Plato’s Phaedo and “the Art of Glaucus”: Transcending the Distortions of Developmentalism

In a 1985 article, Diskin Clay offered a modern solution to an ancient problem: instead of choosing between the scholiast’s two different explanations of “the art of Glaucus,” he offered a more textual explanation based on Socrates’ image of the distorted appearance of the embodied soul in Republic X. This paper’s thesis is that we should reconsider the way we read Socrates’ last discourse by privileging its dramatic and didactic aspects in a manner that allows us to give Clay’s insights the weight they deserve. This is preferable to regarding Phaedo as an outgrown stage of Plato’s development rather than the dramatic culmination of the dialogues as a whole, and the hegemonic hermeneutic based on chronological order of composition has made this great dialogue’s original form as unrecognizable as the ocean has made Glaucus

The Problem of time in Hegel's philosophy of history

Tese (doutorado) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Centro de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Filosofia, Florianópolis, 2010O objetivo deste trabalho é mostrar porque o problema do tempo é o calcanhar de Aquiles no sistema Hegeliano. A filosofia da história em Hegel dá margem a crítica rigorosa porque estruturas lógicas atemporais devem ser aplicadas a um processo que se desenvolve no tempo. Mas não se pode pensar em Hegel aplicando a dialética à história; esta noção pressupõe a existência de nossa consciência histórica pos-Hegeliana. Para nós, tempo é aquilo no qual os eventos ocorrem, um processo infinito estendendo-se para o futuro. Para Hegel, #tempo# emerge somente quando a Idéia Absoluta externaliza-se na filosofia da natureza e nosso #futuro# é meramente um #mau infinito#. Uma investigação arqueológica da compreensão do tempo em Hegel enfatiza que ele foi herdeiro de uma longa tradição filosófica que era absolutamente hostil à mudança, fenômenos temporais e tempo. Nós somos tão profundamente influenciados pelas implicações do pensamento do próprio Hegel que é agora difícil para nós entendermos que ele mesmo não tinha consciência dessas implicações. A hostilidade de Hegel para com o tempo revela-se em sua filosofia da história porque seu próprio sistema é, e somente pode ser, o término da história da filosofia. Mas o escândalo do #fim da história# depende inteiramente de um prévio e muito menos visível escândalo: a falha de Hegel em perceber o que tornou possível para ele conceituar um processo cronológico como a história foi a temporalidade já implícita na dialética Hegeliana em si.The aim of this work is to show why the problem of time is the Achilles heel of the Hegelian System. Hegel#s philosophy of history is the correct point of entry for a rigorous critique because timeless logical structures must here be applied to a process that enfolds in time. But it is wrong to think of Hegel applying the dialectic to history; this notion presupposes the existence of our own post-Hegelian historical consciousness. For us, time is that within which events occur, an endless process extending into the future. For Hegel, #time# emerges only when the Absolute Idea externalizes itself in the philosophy of nature and our #future# is merely his #bad infinite.# An archeological investigation of Hegel#s understanding of time emphasizes that he was heir to a long philosophical and tradition that was resolutely hostile to change, temporal phenomena, and time. We have been so deeply influenced by the temporal implications of Hegel#s own thought that it is now difficult for us to grasp that he was unconscious of these implications himself. Paradoxically, Hegel#s hostility to time is revealed in his philosophy of history because his own System is and can only be the culmination of the history of philosophy. But the scandal of #the end of history# depends entirely on a prior and far less visible scandal: Hegel#s failure to realize that what made it possible for him to conceptualize a chronological process like history was the temporality implicit in the dialectic itself

Dialectic in xenophon’s Memorabilia: Responding to 4.6

A consideration of Memorabilia 4.6 as a whole and in context reveals that Xenophon’s Socrates taught his companions to be “more dialectical” (dialektikōtéroi) by deliberately offering them bad, simplistic, or fallacious arguments in order to provoke debate, discussion, and dialectic. This reading indicates why Xenophon introduces the chapter modestly by saying “I will try to explain even this” (the first words of 4.6.1) and why some of the arguments that follow have generated a decidedly mixed scholarly response. Although the chapter as a whole will be analyzed and discussed, particular attention is given to the use of the word “hypothesis” in the chapter (4.6.13-14) and the fact that Socrates identifies Odysseus as “a safe speaker” at 4.6.15

Cicero’s Practical Platonism: Brutus as Funeral Oration

ResumoCelebrado por Quintiliano como “o rival de Platão”, e embora muitas vezes negligenciado, Cícero não apenas ilumina a recepção romana de Platão, mas também um importante aspecto prático do pensamento político platônico. Usando a Oração Fúnebre de Péricles e o Discurso de Gettysburg (Lincoln) como paradigmas, o artigo argumenta a favor da origem platônica da tentativa de Cícero de persuadir filósofos como Brutus a dominarem a arte da retórica para um objetivo prático. Por meio de um elogio sobre a morte da oratória e da república que a engendrou, Cícero exorta um público contemporâneo a resistir à tirania, da mesma forma como a República de Platão tinha persuadido o seu mais inteligente leitor romano a fazê-lo.AbstractCelebrated by Quintilian as “Plato’s rival,” the often-neglected Cicero not only illuminates the Roman reception of Plato but an important practical aspect of Platonic political thought. Using Pericles’ Funeral Oration and the Gettysburg Address as paradigms, “Cicero’s Practical Platonism: Brutus as Funeral Oration” argues for the Platonic origin of Cicero’s attempt to persuade philosophers like Brutus to master the art of rhetoric for a practical purpose. By means of a eulogy on the death of oratory and the Republic that engendered it, Cicero exhorts a contemporary audience to resist tyranny just as Plato’s Republic had persuaded its most insightful Roman reader to do.

Co‐developing guidance for conservation: An example for seabirds in the North‐East Atlantic in the face of climate change impacts

Conservation guidance—an authoritative source of information and recommendations explicitly supporting decision-making and action regarding nature conservation—represents an important tool to communicate evidence-based advice to conservation actors. Given the rapidly increasing pressure that climate change poses to biodiversity, producing accessible, well-informed guidance on how to best manage the impacts and risks of changing climatic conditions is particularly urgent. Guidance documents should ideally be produced with multistage input from stakeholders who are likely to use and implement such advice; however, this step can be complicated and costly, and remains largely unformalized. Moreover, there is currently little direct evidence synthesized for actions that specifically target climate change and guidance remains largely absent. Here, we introduce a process for co-developing guidance for species conservation in the face of climate change, using seabirds in the North-East Atlantic as a case study. Specifically, we collated evidence on climate change vulnerability and possible conservation actions using literature synthesis, stakeholder surveys, and ecological modeling. This evidence base was then discussed, refined, and expanded using structured stakeholder workshops. We summarize the knowledge gained through stakeholder engagement and provide recommendations for future international efforts to co-produce conservation guidance for managing wildlife, in the context of a rapidly changing climate.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Co-developing guidance for conservation: an example for seabirds in the North-East Atlantic in the face of climate change impacts

Conservation guidance—an authoritative source of information and recommendations explicitly supporting decision-making and action regarding nature conservation—represents an important tool to communicate evidence-based advice to conservation actors. Given the rapidly increasing pressure that climate change poses to biodiversity, producing accessible, well-informed guidance on how to best manage the impacts and risks of changing climatic conditions is particularly urgent. Guidance documents should ideally be produced with multistage input from stakeholders who are likely to use and implement such advice; however, this step can be complicated and costly, and remains largely unformalized. Moreover, there is currently little direct evidence synthesized for actions that specifically target climate change and guidance remains largely absent. Here, we introduce a process for co-developing guidance for species conservation in the face of climate change, using seabirds in the North-East Atlantic as a case study. Specifically, we collated evidence on climate change vulnerability and possible conservation actions using literature synthesis, stakeholder surveys, and ecological modeling. This evidence base was then discussed, refined, and expanded using structured stakeholder workshops. We summarize the knowledge gained through stakeholder engagement and provide recommendations for future international efforts to co-produce conservation guidance for managing wildlife, in the context of a rapidly changing climate