Piccola archeologia del sorteggio

The best known instance of a political system widely grounded on election by lot was in ancient Greece, especially in the Athenian democracy, where the citizens were appointed to many public offices every year. Election by lot was the procedure by which they were assigned to the City Counsel (Boulé), to juries and to administrative tasks. The fact that the citizens who had exercised an office could not be re-elected allowed a large rotation and an involvement of many citizens. We have also evidence of election by lot in the mythical tradition and in the religious background, that was exhibited in cult practices and in games. This system, however, had several restrictions: financial and military offices were assigned by voting and not by lot; the candidates were required to show they had qualifications, moral qualifications too, for the offices; at the end of the year each office-holder should present a report to be submitted to public control. The election by lot was strongly rejected by adversaries of the democracy, such as the so-called Old-oligarch or Plato, who judged it contrary to any form of expertise, but also by Isocrates and Aristotle. Also in republican Rome the use of the lot was restricted to some military practices or for establishing the order of succession according to which the single tribes or centuriae (numerically different) were called to vote. It was therefore a mixed system of both voting and lot, particularly fitting to the aristocratic or oligarchic character of republican Rome. This mixed system was employed also in medieval and renaissance Italian city-states, for example in Arezzo or Perugia or Venice. Montesquieu grasped clearly that election by lot, with its restrictions, was a distinctive character of the democratic form of government, but also that it was an anachronism in modern age. Generally the modern political thinkers such as Hobbes or Spinoza, but also Rousseau, did not assign a relevant role to election by lot in their theories. The emphasis on representation in modern political theories of democracy naturally tends to exclude election by lot from the horizon. And marxist theorists, even if they criticize the institute of representation, present the same attitude

Relations de la philosophie avec son histoire

It is a great honor to present one of the proceedings of the Institut In- ternational de Philosophie in the \uablessico Intellettuale Europeo\ubb series. Both have longstanding traditions. the Institut International de Philosophie (IIP) was founded during the momentous ann\ue9e Descartes of 1937 and its meet- ings have taken place on a yearly basis (with the exception of 1939 to 1946 because of World War two). Its first president was l\ue9on Robin. Past pres- idents during the last four decades were Georg Henrik von Wright, Max Black, Paul Ricoeur, Jerzy Pelc, David Pears, Ruth Barcan Marcus, Evan- dro agazzi, tomonobu Imamichi, Jaakko Hintikka, anne Fagot-largeault, Hans lenk, tom\ue1s Calvo Mart\uednez and Enrico Berti. Ioanna Ku\ue7uradi is currently the president and Bernard Bourgeois the secretary general. to date, its membership lists 102 philosophers from forty-four countries. Its several committees are concerned with international communication and coopera- tion in philosophy from the point of view of reason and tolerance. a con- stant focus is placed on the mutual opening of philosophical cultures, tra- ditions and approaches.1 the Istituto per il lessico Intellettuale Europeo of the National Research Council of Italy (lIE and since 2001 IlIESI) was founded in 1964 and has been hosting its own international meetings every three years. We are count- ing fifty-five Entretiens de l\u2019Institut International de Philosophie and fifteen Colloqui Internazionali del Lessico Intellettuale Europeo. the IlIESI is ded- icated to the history of cultural and scientific terminology. It focuses on the phenomenon of cultural migration, which accompanies the whole history of civilizations while involving continuous relations and reciprocal exchanges among diverse cultures, and thus translations (in their widest sense) of texts and modules from one to another context, be it linguistic, economic, politi- cal, or cultural. Its researchers investigate several epochs under the assump- tion that at the root of the history of philosophy and of the sciences and more generally of the history of ideas lie textual corpora that have been de- veloped in the context of each discipline over the centuries.2 today, the \uablessico Intellettuale Europeo\ubb series, which was started in 1967, boasts 124 volumes. and we find it extremely inspiring that volume 125 of the series hosts the sixty-third IIP meeting, which is its sixth meeting in Italy, after Venice in 1958 (in coincidence with the twelfth World Con- gress of Philosophy), l\u2019aquila in 1964, Bellagio in 1982, Palermo in 1985 and Santa Margherita/Genova in 1989. all presentations but one that were given at the Entretiens de Rome of the Institut International de Philosophie on 24-28 September 2014 have found their way to this volume. appropriate funding was provided by the Italian Ministry for Education, university and Research within the PRIN2012 \u201cuniversalism and its limits\u201d, unit coordinator Riccardo Pozzo and national coordinator loris Sturlese. the four papers contributed by Giovanni Pugli- si, Hans Poser, Evandro agazzi and Enrico Berti were read at the meeting of the Committee on the History of Philosophy of the F\ue9d\ue9ration Interna- tionale des Soci\ue9t\ue9s de Philosophie (FISP) dedicated to the textual basis of the intercultural history of philosophy \u2013 Migrating Alphabets, which took place in Rome in the aula Marconi at the main seat of the National Re- search Council of Italy on 11 January 2011

Thucydide en Italie et en France vers le milieu du xvie siècle

L’espace qui sépare la traduction latine de Thucydide par Lorenzo Valla vers la moitié du xve siècle et la traduction en anglais par Thomas Hobbes au début du xviie siècle, n’est pas vide. Claude de Seyssel en 1545 traduit Thucydide en français à partir de la traduction latine de Valla et en 1564 une traduction en italien par le florentin Francesco di Soldo Strozzi paraît à Venise comme troisième tome d’une série de Historici greci, prévue en 12 tomes. La première édition avait été publiée en..

Eric Dodds entre psychanalyse et parapsychologie

Eric Dodds between psychoanalysis and psychical research As a classical scholar, E. R. Dodds always displayed a special interest in the function of the irrational in cultural and religious experience of antiquity. The most remarkable issue of this interest is to be found in his well-known book "The Greeks and the Irrational". The focus of this article is to point out the extent to which both psychoanalytic categories and psychic researches had an influence on his work. This can allow us to better understand his general interpretation of the development of ancient civilization, as well as his studies on Euripides, Plotin and the supernormal phenomena in antiquity. This can also allow us to grasp his attitude towards the crisis of rational thinking in the contemporary age.Au centre des recherches d'Eric Dodds, dont le résultat le plus remarquable est le livre Les Grecs et l'irrationnel, on trouve le concept d'irrationnel et ses fonctions à l'intérieur de l'expérience culturelle et religieuse de l'Antiquité. Cet article vise à mettre en lumière l'influence que les catégories de la psychanalyse, surtout freudienne, et les problèmes posés par les recherches psychiques ont exercée sur son travail d'helléniste. Cela rend possible une meilleure compréhension de son interprétation d'Euripide et de Plotin, ainsi que de ses études sur les phénomènes paranormaux pendant l'Antiquité. En même temps il en résulte une esquisse de l'attitude de Dodds envers la crise de la rationalité entre XIXe et XXe siècle.Cambiano Giuseppe. Eric Dodds entre psychanalyse et parapsychologie. In: Revue de l'histoire des religions, tome 208, n°1, 1991. pp. 3-26

Platon et les rapports entre théorie et praxis dans la médecine hippocratique

L’article analyse la façon dont Platon représente la réflexion et la pratique de la médecine par analogie avec la pratique dialectique du logon didonai. Dans le corpus hippocratique, on retrouve cette idée que le médecin doit raisonner et trouver des connexions causales que le patient n’a pas remarquées ; mais parce qu’il connaît le passé de son patient, il peut prévoir son futur, et ainsi justifier la thérapie qu’il propose. La τέχνη n’est donc pas opposée frontalement à l’ἐμπειρία qui est une connaissance directe fondée sur l’observation intentionnelle d’événements qui se répètent. Dans le Gorgias en revanche, Platon oppose τέχνη à ἐμπειρία, en faisant de la médecine une τέχνη et en abaissant la rhétorique à n’être qu’une ἐμπειρία, réduite à une activité qui ne peut rendre compte d’elle-même et qui n’a pour but que le plaisir. Une telle opposition donne à la médecine considérée comme une τέχνη un statut véritable, mais la sépare de toute ἐμπειρία. Toutefois l’attitude de Platon à l’égard de l’ ἐμπειρία doit être nuancée, dans la mesure où il demeure essentiel de recourir à l’expérience sensible pour l’application de la théorie générale aux cas particuliers, bien qu’il faille d’abord disposer du cadre théorique général. Ce dernier aspect, que Platon trouve chez les médecins, sert aussi de modèle pour la construction d’une rhétorique dialectique, c’est-à-dire philosophique.The paper analyses how Plato describes the medical thought and practice as a pattern for the dialectical practice of logon didonai. In the Hippocratic corpus, one finds the idea that the doctor must reason and find causal connections that the patient has not noticed ; because he knows his patient’s past, the physician can foresee his future, and thus justify the therapy he proposes. Thus, τέχνη is not frontally opposed to ἐμπειρία, which is a direct knowledge based on the intentional observation of events that repeat themselves. In the Gorgias, by contrast, Plato opposes τέχνη to ἐμπειρία, making medicine a τέχνη and lowering rhetoric to the status of a mere ἐμπειρία, reduced to an activity that cannot account for itself, and which has only pleasure as its goal. This opposition gives medicine considered as a τέχνη a true status, but separates it from all ἐμπειρία. However, Plato’s opposition to ἐμπειρία must be attenuated, for he thinks that the recourse to experience is necessary when a general theory must be applicated to individual cases, even though only after the elaboration of the theory. Plato finds this feature in the medical practice and uses it for the construction of a dialectical, viz. philosophical rhetoric

Platone e il governo misto

This paper discusses Plato’s political philosophy in the light of Polybius’s theory of mixed government or regimen mixtum. The article focuses mainly on Plato’s Statesman and LawsThis paper discusses Plato’s political philosophy in the light of Polybius’s theory of mixed government or regimen mixtum. The article focuses mainly on Plato’s Statesman and Law