Table Of ContentPlato’s Statesman Revisited
Trends in Classics –
Supplementary Volumes
Edited by
Franco Montanari and Antonios Rengakos
Associate Editors
Evangelos Karakasis · Fausto Montana · Lara Pagani
Serena Perrone · Evina Sistakou · Christos Tsagalis
Scientific Committee
Alberto Bernabé · Margarethe Billerbeck
Claude Calame · Jonas Grethlein · Philip R. Hardie
Stephen J. Harrison · Richard Hunter · Christina Kraus
Giuseppe Mastromarco · Gregory Nagy
Theodore D. Papanghelis · Giusto Picone
Tim Whitmarsh · Bernhard Zimmermann
Volume 68
Plato’s Statesman
Revisited
Edited by
Beatriz Bossi and Thomas M. Robinson
ISBN 978-3-11-060463-4
e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-060554-9
e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-060491-7
ISSN 1868-4785
Library of Congress Control Number: 2018961056
Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie;
detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de.
© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Editorial Office: Alessia Ferreccio and Katerina Zianna
Logo: Christopher Schneider, Laufen
Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck
www.degruyter.com
Contents
Introduction | 1
Part I: Defining the Place of the Statesman
Annie Larivée
Taking Frustation Seriously:
Reading Plato’s Statesman as a Protreptic to Political Science | 11
Maurizio Migliori
The Multifocal Approach:
The Statesman as the Key to Plato’s Political Philosophy | 35
Part II: What Kind of ‘Science’ of Government?
Dimitri El Murr
Plato on the Unity of the Science of Government (258b–259d) | 55
Giovanni Casertano
True and Right in the Statesman | 73
Part III: Interpreting the Myth
David A. White
Paradigm, Form and the Good in Plato’s Statesman: The Myth Revisited | 87
Dougal Blyth
God and Cosmos in Statesman 269c–270a and Aristotle | 107
José María Zamora
Plato’s Reign of Kronos:
Proclus’ Interpretation of the Myth in the Politicus | 119
VI | Contents
Anna Motta
Demiurgy in Heavens. An Ancient Account in Plato’s Statesman | 141
Part IV: Measuring, Weaving and Women
Josep Monserrat Molas
The Avoidance of Errors: a Sense of Due Measure | 159
Gislene Vale dos Santos
On the Art of Weaving and the Act of Thinking in Plato’s Statesman | 171
Nuria Sánchez Madrid
Weaving the Polis. Reading Plato’s Statesman (279a–283d) | 183
Thomas More Robinson
Plato’s Stateswomen | 195
Part V: The Statesman and the Sophist
Lidia Palumbo
Mimesis in the Statesman | 209
Laura Candiotto
The very Difficult Separation from the Chorus of the Greatest Magician of all the
Sophists (Statesman 291a1–c6) | 231
Part VI: Wisdom and Law
Miriam C.D. Peixoto
On the Limits of Law and the Sovereignity of the Wise. Conjectures about the
Primacy of Law in Plato’s Statesman | 249
Contents | VII
Part VII: Bonds and Virtues
Giovanni Giorgini
Divine and Human Bonds: The Essence of the Art of Politics | 265
Beatriz Bossi
On Virtue and Wisdom in the Protagoras, the Phaedo and the Statesman:
One Thesis or Several? | 287
Christopher Rowe
‘Moderation’ and Courage in the Statesman | 309
Bibliography | 327
List of Contributors | 341
Index Locorum | 345
Introduction
This book consists of a selection of papers presented at the II International Spring
Plato Seminar (25-26 April 2016, Facultad de Filosofía, Universidad Complutense
de Madrid) on Plato’s Politicus1 and some papers by other authors who were in-
vited to contribute to this volume (namely, A. Larivée, M. Migliori and D. White).
Inspired by Melissa Lane’s conference on the same dialogue at Princeton Univer-
sity during her stay for three months in 2015, B. Bossi thought that it was due time
for a second conference on one of Plato’s dialogues in Spain, and that it would be
a good follow up to organize it too on the Politicus. The aim of the conference was,
like that of the first, held on Plato’s Sophist (Benasque, 2009), the promotion of
Plato studies in Spain; it offered us the opportunity to look afresh at one of Plato’s
most severely overlooked political dialogues, with discussions among a number
of international scholars of distinction in the field taking place. This time, in the
context of a bilingual seminar devoted to this topic at the Facultad de Filosofía of
the UCM during the previous term, the conference included the participation of
seven students whose papers were selected to take part in the conference.
Readers will find in this volume papers by scholars from the Anglo-Saxon
orbit (Rowe, Blyth, White, Robinson) as well as from Italy (Giorgini, Palumbo,
Migliori, Casertano, Motta, Candiotto), Spain (Zamora, Monserrat, Sánchez,
Bossi), the French orbit (Larivée, El Murr), and Brazil (Peixoto, Vale dos Santos).
The papers included fall into seven categories that attempt to follow the order
of the subjects as they are presented in the dialogue: 1.) two general papers deal-
ing directly with the place of the Statesman in Plato’s philosophy; 2.) two papers
dealing with the difficulties arising from consideration of the ostensible aim of
the dialogue, the definition of the art/science of government; 3.) a number which
tackle the question of the interpretation of the myth and its reception; 4.) some
discussing specific issues such as the art of measuring, weaving the polis, and
the status of women; 5.) two papers focused on the problematic comparison be-
tween the statesman and the sophist; 6.) one paper contrasting the statesman’s
wisdom with the limits of the law; and finally 7.) three papers discussing the role
which bonds and virtues play in several Platonic dialogues.
||
1 As this volume is presented to the community of scholars in English, for practical purposes we
have decided to entitle the volume ‘Plato’s Statesman Revisited’ (rather than Plato’s Politicus
Revisited) but we have respected the authors’ choice of either title (and their interpretations of
its meaning) in their respective papers. We are grateful to D. Blyth for his valuable help in the
editing of this volume.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110605549-001
2 | Introduction
The volume opens with a strong and significant paper by A. Larivée which
argues that the frustration the dialogue has generated is due mainly to an ana-
chronistic expectation. The main problem of the dialogue, she claims, is that the
statesman is an intangible, absent figure whose elusive political science has an
enigmatic relationship with dialectic. The need for this science, she argues, is the
message of this protreptic dialogue addressed to philosophers. It aims at encour-
aging them to pursue this political science passionately, badly needed as it is and
still to be developed at the time Plato was writing. She concludes that Aristotle
saw himself as a pioneer in that regard, and that his Politics could be considered
as a sound proposal taking inspiration in Plato’s Politicus. M. Migliori reflects on
the major triad comprising the Republic, Statesman and Laws, in order to call at-
tention to some key progressive points in Plato’s politics. The contribution of the
Statesman, he suggests, is to explain the significance of the ‘utopian’ model, the
imitative nature of human polities, and the weight of the two pillars of human
politics: the law and the statesman. The models of the Republic and the Laws are
not to be implemented but constitute ‘regulating principles’. The more theoretical
philosopher-king of the Republic becomes a sensible single man ruling according to
the laws ‘by science or by opinion’ while still imitating ‘the divine’, in a more
down to earth Statesman (301a10–b3).
The second section deals with more specific problems. D. El Murr argues that,
though it might seem that, by making political science theoretical and detached
from a specific conception of ‘practice’ (equated with manual production) Plato
runs the risk of purging political science of effectiveness, he manages to connect
it to action through the notion of prescription, which El Murr regards as ‘a distinct-
ive conceptual innovation that the dialogue must be credited for in the history of
political thought’. In addition, he seems to suggest that only a political science
‘with such a high epistemic requirement’ can take action and transform the social
fabric. G. Casertano examines 277e–279a to reflect on the problematic relation be-
tween ‘correct’ and ‘true’ on the one hand, and between δόξα and ἐπιστήμη on
the other. He argues that in our dialogue ‘there is an identification, or at least a
fluctuation’ in the use of these terms. Unlike other dialogues where these terms
are clearly opposed, the ἐπιστήμη of the king/statesman is also called δόξα,
though it is described as the ‘true opinion of a daemonic being’. Casertano finds
the complete identification of ‘correctness’ and the ‘kingly science’ problematic
arguing that, if the law is not set up by the true king (who does not need it) and
every written law must be mere ‘imitation’ of the truth, it is unclear who else
could produce it.
The third section is devoted to the interpretation and reception of the myth.
D. White claims that the myth does serious philosophical work in the context of
