reality that, from Plato's point of view, is simply the truth. Truth in the proper sense can in principle only belong to the unchangeable, not to the perishable. From this perspective, historically correct knowledge of individual processes in the mythical past does not appear to be essential. In the myths of the afterlife, too, Plato only makes a claim to truth for the philosophical content, not for details such as the detailed information on the topography of the realm of the dead. The question of the truth of a mythical representation in the literal sense is basically irrelevant for the philosopher, because it does not affect his actual concern. This consists in attaining and cultivating the virtues ( aretaí ) that enable him to lead a philosophical way of life. Therefore, Plato only gives myths a value insofar as they offer an additional incentive to philosophical life by means of vivid ideas. All that matters to him is the effect of the myth on the mind of the listener or reader. If the myth strengthens the connection with the intelligible (purely spiritual) world of ideas, it brings people closer to the truth and is in this respect "true" in a higher sense, even if it is fictitious. A myth, on the other hand, which has a discouraging effect, in that it casts doubt on the wisdom and justice of the gods and ascribes human vices to them, is lying because it alienates people from metaphysical truth. Plato wants to keep such myths out of child-rearing.

With this understanding of myths, Plato assigns philosophy the role of judge of every myth. She has to examine and evaluate the myth with regard to the ontological truthfulness of its message. Depending on its suitability for your purposes, it should be distributed or rejected.

In addition, the Platonic Socrates regards the truth of the myth as provisional. He stresses that a myth can be replaced at any time by something better with a higher truth content, if something better can be found. In Timaeus , the cosmological design presented there is characterized as a "realistic myth" (eikós mýthos) . What is meant is a (relatively) faithful reproduction of reality; the common translation of eikos with "probably" is imprecise.

reception

Antiquity

The use of myths in philosophical literature also occurred in the generation of Plato's students. What is certain is that his pupil Aristotle made use of myth in his “exoteric” (intended for a broader public) writings, of which only fragments have survived today. The philosopher Herakleides Pontikos , another student of Plato, also used mythical material in his works.

Plato's heavy use of myths met with criticism in antiquity. The historian of philosophy Diogenes Laertios reports that in some circles the abundance of such narratives in philosophical writings has caused offense. A sharp opponent of the use of "lying" myths for philosophical purposes was the Epicurean Kolotes von Lampsakos. He particularly criticized the myth of the Er in the Politeia . As far as his criticism can be seen from the only fragmentary surviving statements in his writing directed against Plato's myths, he put forward three main arguments: first, it is inadmissible for a philosopher to present stories in the manner of poets instead of basing his statements on evidence; secondly, it is a contradictory behavior of Plato, on the one hand to attack the poets for their terrifying myths and on the other hand to resort to this means himself; third, the philosophical myths are useless, because for most readers they are incomprehensible, and whoever can understand them as a wise man does not need them in order to become a better person.

The Middle Platonist Plutarch followed Plato's example by occasionally inserting myths into his writings. Numenios , an influential Middle Platonist of the 2nd century, advocated an allegorical interpretation of the Atlantis myth.

Church writers also grappled with the myths. Clement of Alexandria advocated the exploration of the philosophical content of the myths through symbolic-allegorical interpretation, but rejected a thorough allegorical interpretation of their entire wording. Origen said that the Platonic myth was a veiled expression. In this way something essential is only communicated to those who know how to interpret the myth philosophically. Origen saw here a parallel to the biblical account of the Fall.

The Neoplatonists saw in myths encoded messages of the same truths which the philosopher recognizes through the exercise of his reason. They did not accept a truth that could only be expressed by mythical means. The myth was a revelation to them - but only of subordinate issues, never of the highest principles. The Neo-Platonists are convinced that all myths are fundamentally in need of interpretation; its content cannot be inferred from the wording, but only reveals itself through the correct allegorical interpretation. However, this does not imply that the literal sense should be rejected. In the third century, Plotinus, the founder of Neoplatonism, assumed that Plato, like Homer, used mythical language as a means of pointing out purely spiritual reality. The late antique Neo-Platonist Proklos († 485) dealt with the interpretation of both the Homeric and the Platonic myths. He viewed both as presentations of one and the same ontological-theological truth. According to his understanding, truth lies hidden in myth; the interpreter must have already grasped it philosophically if he is to interpret the myth. All platonic myths complement each other and form a coherent unit. There is an analogy relationship between the soul and the myth; since the structure of the myth corresponds to that of the soul, it can recognize itself in it. In his commentary on the Politeia Proclus went into detail on the myth of the Er. He also dealt with the criticism of the Epicurean Kolotes, to which Porphyrios , a student of Plotinus, had already responded with counter-arguments. Also Macrobius wrote a detailed reply to the Epicurean criticism of the Platonic myth, where he examined the question of under what conditions a philosopher must use a mythical expression.

Early modern age

The humanist Marsilio Ficino (1433–1499), who as a translator and commentator contributed significantly to the development of Plato's works, expressed himself on the question of the truthfulness of myths. He pointed to differences between the descriptions of the afterlife in various dialogues and the playful, joking character of some passages, but said that these games and jokes were more weighty than the serious statements of the Stoics . In the mythical passages of his works, Plato does not appear as a teacher, but as an ecstatic seer and priest. The flowers of his teaching are intended for everyone, the fruits (meaning of myths) for the initiated, who could understand them.

Modern

Modern philosophers, historians of philosophy, and scholars of antiquity have tried to fathom why Plato considered it necessary to often supplement the philosophical discourse with myths, the statements of which are beyond scrutiny. The tension between this approach and the fact that Plato demanded stringent arguments in philosophy, the validity of which he made the highest demands on, is discussed again and again.

Hegel already took a decided position on this. He opposed the opinion that Plato's myths were "more excellent than the abstract way of expression" and a sign of extraordinary ingenuity that other philosophers lack. In reality it was "the inability to express oneself in the pure way of thought"; For this reason, Plato resorted to the aids of sensual expression. The philosophical myth is supposed to reveal truth and not to hide it, but in reality it does not fulfill this task. It is a poor symbol and not a suitable medium for philosophical thoughts.

In the 20th century, the question was debated how seriously Plato took his myths as the bearer of messages with claims to truth and how the relationship between seriousness and play is to be assessed when using such means. Karl Reinhardt said that the myths are a fairytale-like thought game that Plato playfully, ironically, “floating” contrasts with the logos, the seriousness of dialectics. The opposing position was represented by Josef Pieper , among others . According to his interpretation, Plato took the message of the myth as an independent truth, independent of the Logos, accessible only to faith, and believed in a divine revelation, which he believed to be the source of this truth.

Most recent research is based on a different approach. The prevailing view is that the myths, while free literary creations with playful elements, contain serious philosophical messages. A complementary relationship between logos and myth is assumed; the structure of the myth is understood as complementary to the logos. A much discussed question is whether the Platonic myth should only proclaim the same truth as the Logos or whether it should lead into an area that is no longer accessible to the Logos. The first-mentioned view has prevailed and is the dominant doctrine today. Its representatives include Gerhard Müller , Hermann Gundert , Hans-Georg Gadamer , Theo Kobusch , Thomas Alexander Szlezák and Michael Erler . Even Werner Beierwaltes rejects the assumption that the myth of the matter implies for something that the dialectic remain per se inaccessible. He states: “Myth is based on the logos; Logos lives in myth. ”Dirk Cürsgen came to the same conclusion in a detailed investigation. He states that the myth is produced according to the logos. For Plato, conceptual knowledge must be able to be a level of meaning in the mythical image details, and the myth must be able to be reflected and criticized from this knowledge. Since the philosophical myth is a function of the logos, it cannot stand in opposition to it. Walter Hirsch, on the other hand, separates the areas of responsibility of myth and logos. He believes that the abandonment of myth begins where "the logos (as dialectic) has reached its utmost potential". According to its nature, the logos must penetrate ground and foundation. Therefore he could "not grasp what constitutes every reason itself". From this arises the need to continue the philosophical search that began with the logos with the myth. The myth, however, needs to be interpreted with which it cannot be transformed into the Logos, but leads back to the Logos from which it emerged. Francisco J. Gonzalez, among others, takes a similar approach.

Texts

literature

Overview representations

Investigations

  • Luc Brisson: Plato. Les mots et les mythes . Maspero, Paris 1982, ISBN 2-7071-1326-3
  • Catherine Collobert et al. (Ed.): Plato and Myth. Studies on the Use and Status of Platonic Myths . Brill, Leiden 2012, ISBN 978-90-04-21866-6
  • Marlis Colloud dispute: five platonic myths in relation to their textual contexts . Academic Press, Freiburg (Switzerland) 2005, ISBN 3-7278-1531-0
  • Dirk Cürsgen: The Rationality of the Mythical. The philosophical myth in Plato and its exegesis in Neoplatonism. De Gruyter, Berlin 2002, ISBN 3-11-017337-9
  • Markus Janka, Christian Schäfer (ed.): Plato as a mythologist. Interpretations of the myths in Plato's dialogues. 2nd, revised edition, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 2014, ISBN 978-3-534-25494-1
  • Kathryn A. Morgan: Myth and Philosophy from the Presocratics to Plato . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2000, ISBN 0-521-62180-1

Web links

Remarks

  1. ↑ See Markus Janka: Mythos . In: Christian Schäfer (Ed.): Platon-Lexikon , Darmstadt 2007, pp. 203–209, here: 203 and in general on Plato's pertinent linguistic usage Markus Janka: Semantics and context: Myth and related items in the Corpus Platonicum . In: Markus Janka, Christian Schäfer: Platon als Mythologe , 2nd, revised edition, Darmstadt 2014, pp. 23–46.
  2. ↑ Plato, Gorgias 523a, 526d-527c.
  3. ↑ Glenn Most: Plato's Exoteric Myths . In: Markus Janka, Christian Schäfer (Ed.): Platon als Mythologe , 2nd, revised edition, Darmstadt 2014, pp. 9–21, here: 10–12 (revised version: Plato's Exoteric Myths . In: Catherine Collobert et al. ( Ed.): Plato and Myth , Leiden 2012, pp. 13–24, here: 14–16); Michael Erler: Platon ( Outline of the history of philosophy. The philosophy of antiquity , edited by Hellmut Flashar, Volume 2/2), Basel 2007, p. 89. Cf. Robert Zaslavsky: Platonic Myth and Platonic Writing , Lanham 1981, p 12-16; Geneviève Droz: Les mythes platoniciens , Paris 1992, pp. 10-16.
  4. ↑ Glenn Most: Plato's Exoteric Myths . In: Markus Janka, Christian Schäfer (ed.): Platon als Mythologe , 2nd, revised edition, Darmstadt 2014, pp. 9–21, here: 12f. (Revised version: Plato's Exoteric Myths . In: Catherine Collobert et al. (Ed.): Plato and Myth , Leiden 2012, pp. 13–24, here: 15f.).
  5. ↑ Glenn Most: Plato's Exoteric Myths . In: Markus Janka, Christian Schäfer (Ed.): Platon als Mythologe , 2nd, revised edition, Darmstadt 2014, pp. 9–21, here: 13–15 (revised version: Plato's Exoteric Myths . In: Catherine Collobert et al. ( Ed.): Plato and Myth , Leiden 2012, pp. 13–24, here: 16–19).
  6. ↑ Plato, Protagoras 320c-323a.
  7. ↑ Bernd Manuwald : Plato's myth-narrator . In: Markus Janka, Christian Schäfer (ed.): Platon als Mythologe , 2nd, revised edition, Darmstadt 2014, pp. 113–135, here: 116; Kathryn A. Morgan: Myth and Philosophy from the Presocratics to Plato , Cambridge 2000, pp. 132-154.
  8. ↑ Plato, Charmides 156d-157c.
  9. ^ Plato, Apology 40e – 41c.
  10. ↑ Plato, Gorgias 523a-527a.
  11. ↑ Plato, Gorgias 492e-493c.
  12. ^ Plato, Menon 81a – e.
  13. ↑ Plato, Phaedon 107d-114c.
  14. ↑ Plato, Politeia 614a-621b.
  15. ↑ Plato, Politeia 414b-415d.
  16. ↑ Plato, Politeia 359c-360b; see. 612b.
  17. ↑ Plato, Phaedrus 246a-257a.
  18. ↑ Plato, Phaedrus 258E-259d.
  19. ↑ Plato, Phaedrus 274c-275b.
  20. ↑ Plato, Symposium 189d-193d.
  21. ↑ Plato, Symposium 203a-204c.
  22. ↑ Plato, Politicus 268d-274e.
  23. ^ Plato, Timaeus 20d – 26e.
  24. ^ Plato, Critias 108e – 121c.
  25. ^ Plato, Timaeus 27c ff.
  26. ↑ Plato, Nomoi 713a-714b.
  27. ^ Plato, Nomoi 903a-905c. Cf. Christian Pietsch : Myth as concretized logos. Plato's use of the myth using the example of Nomoi X 903b – 905d . In: Markus Janka, Christian Schäfer (ed.): Platon als Mythologe , 2nd, revised edition, Darmstadt 2014, pp. 157–172.
  28. ↑ Plato, Politeia 621b – d.
  29. ↑ Joachim Dalfen : Plato's afterlife myths: a "new mythology"? In: Markus Janka, Christian Schäfer (ed.): Platon als Mythologe , 2nd, revised edition, Darmstadt 2014, pp. 355–371, here: 366–369; Michael Erler: Platon ( Outline of the history of philosophy. The philosophy of antiquity , edited by Hellmut Flashar, Volume 2/2), Basel 2007, p. 92.
  30. ↑ For the problem, see Georg Rechenauer : Visualization of the non-visual: Plato's new rhetoric in the final myth of Gorgias . In: Markus Janka, Christian Schäfer (ed.): Platon als Mythologe , 2nd, revised edition, Darmstadt 2014, pp. 399–418, here: 399–401.
  31. ↑ Plato, Phaedon 114d. Cf. Gerhard Müller: The Myths of the Platonic Dialogues . In: Nachrichten der Giessener Hochschulgesellschaft 32, 1963, pp. 77–92, here: 80f .; Christian Schäfer: Myth / Myth Criticism . In: Christoph Horn u. a. (Ed.): Platon-Handbuch , Stuttgart 2009, pp. 309-313, here: 312f.
  32. ↑ See on Plato's view of the function of myths Theo Kobusch: The return of the myth . In: Markus Janka, Christian Schäfer (ed.): Platon als Mythologe , 2nd, revised edition, Darmstadt 2014, pp. 47–60, here: 50–53; Konrad Gaiser : Plato as a philosophical writer . In: Konrad Gaiser: Gesammelte Schriften , Sankt Augustin 2004, pp. 3–72, here: 58–63; Penelope Murray: What Is a Muthos for Plato? In: Richard Buxton (Ed.): From Myth to Reason? , Oxford 1999, pp. 251-262.
  33. ↑ Plato, Gorgias 527a.
  34. ↑ See Elsa Grasso: Myth, image and likeness in Plato's Timaeus . In: Catherine Collobert et al. (Ed.): Plato and Myth , Leiden 2012, pp. 343–367, here: 351–356; Janet E. Smith: Plato's myths as "likely accounts" worthy of belief . In: Apeiron 19, 1985, pp. 24-42, here: 34-37.
  35. ↑ Diogenes Laertios 3.80.
  36. ↑ See Eleni Kechagia: Plutarch Against Colotes , Oxford 2011, pp. 68–70.
  37. ↑ See Harold Tarrant: Literal and Deeper Meanings in Platonic Myths . In: Catherine Collobert et al. (Ed.): Plato and Myth , Leiden 2012, pp. 47–65, here: 48f.
  38. ↑ Dirk Cürsgen: Die Rationalität des Mythischen , Berlin 2002, p. 161f.
  39. ^ Heinrich Dörrie , Matthias Baltes : The Platonism in antiquity , Vol. 2, Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1990, p. 498.
  40. ↑ On the concept of allegory in this context, see Werner Beierwaltes: Logos im Mythos. Marginalia on Plato . In: Michael Langer , Anselm Bilgri (ed.): Weite des Herzens, Weite des Lebens , Regensburg 1989, pp. 273–285, here: 280.
  41. ↑ On the Neo-Platonic reception of myths see Robert Lamberton: Homer the Theologian , Berkeley 1986, pp. 97-103, 169f., 203-206, 230-232; Theo Kobusch: The return of the myth . In: Markus Janka, Christian Schäfer (ed.): Platon als Mythologe , 2nd, revised edition, Darmstadt 2014, pp. 47–60, here: 54f .; Dirk Cürsgen: Die Rationalität des Mythischen , Berlin 2002, pp. 5–11, p. 31, note 36, pp. 144–160, 172–211; Harold Tarrant: Literal and Deeper Meanings in Platonic Myths . In: Catherine Collobert et al. (Ed.): Plato and Myth , Leiden 2012, pp. 47–65, here: 47–50.
  42. ^ Proklos, In Platonis rem publicam II p. 105 line 23 - p. 109 line 3 Kroll. See André-Jean Festugière : Proclus: Commentaire sur la République , Vol. 3, Paris 1970, pp. 47-52 (French translation and commentary).
  43. ↑ Macrobius, Commentarii in somnium Scipionis 1,1,9-1,2,21.
  44. ↑ See Elizabeth McGrath: Platonic myth in Renaissance iconography . In: Catalin Partenie (Ed.): Plato's Myths , Cambridge 2009, pp. 206-238, here: 227f.
  45. ^ Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: Lectures on the history of philosophy I (= works in twenty volumes , volume 18), Frankfurt am Main 1971, p. 108f.
  46. ↑ Julius A. Elias: Plato's Defense of Poetry , London 1984, pp. 75–118 and Kent F. Moors: Platonic Myth, provide an overview of the older research literature . An Introductory Study , Washington (DC) 1982, pp. 1-23.
  47. ↑ Karl Reinhardt: Platons Mythen , Bonn 1927, reprinted in: Karl Reinhardt: Vermächtnis der Antike , 2nd edition, Göttingen 1989, pp. 219–295, here: 230–241, 259, 262, 278. Cf. Perspective and its representatives Dirk Cürsgen: Die Rationalität des Mythischen , Berlin 2002, p. 18.
  48. ^ Josef Pieper: About the platonic myths , Munich 1965, pp. 61, 73-82. See Marlis Colloud-Streit: Five platonic myths in relation to their textual environments , Freiburg (Switzerland) 2005, p. 28f. and on the criticism of this position Dirk Cürsgen: Die Rationalität des Mythischen , Berlin 2002, p. 22f.
  49. ↑ On the playful aspect, see Janet E. Smith: Plato's Use of Myth in the Education of Philosophic Man . In: Phoenix 40, 1986, pp. 20-34, here: 25-29.
  50. ↑ Dirk Cürsgen: Die Rationalität des Mythischen , Berlin 2002, pp. 23-25, 27f.
  51. ↑ Gerhard Müller: The myths of the platonic dialogues . In: Nachrichten der Giessener Hochschulgesellschaft 32, 1963, pp. 77–92, here: 77f.
  52. ^ Hermann Gundert: The platonic dialogue , Heidelberg 1968, p. 32.
  53. ↑ Hans-Georg Gadamer: Greek Philosophy I ( Collected Works , Volume 5), Tübingen 1985, p. 209.
  54. ↑ Theo Kobusch: The return of the myth . In: Markus Janka, Christian Schäfer (ed.): Platon als Mythologe , 2nd, revised edition, Darmstadt 2014, pp. 47–60, here: 53f.
  55. ↑ Thomas Alexander Szlezák: Read Platon , Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1993, p. 136.
  56. ↑ Michael Erler: Platon ( Outline of the history of philosophy. The philosophy of antiquity , edited by Hellmut Flashar, Volume 2/2), Basel 2007, p. 91.
  57. ↑ Werner Beierwaltes: Logos in Myth. Marginalia on Plato . In: Michael Langer, Anselm Bilgri (ed.): Weite des Herzens, Weite des Lebens , Regensburg 1989, pp. 273–285, here: 274f., 277. Cf. Kathryn A. Morgan: Myth and Philosophy from the Presocratics to Plato , Cambridge 2000, p. 180; Elizabeth E. Pender: Images of Persons Unseen , Sankt Augustin 2000, pp. 79-86.
  58. ↑ Dirk Cürsgen: Die Rationalität des Mythischen , Berlin 2002, pp. 4f., 374f.
  59. ↑ Walter Hirsch: Platons Weg zum Mythos , Berlin 1971, p. 252. Cf. on this position and its representatives Christian Pietsch: Myth as concretized logos. Plato's use of the myth using the example of Nomoi X 903b – 905d . In: Markus Janka, Christian Schäfer (ed.): Platon als Mythologe , 2nd, revised edition, Darmstadt 2014, pp. 157–172, here: p. 158 and note 8.
  60. ^ Francisco J. Gonzalez: Combating Oblivion: The Myth of Er as Both Philosophy's Challenge and Inspiration . In: Catherine Collobert et al. (Ed.): Plato and Myth , Leiden 2012, pp. 259–278, here: 276f.