Table Of ContentZacharoula Petraki
The Poetics of Philosophical Language
Sozomena
Studies in the Recovery of Ancient Texts
Edited
on behalf of the Herculaneum Society
by
Alessandro Barchiesi, Robert Fowler,
Dirk Obbink and Nigel Wilson
Vol. 9
De Gruyter
Zacharoula Petraki
The Poetics
of Philosophical Language
Plato, Poets and Presocratics in the Republic
De Gruyter
ISBN 978-3-11-026097-7
e-ISBN 978-3-11-026216-2
ISSN 1869-6368
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
Petraki,ZacharoulaA.
The poetics of philosophical language : Plato, poets and
presocraticsinthe“republic”/ZacharoulaA.Petraki.
p. cm. (cid:2) (Sozomena. Studies in the recovery of ancient
texts;v.9)
Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
ISBN978-3-11-026097-7(hardcover:acid-freepaper)
1.Plato.Republic(cid:2)Criticism,Textual. I.Title.
PA4279.R7P48 2011
3211.07(cid:2)dc23
2011020280
BibliographicinformationpublishedbytheDeutscheNationalbibliothek
TheDeutscheNationalbibliothekliststhispublicationintheDeutsche
Nationalbibliografie;detailedbibliographicdataareavailableintheInternet
athttp://dnb.d-nb.de.
©2011WalterdeGruyterGmbH&Co.KG,Berlin/Boston
Printing:Hubert&Co.GmbH&Co.KG,Göttingen
(cid:3)Printedonacid-freepaper
PrintedinGermany
www.degruyter.com
Acknowledgments
This book stems from work I conducted for my PhD Thesis under the
supervisionof ProfessorAndrewBarkerattheInstituteof Antiquityand
Archaeology at Birmingham. I owe more than I can say to Professor
Barker for his kindness, generosity of mind and spirit and his expert
criticismthroughoutmypostgraduatestudies.ProfessorBarkermeasures
up to the best standards of academic mentorship; his supervision over
the years has always been a source of inspiration, insight and illumina-
tion. His help and support has been invaluable in more ways than he
will ever know.
IoweanotherdebttomyteachersattheUniversityof CreteatRe-
thymno. I cannot thank enough Professors Lucia Athanassaki and Yan-
nis Tzifopoulos for the inspiration they stirred in me and for their gen-
erous support throughout my undergraduate studies. I owe a special
gratitude to Professor Anastasia-Erasmia Peponi who first sparked off
my interest in Plato at Rethymno and has always been kind and gener-
ous with her guidance and advice.
Inaddition,manyfriendsandscholarshaveofferedmevaluablehelp
in bringing this book to the world; for the book’s shortcomings I alone
am responsible. I wish to thank Professors Penelope Murray and Ken
Dowden,theexaminersofmyPhDThesis,fortheirvaluablecomments
and constructive criticism. I am deeply grateful to Professor Stelios Vir-
vidakis for labouring over versions of this manuscript as well as for our
several stimulating conversations on Plato. I am especially indebted to
thefollowing scholars fortheir incisivecriticisms:EltonBarker,Kyriaki
Konstantinidou, Costas Makris, Penelope Skarsouli, Cedric Hugonnet,
Xanthippe Bourloyanni and Eirene Visvardi. I would also like to say a
special thank you to my students at the Universities of the Peloponnese
andCretefortheveryinterestingandstimulatingdiscussionswehadon
Greekphilosophy.ThanksarealsoowedtotheanonymousreaderatDe
Gruyter for his valuable comments. I amespecially grateful to the Series
Editor, Professor Dirk Obbink, for the help and encouragement hege-
nerously gavemewhile Iwas preparingthisbook.Many thanks are due
to the staff of De Gruyter who have dealt with my typescript with both
efficiency and skill, as well as to Dr Andrew Farrington and John Ra-
VI Acknowledgments
nells Stephens, both of whom laboured over the manuscript and saved
me from numerous errors as regards the English language.
The Hardt Foundation at Geneva provided the ideal intellectual at-
mosphere for writing this book; I am deeply grateful to the Foundation
for their generous research grant and to its director, Mr Pierre Ducrey,
and Scientific Secretary, Monica Brunner, for their generosity, kindness
and support. During my stay at the Foundation I had the privileged op-
portunity to exchange views and ideas with the fellows there. I wish to
thank, in particular, Vyara Kalfina, Valentina Garulli and Peggy Le-
caudé.
During the preparation of the book for publication I have been
privileged to have the generous support of good friends. I wish to
thank, in particular, Dr Katerina Ladianou for standing by me with pa-
tience and unending generosity when things were difficult. Special
thanksarealsoduetomyverygoodfriendsChristosandNikos.Finally,
this book is dedicated to my parents, Anastasios and Euaggelia Petrakis
andtomybrother,George.Thisisbutasmalltribute;mydebttothem
cannot be repaid in words or deeds.
Piraeus 2011
Contents
1. Introduction ....................................... 1
1.1 Plato and the Presocratics: Old and new problems ..... 1
1.2 The language problem ........................... 6
1.3 The literary and the philosophical in Plato:
Philosophyagainstpoetry ......................... 8
1.4 The poetics of philosophical language ............... 12
1.5 The Republic’s main motifs: Mixture, diversity and purity 15
1.6 Philosophy, poetry, painting and the poikilia-motif ..... 18
1.7 The Republic’s interlocutors ....................... 26
1.8 Plato and Post-Platonic problems about language ...... 30
Section One: The Theory
1. Aims and perspectives ............................... 37
2. Poetics ........................................... 42
3. Mythos and eikõn .................................. 58
4. Imagistic discourse .................................. 64
4.1 Poikilia and images .............................. 64
4.2 Eikones in Gorgias’ Helen ......................... 65
4.3 Definition of Platonic imagery..................... 69
5. Imagistic language, the dramatization of language and
metaphoric language ................................. 78
5.1. Platonic Eikones: A homoiõsis? .................... 78
5.2 Dramatization of language: the theory ............... 90
5.3 Metaphoric language ............................ 94
Section Two: The Republic
1. Human nature and philosophical style intheRepublicBook5 . 109
1.1 Introduction ................................... 109
1.2 The “two waves” of the argument ................. 111
VIII Contents
1.2.1 The first wave of argument: women in the
guardians’ agele˜ ............................ 116
1.2.2 The second wave of argument:
theguardians’mixisandclasspurity ............. 124
1.2.3 The third wave of argument ................. 136
2. Philosophical style in the third wave of argument in Book 5 . 142
2.1 Glaucon ...................................... 142
2.2 The third wave again ............................ 155
2.2.1 Part one: the mixed style .................... 163
2.2.2 Part two: the cleansed style .................. 167
2.2.3 Part three: the imagistic style ................. 173
3. Verbal Images in the Republic Books 2 and 6 ............. 177
3.1 The poets’ eikones in the Republic ................... 177
3.2 Plato’s eikones in the Republic ...................... 188
3.2.1 Images of human nature ..................... 188
3.2.2 The way to the Form of the Good ............ 194
3.2.3 Plato’s eikones: The Image of the Sun .......... 200
4. Philosophers, non-philosophers and theunjustintheRepublic . 215
4.1 Adeimantus’ philosophers ......................... 215
4.2 Human nature, “true” philosophers and
“false”philosophers.............................. 220
4.3 The poetics of the unjust in Books 8 and 9 .......... 229
4.4 The Language of Democracy and Tyranny ........... 239
4.4.1 Democracy ............................... 239
4.4.2 Tyranny ................................. 243
5. Conclusion ........................................ 255
‘Viewing’ the skiagraphia.............................. 255
Bibliography ......................................... 267
Index ............................................... 291
1. Introduction
1.1 Plato and the Presocratics: Old and new problems
In his Republic, Plato ventures a wholesale examination of a broad range
of issues that preoccupy his philosophical thought. The dialogue’s main
theme is the definition of the ethical concept of justice and its preva-
lence over injustice, but in the course of the discussion Plato examines
a series of further issues, the most prominent being his demonstrating
that the just life is the happiest form of life for humans (344e;
578c5–7).Platobaseshisinvestigation intothenatureof justiceandin-
justice on the analogy of city and soul and defines justice in both
(402b–c; 434b). He argues for the division of the human soul in
three parts – the appetitive, the spirited and the rational – and he also
creates in speech an ideal city consisting of three classes: the economic
class, the guardian class and the philosopher-kings. He then argues that
justice in both city and soul is to be found in “each part performing its
own task” and discusses the way in which this can be achieved in the
city and the soul (443d–e).
For Plato, Socrates’ main thesis in the dialogue is that correct edu-
cation is the only way towards the harmonisation of the tripartite soul
and the preservation of the ideal polis once this is created by the city
founders. He then devotes a great part of his discussion to laying out
the guidelines and the specific characteristics of this type of education
which is directed to the guardians (Books 2 and 3) and the philoso-
pher-kings of the ideal polis (Book 7).
Plato’s educational programme in the Republic is essentially a refor-
mation (or “cleansing”) of current education in contemporary Athens
(399e; 411d–e). In Books 2 and 3 of the Republic, Socrates condemns
thepoetsfor“notlyingwell”totheiraudienceforthethingsthatmatter
most in life, namely the gods and the heroes (376e-377c). In this view,
the poets also fail to present correctly the “simple character” of humans
(392a–b; Cp. Critias 107a-108b). In Book 10(604e-605a), Plato’s Soc-
rates informs us that the poets fail to depict or convey a correct (re)pre-
sentation of ethical values as regards gods, heroes and simple people be-
cause they lack true knowledge of these values (Cp. Rep.392b–c).
Contrawise,intheRepublic’sterms,theknowledgeofourearthlyethical
2 1. Introduction
values, which are manifested in the actions of humans as much as they
arerepresentedintheactionsofgods,heroesandsimplepeopleinmyth
and poetry, is inextricably linked with a new type of philosophical
knowledge (Episte˜me˜), namely, one’s acquaintance with the Platonic
Forms (517d–e).
According to Socrates in the Republic Book 5, this is a type of
knowledge that the majority of people lack, since only very few “be-
lieve” in the existence of the Forms, and even less have the intellectual
ability and strength of character to undergo the hard and strenuous ed-
ucation that finally leads to grasping these Forms. Yet, ethical values
such as courage, moderation or justice cannot be fully identified in
their earthly manifestation unless one knows the Forms which make
the very many particular things or actions bear the qualities that people
ascribe to them. For Plato in the Republic, the Forms differ from their
visible or sense-perceptible earthly manifestation in that, contrary to
the doings in our own mundane sphere of human action, the Forms
are transcendent, unaltering and unchanging, eternal, pure and thus
truly Real (see Jowett II [1894: 316]). Socrates’ assigns knowledge of
this type of Reality only to the Republic’s philosopher-kings. From
thispoint of view, thepoets’knowledge andability toeducate thepeo-
ple is then placed very low in this cognitive hierarchy, and on that very
basis the poets are finally expelled in Book 10 from the ideal state. Pla-
to’s main accusation against them is that their compositions endanger
the formulation of a correct ethical character. As a result, they must
be banished.
The above summary of the Republic hardly does justice to the rich-
ness of this dialogue and to the many and complex problems posed
therein. Nevertheless, this sketchy account of the main themes that
Platotreats inthisdialoguehasledustothe coreissueof hisphilosophy
and, possibly, to the most important philosophical problem that preoc-
cupied Plato in his writings at large. Standing at the end of Presocratic
thought, Plato’s newly-founded philosophy has been deeply influenced
by the innovative ideas of these early thinkers.1 It has long been ac-
1 The influence that Presocratic thought exercised on Platonic philosophy is
well-documented. Lloyd (1966) and (1987); Cherniss (1951: 333 and 337–
339);Cohen(1969/70:111–141);Kahn(1979);Fontaine(1988)andGraham
(2006).ForHeracliteaninfluencesonPlato,seeIrwin(1977).Palmer’sanalysis
(1999)of Plato’sreceptionof ParmenidesaddressesindetailParmenides’influ-
ence on Plato. See also Rist (1970: 221–229).
