This paper reads Republic 583b-608b as a single, continuous line of argument. First, Socrates distinguishes real from apparent pleasure and argues that justice is more pleasant than injustice. Next, he describes how pleasures nourish the soul. This line of argument continues into the second discussion of poetry: tragic pleasures are mixed pleasures in the soul that seem greater than they are; indulging them nourishes appetite and corrupts the soul. The paper argues that Plato has a novel account of the ‘paradox (...) of tragedy’, and that the Republic and Philebus contain complementary discussions of tragic and comic pleasure. (shrink)

Plato links pleasure with illusion, and this link explains his rejection of the view that all desires are rational desires for the good. The Protagoras and Gorgias show connections between pleasure and illusion; the Republic develops these into a psychological theory. One part of the soul is not only prone to illusions, but also incapable of the kind of reasoning that can dispel them. Pleasure appears good; therefore this part of the soul (the appetitive part) desires pleasures qua good but (...) ignores reasoning about what is really good. Hence the new moral psychology of the Republic: not all desires are rational, and thus virtue depends on bringing one's non-rational desires under the control of reason. (shrink)

Las numerosas acusaciones formuladas por Platón contra la poesía aparecen a lo largo de toda su obra, referidas tanto al contenido como a la forma, y se basan en diversos supuestos éticos, políticos y metafísicos. Sin embargo, tales ataques no son lanzados con-tra la poesía como tal, sino contra la poesía tradicional y su importante presencia en el ámbito educativo griego. Frente a la tradición poética y frente a las distintas corrientes intelectuales que se disputan el espacio educativo de su (...) tiempo, Platón elabora una nueva poesía sometida a la filosofía, que no solo resulta agradable sino también útil. (shrink)

Although it is often acknowledged that poetry can only influence the non-rational part of the soul, this is rarely thought to be decisive for Plato’s argument. Poetry, instead, is taken to be psychologically corrupting because it is third removed from reality. By a closer look at Plato’s account of the address of poetry in the Republic, this paper argues that Plato takes poetry to be morally corrupting, not because of bad imitation, but because it represents and strengthens the illusory sentiments (...) of an already corrupted character condition. Looking at the dialogue from this point of view can both help to clarify how the illusions of poetry are morally dangerous, and not just metaphysically wrong, and why Plato puts so much effort into explaining them. (shrink)

In book X of the Republic, Plato famously reports “a quarrel between poetry and philosophy.” The present essay examines this quarrel in book X, along with other relevant parts of the Republic, by understanding “philosophy” and “poetry” as rival ways of life and rival ways of discourse. The essay first explains why, in Plato’s view, poetic discourse weakens one’s power to reason and is at odds with philosophic discourse. Then it shows how poetic discourse is bound up with a way (...) of life that champions the value of freedom. Such a life forms a contrast with the philosophic life, which is marked more by stability and unity than by freedom. The quarrel, however, is not a simple antagonism. The essay hence concludes by discussing why, despite the opposition between the two, philosophy cannot do without poetry. (shrink)

On dit et répète que, dans la République, Platon a chassé les poètes de la cité. L’affirmation n’est pas fausse, à condition d’ajouter plusieurs réserves et précisions qui, si on les prend au sérieux, donnent une image très différente de l’attitude de Platon envers la poésie. La cité a besoin de poètes : une partie essentielle de l’éducation des gardiens (livres II-III) repose sur la musique-poésie, et c’est bien pourquoi Platon s’attarde longuement sur les règles à respecter en la matière. (...) Cette poésie soumise à la censure n’est pourtant pas la seule admise : vis-à-vis de la poésie existante (Homère, les Tragiques), le philosophe adopte une position nuancée : elle a beaucoup de charme, et si elle a beaucoup de défauts, il n’est pourtant pas impossible de l’accueillir dans la cité pour peu que les citoyens soient munis de l’antidote fourni par l’éducation. C’est à cette dernière qu’on doit apporter tous ses soins, à celle des gardiens mais aussi à celle des citoyens ordinaires. (shrink)

Este trabajo se ocupa de la crítica de Platón a oradores, poetas y sofistas. Su propósito es mostrar que independientemente de las características que singularizan una batalla de vasto alcance librada por el filósofo en tres frentes distintos, la noción de imitación (mimesis) proporciona un hilo conductor que permite vincular esos diferentes enfrentamientos y arrojar luz sobre la reacción de Platón ante quienes identifica, peyorativamente, como imitadores. La práctica adulatoria del orador en Gorgias, no menos que el quehacer del poeta (...) puesto en tela de juicio en República y el del sofista en el diálogo homónimo tendrían, en efecto, una naturaleza mimética. Esto no impide reconocer, junto a los puntos de continuidad, diferencias significativas en los tratamientos de la mimesis que ofrecen los tres diálogos aquí considerados. (shrink)