Podcasts about Theaetetus

PHILOSOPHY SERIES 1: Foundations of Western ThoughtEPISODE 003: Socrates: Ideas Worth Dying ForAfter taking a look at the world of Socrates on the last episode — the Athenian Golden Age, Pericles, the Plague of Athens, the Peloponnesian War — we dive into Socrates' philosophy! Using a handful of Plato's Dialogues — Euthyphro, Meno, Gorgias, Theaetetus, Symposium, and Phaedo — we will find some of the foundational concepts in Western philosophy, foundations that will directly impact not only the Classical Age, but also the beginnings of Christianity, medieval philosophy, and onto today!Members-Only Series on Patreon:For only a dollar per month, you can hear multiple varying stories and storylines so far through the 11th century, including but not limited to the creation of the Kingdom of Poland, what's happening on the Continent while Duke William is conquering England, and, currently, our series called “The Book of Alexios” detailing all those details of the monumental medieval emperor, Alexios Komnenos, that didn't make it into the public podcast. Every dime donated will be put directly back into the show, so I hope you consider becoming a Patreon member!  Just follow this link to our Patreon page to peruse the right “subscription” for you: https://www.patreon.com/FortunesWheelPodcast. Social Media:YouTube Page: Fortune's Wheel PodcastFacebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/fortunes.wheel.3 Twitter Page: https://twitter.com/WheelPodcast

Jim talks with Jonathan Rauch about the ideas in his book The Constitution of Knowledge: A Defense of Truth. They discuss the epistemic crisis, Plato's Theaetetus, Trump & propaganda techniques, the Constitution of Knowledge as a framework for epistemics, the "marketplace of ideas" metaphor, the reality-based community, the personal-institutional spiral, the social funnel of knowledge, social media's impact on epistemics, advertising vs subscription models, meme space pollution, the anti-vax movement, the importance of free speech to the gay rights movement, recommendations for defending truth, supporting institutions, speaking out against misinformation, maintaining viewpoint diversity, and much more. Episode Links The Constitution of Knowledge: A Defense of Truth, by Jonathan Rauch Plato's Theaetetus Heterodox Academy JRS EP273 - Gregg Henriques on the Unified Theory of Knowledge Invisible Rulers: The People Who Turn Lies Into Reality, by Renée DiResta Cross Purposes: Christianity's Broken Bargain with Democracy, by Jonathan Rauch Jonathan Rauch, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington, is the author of eight books and many articles on public policy, culture, and government. He is a contributing writer for The Atlantic and recipient of the 2005 National Magazine Award, the magazine industry's equivalent of the Pulitzer Prize. His latest book, published in 2021 by the Brookings Press, is The Constitution of Knowledge: A Defense of Truth, a spirited and deep-diving account of how to push back against disinformation, canceling, and other new threats to our fact-based epistemic order.

Theaetetus by Plato audiobook. Theaetetus discusses concepts including perception, true judgment and knowledge. Socrates compares the human mind to a piece of wax and is critical of lawyers who seek only to persuade. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Plato's Pod introduces its 4th season by demonstrating the relevance of ancient philosophy to modern technology with the question, “What Would Socrates Say About ChatGPT?” We take Socrates to the offices of OpenAI to meet the company's CEO, Sam Altman, and imagine the questions that Socrates would have after the technology is explained to him. In the course of the imagined meeting, we bring a number of Plato's dialogues previously featured in the podcast into consideration, including the Cratylus, The Republic, the Phaedo, the Phaedrus, the Meno, the Statesman, the Theaetetus, the Critias, and the Philebus. What do you think - are there some timeless and fundamentally questions about our relationship with technology?

Justin introduces himself and the podcast. He recounts his epistemological journey that inspired the podcast and discusses the show format for the future.   If you would like to be interviewed, please reach out to me at theaetetuspodcast@gmail.com.

Today we begin our discussion of Plato's Theaetetus. We start by considering how some of our friends answered the question: What is knowledge? Then, we discuss the difference between knowledge and the kinds of knowledge and we briefly go over Socrates' famous midwife passage. We end by inquiring in a preliminary way into the relationship between Theaetetus's claim that knowledge is perception and Protagoras's that man is the measure of all things.

Theaetetus

Phaedo by Plato, complete audiobook with relaxing music and captions (sub titles). Translated by Benjamin Jowett and narrated by Bob Neufeld. Subscribe for more Chillbooks - audiobooks with background music, get the knowledge while you work, drive or relax!

Phaedo by Plato audiobook. Plato's Phaedo is one of the great dialogues of his middle period, along with the Republic and the Symposium. The Phaedo, which depicts the death of Socrates, is also Plato's seventh and last dialogue to detail the philosopher's final days (the first six being Theaetetus, Euthyphro, Sophist, Statesman, Apology, and Crito). In the dialogue, Socrates discusses the nature of the afterlife on his last day before being executed by drinking hemlock. Socrates has been imprisoned and sentenced to death by an Athenian jury for not believing in the gods of the state and for corrupting the youth of the city. The dialogue is told from the perspective of one of Socrates' students, Phaedo of Elis. Having been present at Socrates' death bed, Phaedo relates the dialogue from that day to Echecrates, a fellow philosopher. By engaging in dialectic with a group of Socrates' friends, including the Thebans Cebes and Simmias, Socrates explores various arguments for the soul's immortality in order to show that there is an afterlife in which the soul will dwell following death. Phaedo tells the story that following the discussion, he and the others were there to witness the death of Socrates.

In this episode of Author to Author, Dr. Cynthia Toolin-Wilson interviews Brandon Spun on his book Three Acts: A Commentary on Plato's Theaetetus (January 24, 2022)A reader's guide to Plato's Theaetetus. This Socratic companion serves as an introduction to philosophy through an exploration of ethics, epistemology, psychology, and metaphysics.https://enroutebooksandmedia.com/threeacts/

Members of the Toronto Philosophy and Calgary Philosophy Meetup groups convened on September 26, 2021 to launch season two of Plato's Pod with a discussion on Plato's Republic. Our focus was on the famous allegory of the cave, and the related simile of the sun, nature of the good, and divided line of reasoning (in passages 502(d)-521(b).Is the prisoner in the cave, unable to see the source of the images projected on the wall in front of him that he mistakes for reality, like us, as Socrates states? During our dialogue, participants weighed in with some fascinating thoughts. The restricted perspective of the cave was compared to being in a small town and not knowing its surroundings, while another raised the idea of the human capacity of differentiation in distinguishing that which is from that which is not.Our discussion included questions on our perception of ordering in sequences of cause and effect, and our ability to distinguish original cause and final effect. The nature of the good was compared to that which is without cause, and we explored the properties of the divided line that Socrates set out by which we weigh and measure degrees of reality. Is man, however, the measure of all things? That was the question raised in Plato's Theaetetus, with which we ended season one, and in The Republic Socrates provides a method which as – as one member observed – allows for inductive logic to be reconciled with deductive logic at a single point of knowledge. One participant went so far as to claim knowledge that all we think exists is an illusion, and perhaps the question of how such knowledge could be obtained, in such a state, is a matter that we may continue to explore in future episodes when we return to discuss more of The Republic.

Join Mark and Adam for the heartfelt conclusion to Season 1 of Unlimited Opinions, in which they discuss modern philosophers' opinions on God! They discuss the various ideas that God is not real, from Ludwig Feuerbach's belief that God is just a projection of the human mind, Marx's "opium of the masses," and Nietzsche's famous "God is dead."  They also look at the opposite beliefs, with Kierkegaard's opinion that religion is the summit of human progress, Cardinal Newman's religious ideals, and Wittgenstein's belief that only faith can give meaning to life. They are also open to suggestions for what the next season should center around, and would welcome any suggestions on Twitter! @UlmtdOpinions

How many people in our lives are really fully-fledged people to us and not just NPCs? How do we wrap our minds around the fact that everyone is their own individual person? All this and more probably will not be answered in this episode of Unlimited Opinions! Mark and Adam look at more philosophers in the Modern Era of philosophy, including Frege's birth of analytical philosophy, British Idealism, and Wittgenstein's various philosophical beliefs. Language is discussed heavily, and Mark and Adam describe its importance in every aspect of human life.  Follow us on Twitter! @UlmtdOpinions

Participants from the Toronto and Calgary Philosophy and Online Rebels Meetup groups met on June 13, 2021 to discuss themes in the second part of Theaetetus, Plato's dialogue on knowledge. We began by listening to part of a "Joy of x" podcast interview by mathematician Steven Strogatz of computer scientist Melanie Mitchell, addressing the challenges of generalizing the particulars of knowledge in computer algorithms when faced with an infinity of probabilities in everyday existence. We connected the discussion to the ideas in Plato's theory of forms, and to Socrates' challenge to the Protagorean belief that "man is the measure of all things".Is each one of us equipped to determine the extent of being and non-being and all that comes to be between these two extremes? As the transmission of knowledge has altered over time from the spoken word to the written word and, in recent decades to digital bits soon to be geometrically quantized in the qubit of the quantum computer, do we understand what knowledge is and how its limits are determined - either by one or in combination? Do we distinguish between two types of motion, as Socrates does, and recognize that alteration of state and perception is motion like change in spatial position? Is knowledge and our own existence in a constant and unknowable flux, as Socrates presents the argument of Heraclitus, or is the contrasting position of Parmenides correct that all limits are the derivative of one eternal, changeless state? How will we encode the "account of the reasons why", as Socrates described memory of knowledge in The Meno, together with individual bits of knowledge in order to provide context and understanding?While we did not reach definitive conclusions on these questions, our own dialogue raised so many interesting and thoughtful insights that shine a new light on the path of knowledge. We look forward to resuming regular meetings in September for the beginning of season 2 to consider The Republic and Parmenides, together with some of Plato's other dialogues not addressed in season 1. In between seasons we hope to podcast some interesting interviews and perspectives on themes discussed in our most fascinating first season, in the continual exchange and construction of knowledge.

In this live recorded discussion on May 30, 2021 we began by listening to an interview of physicist Richard Feynman recalling the paths that he and other explorers took to acquire and apply knowledge, the nature of which Plato explores in the dialogue Theaetetus. The way in which knowledge connects to memory was among the themes explored from individual and collective perspectives by participants from the Toronto and Calgary Philosophy and Online Rebels Meetup groups. In the present state of coming to be, becoming as we are in flux and motion, how do we tie down knowledge? When the known is the limit of the unknown, how do we distinguish between subject and predicate in our inquiries? In raising the geometry of the spiral of Theodorus, the geometer who together with the mathematician Theaetetus join in dialogue with Socrates, is Plato implying a relationship between geometry and knowledge? These and other questions were raised with a number of fascinating perspectives in the first part of our dialogue on Plato's Theaetetus, which we will continue on June 13 as we aim to form an account of knowledge and its "reasons why".

Platon, Sokrates'in ağzından işinin bilgi ebeliği olduğunu. Ancak bu iş için kadınlarla değil ama erkeklerle ve onların bedenleriyle değil ruhlarıyla ilgilendiğini söylüyor. (sayfa 79) Cahillerden kastım sadece gördüğüne inananlar ve görünmeyen hiçbirşeyin olamayacağını düşünenlerdir. Bunlar barbarlardır. (Sayfa 85) Zira [doğada] hiçbirşey yoktur ki değişmeden ve ilişkisiz durabilsin. Bölyece varlık tümüyle ortadan kalkar. (Sayfa 86) Nasıl ki gözlerimiz kapalı birşeyler hatırlarken biliyorsak, o halde bilmek= algılamak değildir (Sayfa 93) Protagoras'ın belirttiği gibi İnsan herşeyin ölçüsüdür. Beyazlığın, ağırlığın, parlaklığın vb. Yargıcıdır. Çünkü tüm bunların kriteri kendisindedir. Ve şeylerde deneyimlediği şey kendisidir. Ve Protagoras'ın öğretisini şu şekilde genişletmesi gerekir: İnsanda sadece kendi düşüncelerinin değil olacak olan ve olmakta olan herşeyin kriteri vardır... Sadece bilge bir adam ölçüdür. (Sayfa 105) Bilgi, tanım ve akılcı açıklama ile biraraya getirilmiş fikirdir. Şimdi varsayabiliriz ki Theaetetus, bugün, öyle bir gerçek bulduk ki eski zamanlarda yaşamış pek çok bilge adamın bulamamıştır. (Sayfa 127) Ansiklopedik Felsefe Şeması http://bit.ly/ansiklopedi Facebook Grubumuz https://www.facebook.com/groups/gercegeyolculuk/ Bu videoyu beğendiyseniz sosyal medyanızda paylaşarak katkıda bulunabilirsiniz. Ayrıca şunlar da ilginizi çekebilir: Gerçeklik Nedir https://youtu.be/Ll998IISxnE Felsefe Nedir https://youtu.be/PMC7QH9CYD0 Nereden Başlamalı https://youtu.be/yLQ4X5RzTDA Kurgusal Felsefe https://youtu.be/Wbpm7WBKl_o Kaynakça Plato, Theaetetus, Jan 15 2013, Trs: Benjamin Jowett, Gutenberg Project Ebook.

In this episode, Mark and Adam discuss epistemology, or the inquiry into what is knowledge and what is knowable. From pre-Socratic epistemology to Plato to Scepticism, they discuss what the ancient Greeks believed about what is and isn't the truth. The discussion of an infinitely knowledgeable God continues, Tolkien is referenced, and Adam decides that he really hates the Sceptics.

According to the French philosopher Henri Bergson, there are two ways of knowing the world: through analysis or through intuition. Analysis is our normal mode of apprehension. It involves knowing what's out there through the accumulation and comparison of concepts. Intuition is a direct engagement with the absolute, with the world as it exists before we starting tinkering with it conceptually. Bergson believed that Western metaphysics erred from the get-go when it gave in to the all-too-human urge to take the concepts by which we know things for the things themselves. His entire oeuvre was an attempt to snap us out of that spell and plug us directly into the flow of pure duration, that primordial time that is the real Real. In this episode, JF and Phil discuss the genius -- and possible limitations -- of his metaphysics. REFERENCES Henri Bergson, "Introduction to Metaphysics" (http://www.reasoned.org/dir/lit/int-meta.pdf) Weird Studies episode 13 (https://www.weirdstudies.com/13) -- The Obscure: On the Philosophy of Heraclitus Weird Studies episode 16 (https://www.weirdstudies.com/16): On Dogen Zenji's 'Genjokoan' Bertrand Russel's critique of Bergson's philosophy (https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Philosophy_of_Bergson_(Russell)) Dōgen Zenji, Shōbōgenzō (https://www.amazon.com/Shobogenzo-Zen-Essays-Dogen-Eihei/dp/0824814010) Wiliam James, Principles of Psychology (https://psychclassics.yorku.ca/James/Principles/) Plato, Theaetetus (http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/theatu.html) Meillassoux, After Finitude: An Essay on the Necessity of Contingency (https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/after-finitude-9781441173836/) Aleister Crowley (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleister_Crowley), British occultist Graham Harman, "The Third Table" (https://www.amazon.com/Graham-Harman-Thoughts-Documenta-Gedanken/dp/3775729348) Weird Studies episode 8 (https://www.weirdstudies.com/8) - On Graham Harman's "The Third Table" Bergson, Laughter: An Essay on the Meaning of the Comic (http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/4352) Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (https://www.gutenberg.org/files/5740/5740-pdf.pdf)

Trial of Socrates The trial of Socrates is the central, unifying event of Plato's dialogues. Because of this, Apology is among the most frequently read of his works. In the Apology, Socrates tries to dismiss rumors that he is a sophist and defends himself against charges of disbelief in the gods and corruption of the young. Socrates insists that long-standing slander will be the real cause of his demise, and says the legal charges are essentially false. Socrates famously denies being wise, and explains how his life as a philosopher was launched by the Oracle at Delphi. He says that his quest to resolve the riddle of the oracle put him at odds with his fellow man, and that this is the reason he has been mistaken for a menace to the city-state of Athens. If Plato's important dialogues do not refer to Socrates' execution explicitly, they allude to it, or use characters or themes that play a part in it. Five dialogues foreshadow the trial: In the Theaetetus and the Euthyphro Socrates tells people that he is about to face corruption charges. In the Meno one of the men who brings legal charges against Socrates, Anytus, warns him about the trouble he may get into if he does not stop criticizing important people. In the Gorgias, Socrates says that his trial will be like a doctor prosecuted by a cook who asks a jury of children to choose between the doctor's bitter medicine and the cook's tasty treats. In the Republic Socrates explains why an enlightened man (presumably himself) will stumble in a courtroom situation. The Apology is Socrates' defense speech, and the Crito and Phaedo take place in prison after the conviction. In the Protagoras, Socrates is a guest at the home of Callias, son of Hipponicus, a man whom Socrates disparages in the Apology as having wasted a great amount of money on sophists' fees. Unity and diversity of the dialogues Two other important dialogues, the Symposium and the Phaedrus, are linked to the main storyline by characters. In the Apology Socrates says Aristophanes slandered him in a comic play, and blames him for causing his bad reputation, and ultimately, his death. In the Symposium, the two of them are drinking together with other friends. The character Phaedrus is linked to the main story line by character (Phaedrus is also a participant in the Symposium and the Protagoras) and by theme (the philosopher as divine emissary, etc.) The Protagoras is also strongly linked to the Symposium by characters: all of the formal speakers at the Symposium (with the exception of Aristophanes) are present at the home of Callias in that dialogue. Charmides and his guardian Critias are present for the discussion in the Protagoras. Examples of characters crossing between dialogues can be further multiplied. The Protagoras contains the largest gathering of Socratic associates. In the dialogues Plato is most celebrated and admired for, Socrates is concerned with human and political virtue, has a distinctive personality, and friends and enemies who "travel" with him from dialogue to dialogue. This is not to say that Socrates is consistent: a man who is his friend in one dialogue may be an adversary or subject of his mockery in another. For example, Socrates praises the wisdom of Euthyphro many times in the Cratylus, but makes him look like a fool in the Euthyphro. He disparages sophists generally, and Prodicus specifically in the Apology, whom he also slyly jabs in the Cratylus for charging the hefty fee of fifty drachmas for a course on language and grammar. However, Socrates tells Theaetetus in his namesake dialogue that he admires Prodicus and has directed many pupils to him. Socrates' ideas are also not consistent within or between or among dialogues. Platonic scholarship "The safest general characterisation of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato." (Alfred North Whitehead, Process and Reality, 1929). Although their popularity has fluctuated over the years,

In the Theaetetus, Plato ascribes a metaphysics to relativism according to which there are no stable objects or properties. In effect, the world dissolves and there is nothing we can refer to in speech. En route to this revisionist picture, Plato toys with expressions that might be suitable to talk about a world in flux: something is no more tall than not tall, no more cold than not cold, etc. The Greek expression used in these formulations, ou mallon, becomes a stock element of Pyrrhonian skepticism. My paper makes a novel proposal by arguing that the Stoics too find a place for this idea. The idea that something can be “no more this than that,” I argue, is philosophically richer than is commonly assumed. It is not just a part of radically revisionist approaches. It is a compelling dimension of the Stoic distinction between impressions and propositions. The Stoic wise person suspends judgment when her impressions are neither true nor false--arguably, this concerns rather many ordinary impressions. For the Stoics, the epistemic norms that call for such suspension of judgment are key to leading a good life.

In this episode, we explore some dimensions of the concept of memory through conversations with two people whose work deals directly with how we remember people, places, time periods, and events. Audrey Strohm hops on the mic with Alex to talk with Taylor Rugg, an M.A. student in Rhetoric at Carnegie Mellon, who has authored both academic and creative work on how people remember traumatic events. We specifically discuss the ways that trauma is experienced by members of the military, and how this can sometimes be at odds with how the public perceives and remembers their trauma, after which Taylor delivers a live reading of a lyric essay she wrote about her own personal trauma. Alex and Ryan also speak with Emily Ruby - a curator at the Heinz History Center museum in Pittsburgh, PA - about her work collecting and preserving the memories and stories of people in the Pittsburgh community.*Trigger warning* This episode contains brief descriptions of traumatic events such as torture and the death of family members.Works and concepts cited in this episode:Butler, J. (2010). Frames of war: When is life grievable? Brooklyn, NY: Verso Books.Delillo, D. (2007). Falling man. New York, NY: Scribner.Fair, E. (2007, Feb. 9). An Iraq interregator's nightmare. Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020801680.htmlFair, E. (2014, Dec. 9). I can't be forgiven for Abu Ghraib. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/10/opinion/the-torture-report-reminds-us-of-what-america-was.htmlFair, E. (2016). Consequence: A memoir. New York, NY: Henry Holt & Co.Phillips, K. (2010). The failure of memory: Reflections on rhetoric and public remembrance. Western Journal of Communication, 74(2), 208-223.Plato. (1992). Theaetetus. (M. J. Levett, Rev., Myles F. Burnyet, Trans., B. Williams, Ed.). Indianapolis: Hackett.Rugg, T. (2017). As a star moves among stars in the night's darkening. The Journal, 41(4). http://thejournalmag.org/archives/12542Donald Trump stating that torture “absolutely” works: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUtAUu_3Yks 

Theaetetus (Ancient Greek: ΘΕΑΙΤΗΤΟΣ) discusses epistemological concepts including perception, true judgment and knowledge. Socrates compares the human mind to a piece of wax and is critical of lawyers who seek only to persuade using rhetoric. Painting: The Studio by Honoré Daumier.

Is knowledge Justified True Belief? How can we know that we know what knowledge is? Plato's Theaetetus part 3, final.   facebook :  https://www.facebook.com/philosophybythebook

Is knowledge true judgement? Or is there still a little something missing? Is your soul more of a block of wax or an aviary full of birds? facebook: https://www.facebook.com/philosophybythebook

This week we begin an examination of epistemology as it found its roots in Plato's Theaetetus. This part one episode focuses on the first definition of knowledge found in the Theaetetus, that knowledge is perception. facebook: https://www.facebook.com/philosophybythebook

It's traditional in Plato scholarship to divide his dialogues in various ways. One common division is a temporal one that distinguishes among early, middle and late dialogues. Another is by content: there are the so-called erotic dialogues, which include Symposium, Phaedrus and Alcibiades I, where themes of love and friendship are explicitly treated, and then the rest, which deal with such non-erotic themes as language and knowledge and ontology. Jill Gordon, Charles A. Dana Professor of Philosophy at Colby College, argues that this second division deeply misinterprets the role of eros in the Platonic corpus. In her new book, Plato's Erotic World: From Cosmic Origins to Human Death (Cambridge University Press, 2012), she argues that paradigmatically non-erotic dialogues, such as Theaetetus, Parmenides and Phaedo, are in fact deeply erotic, and that the theme of eros unifies the corpus rather than divides it. For example, the Socratic dialectic, or elenchus, is a give-and-take that is erotic in nature, and doing philosophy itself is an erotic endeavor akin to naked exercise in the gymnasium. Her argument begins with a close reading of Timaeus, Plato's creation myth, and the role of eros in the immortal human soul, and comes full circle with a reading of Phaedo in which Socrates' growing rigidity as the hemlock takes hold is an erotic pun. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's traditional in Plato scholarship to divide his dialogues in various ways. One common division is a temporal one that distinguishes among early, middle and late dialogues. Another is by content: there are the so-called erotic dialogues, which include Symposium, Phaedrus and Alcibiades I, where themes of love and friendship are explicitly treated, and then the rest, which deal with such non-erotic themes as language and knowledge and ontology. Jill Gordon, Charles A. Dana Professor of Philosophy at Colby College, argues that this second division deeply misinterprets the role of eros in the Platonic corpus. In her new book, Plato's Erotic World: From Cosmic Origins to Human Death (Cambridge University Press, 2012), she argues that paradigmatically non-erotic dialogues, such as Theaetetus, Parmenides and Phaedo, are in fact deeply erotic, and that the theme of eros unifies the corpus rather than divides it. For example, the Socratic dialectic, or elenchus, is a give-and-take that is erotic in nature, and doing philosophy itself is an erotic endeavor akin to naked exercise in the gymnasium. Her argument begins with a close reading of Timaeus, Plato's creation myth, and the role of eros in the immortal human soul, and comes full circle with a reading of Phaedo in which Socrates' growing rigidity as the hemlock takes hold is an erotic pun.

It’s traditional in Plato scholarship to divide his dialogues in various ways. One common division is a temporal one that distinguishes among early, middle and late dialogues. Another is by content: there are the so-called erotic dialogues, which include Symposium, Phaedrus and Alcibiades I, where themes of love and friendship are explicitly treated, and then the rest, which deal with such non-erotic themes as language and knowledge and ontology. Jill Gordon, Charles A. Dana Professor of Philosophy at Colby College, argues that this second division deeply misinterprets the role of eros in the Platonic corpus. In her new book, Plato’s Erotic World: From Cosmic Origins to Human Death (Cambridge University Press, 2012), she argues that paradigmatically non-erotic dialogues, such as Theaetetus, Parmenides and Phaedo, are in fact deeply erotic, and that the theme of eros unifies the corpus rather than divides it. For example, the Socratic dialectic, or elenchus, is a give-and-take that is erotic in nature, and doing philosophy itself is an erotic endeavor akin to naked exercise in the gymnasium. Her argument begins with a close reading of Timaeus, Plato’s creation myth, and the role of eros in the immortal human soul, and comes full circle with a reading of Phaedo in which Socrates’ growing rigidity as the hemlock takes hold is an erotic pun. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It’s traditional in Plato scholarship to divide his dialogues in various ways. One common division is a temporal one that distinguishes among early, middle and late dialogues. Another is by content: there are the so-called erotic dialogues, which include Symposium, Phaedrus and Alcibiades I, where themes of love and friendship are explicitly treated, and then the rest, which deal with such non-erotic themes as language and knowledge and ontology. Jill Gordon, Charles A. Dana Professor of Philosophy at Colby College, argues that this second division deeply misinterprets the role of eros in the Platonic corpus. In her new book, Plato’s Erotic World: From Cosmic Origins to Human Death (Cambridge University Press, 2012), she argues that paradigmatically non-erotic dialogues, such as Theaetetus, Parmenides and Phaedo, are in fact deeply erotic, and that the theme of eros unifies the corpus rather than divides it. For example, the Socratic dialectic, or elenchus, is a give-and-take that is erotic in nature, and doing philosophy itself is an erotic endeavor akin to naked exercise in the gymnasium. Her argument begins with a close reading of Timaeus, Plato’s creation myth, and the role of eros in the immortal human soul, and comes full circle with a reading of Phaedo in which Socrates’ growing rigidity as the hemlock takes hold is an erotic pun. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It’s traditional in Plato scholarship to divide his dialogues in various ways. One common division is a temporal one that distinguishes among early, middle and late dialogues. Another is by content: there are the so-called erotic dialogues, which include Symposium, Phaedrus and Alcibiades I, where themes of love and friendship are explicitly treated, and then the rest, which deal with such non-erotic themes as language and knowledge and ontology. Jill Gordon, Charles A. Dana Professor of Philosophy at Colby College, argues that this second division deeply misinterprets the role of eros in the Platonic corpus. In her new book, Plato’s Erotic World: From Cosmic Origins to Human Death (Cambridge University Press, 2012), she argues that paradigmatically non-erotic dialogues, such as Theaetetus, Parmenides and Phaedo, are in fact deeply erotic, and that the theme of eros unifies the corpus rather than divides it. For example, the Socratic dialectic, or elenchus, is a give-and-take that is erotic in nature, and doing philosophy itself is an erotic endeavor akin to naked exercise in the gymnasium. Her argument begins with a close reading of Timaeus, Plato’s creation myth, and the role of eros in the immortal human soul, and comes full circle with a reading of Phaedo in which Socrates’ growing rigidity as the hemlock takes hold is an erotic pun. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It’s traditional in Plato scholarship to divide his dialogues in various ways. One common division is a temporal one that distinguishes among early, middle and late dialogues. Another is by content: there are the so-called erotic dialogues, which include Symposium, Phaedrus and Alcibiades I, where themes of love and friendship are explicitly treated, and then the rest, which deal with such non-erotic themes as language and knowledge and ontology. Jill Gordon, Charles A. Dana Professor of Philosophy at Colby College, argues that this second division deeply misinterprets the role of eros in the Platonic corpus. In her new book, Plato’s Erotic World: From Cosmic Origins to Human Death (Cambridge University Press, 2012), she argues that paradigmatically non-erotic dialogues, such as Theaetetus, Parmenides and Phaedo, are in fact deeply erotic, and that the theme of eros unifies the corpus rather than divides it. For example, the Socratic dialectic, or elenchus, is a give-and-take that is erotic in nature, and doing philosophy itself is an erotic endeavor akin to naked exercise in the gymnasium. Her argument begins with a close reading of Timaeus, Plato’s creation myth, and the role of eros in the immortal human soul, and comes full circle with a reading of Phaedo in which Socrates’ growing rigidity as the hemlock takes hold is an erotic pun. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Mike and Tones begin their discussion on Socrates (to be continued) by concentrating on Plato’s Theaetetus.  They don’t get in too deep in regards to the epistemological content of the book but rather use it to examine the character of Socrates and to discuss his role as one of the most important philosophers… EVER.  Tones […]

Knowledge, relativism, and memory in the Theaetetus