The main disciples of Socrates criticise the use of city walls. However, their attacks are less grounded in a deep strategic reflexion than related to the traumatic consequences of Pericles’ strategy at the beginning of the Peloponnesian war. The Lacedemonians’ opposition to the erection of surrounding walls is more likely linked to their aristo- cratic ideology and interests than to moral imperatives. Though Plato and Xenophon’s motives are to avoid political divisions in the city, their positions on fortifications reveal their (...) aristocratic bias and the question of the walls appears to be part of a more general questioning on the spatial and political organisation of the city. On that issue, Aristotle criticises Plato from a pragmatic point of view and defends the use of walls, but under strict conditions only. The Spartan and Socratic critique of the building of the walls, as well as Aristotle reluctance to fully accept them, could be traced back to a common Greek archaic ideal. (shrink)

The belief that primitive men lived like beasts and that civilisation developed out of these brutal origins is found in numerous ancient authors, both Greek and Latin. It forms part of certain theories about the beginnings of culture current in late antiquity. These are notoriously difficult to trace to their sources, but they already existed in some form in the fifth century b.c. One idea common to these theories is that of progress, and for this reason a fragment of Xenophanes (...) is sometimes cited as their remote prototype: ‘The gods did not reveal all things to men from the beginning; instead, by seeking, men discover what is better in time’. Mainly on the strength of this fragment, Ludwig Edelstein devoted the first chapter of his book The Idea of Progress in Classical Antiquity to Xenophanes, and W. K. C. Guthrie has even declared that there is good reason to attribute to him a fuller account of progress, one that would include details found in later authors who speak of the early life of mankind. One of these details is the statement that the life of primitive men was ‘brutal’ or ‘beastlike’ . In these authors the implication of that term varies from ‘unschooled in the basic crafts’ to ‘inhumanly violent and bloodthirsty’. In one sense or the other it is repeatedly encountered in ancient references to this subject. Accounts of primitive brutishness which make use of the word θηριώδης (or θηριωδς can be found in the Suppliants of Euripides, in the Hippocratic treatise On Ancient Medicine, in three passages of Diodorus, one of which is thought by some to contain Democritean doctrine, in four passages of Isocrates, in a fragment from a satyr-play Sisyphus which the ancient sources attribute variously to Euripides and to Critias, in a fragment of Athenion, in a second-century inscription, in Plutarch, in Tatian, in Themistius, and in a scholion to Euripides. (shrink)

Was meint die moderne Wirtschaftswissenschaft, wenn sie von Zukunft redet und Künftiges vorhersagt? Wohin greift sie aus, wenn sie die Zukunft für den Menschen sichern oder offen halten will? Wie ist so etwas wie Zukunft in jener Epoche – dem Griechentum – erfahren und gedacht, in der zuerst die Möglichkeit einer Theoriebildung aufkam und also der Grund für ein Wissen von der Zukunft gelegt wurde? Der vorliegende Band versammelt die Beiträge zu zwei in den Jahren 2013 und 2014 an der (...) Freien Universität Bozen abgehaltenen Kolloquien zum Thema des Verhältnisses von Ökonomie und Zukunft. Die Absicht der Kolloquien wie auch dieser Publikation ist, auf das Fragwürdige jenes Verhältnisses hinzuweisen. In dieser Absicht verlieren die Begriffe „Ökonomie“ und „Zukunft“ ihre Eindeutigkeit und werden ihrerseits fragwürdig. (shrink)

Die bis heute maßgebliche Piatondeutung Schlegels wurzelt im Ideenkreis der Bewußtseins- und Bildungsgeschichte des neuzeitlichen Subjekts. Ihre Genesis erklärt ihren Erfolg in einer sich gern an Piaton spiegelnden Moderne, erweist sie aber als historisch inadäquat. Der gegenwärtige Wechsel vom romantischen zum postromantischen Platon-Paradigma wird dadurch argumentativ gestützt.

En nuestra comunicación tratamos de las interpretaciones sobre uno de los fragmentos textuales comprendidos en el Sobre la Verdad, texto sofístico que pasa, en interpretaciones clásicas como las de Untersteiner o Guthrie, por ser pionero en nuestra tradición filosófico política en cuanto en él se expondrían tesis de claro carácter igualitarista. Si bien en las interpretaciones mencionadas se proclama que el texto en cuestión ataca los fundamentos teoréticos de los defensores de la esclavitud natural, no es menos cierto que otras (...) lecturas atenúan tal rasgo, hablando de un igualitarismo parcial y relativo únicamente a las diferencias culturales. Sin perder de vista el vínculo que ambas posiciones mantienen con la famosa Quaestio Antiphontea criticamos, en base a los textos aducidos por los propios intérpretes, la última posición mencionada, defendiendo que si bien los fragmentos y testimonios a nuestra disposición no nos permiten demostrar definitivamente la naturaleza de las tesis políticas de Antifonte, los mismos nos ofrecen la posibilidad de argüir algunas probabilidades a favor de la existencia de un igualitarismo de corte universal en el Sobre la Verdad. (shrink)