Resumo: Propõe-se uma leitura de três episódios da Odisseia, nos quais há o uso de um phármakon. São Helena, Circe e Hermes as personagens que administram as phármaka. Trata-se de leitura: 1) vinculada a um projeto: o levantamento e a interpretação de discursos que se distanciem e/ou questionem a perspectiva da “guerra às drogas”, algo como um projeto de extração de elementos textuais que possam servir como ferramentas teóricas, na construção de uma perspectiva menos mortífera em relação às substâncias; 2) (...) guiada por três princípios, os quais podem ser ditos anticoloniais e antirracistas. Leitura centrada no phármakon, mas que o articula à comida floral dos lotófagos e à relação de xenía; dela, apresenta-se a proposta segundo a qual, no texto homérico, há a valorização de algo que pode ser chamado de multivalência.: The aim of this paper is to analyze three episodes of the Odyssey in which a pharmakon is used. Helen, Circe and Hermes are the characters that administer the pharmaka. This analysis is linked to a project - the survey of discourses that distance themselves and/or question the perspective of the “war on drugs”, a project that aims to extract textual elements that can serve as tools of thought in the construction of a less deadly path in relation to substances - and guided by three principles - which can be called anti-colonial and anti-racist. From this focus, centered on the pharmakon, also articulating it to the floral food of the lotophagi and the relationship of xenia, a thesis is put forward according to which, in the Homeric texts, one can find something that can be called multivalence. (shrink)

The wordeuboulia, which meansexcellence in counselorsound judgement, occurs in only three places in the authentic writings of Plato. The sophist Protagoras makeseubouliathe focus of his whole enterprise(Prot.318e–319a):What I teach a person is good judgement about his own affairs — how best he may manage his own household; and about the affairs of the city — how he may be most able to handle the business of the city both in action and in speech.Thrasymachus, too, thinks well ofeuboulia. Invited by Socrates (...) to call injusticekakoetheia(vicious disposition — he has just identified justice as ‘an altogether noble good nature (euetheia)’, i.e. as simple-mindedness), he declines the sophistry and says (Rep. 348d): ‘No, I call it good judgement’. But Plato finds little occasion to introduce the concept in developing his own ethical and political philosophy. The one place where he mentionseubouliais in his defence of the thesis that his ideal city possesses the four cardinal virtues. He begins with wisdom, and justifies the ascription of wisdom to the city on the ground that it haseuboulia(Rep.428b) — which he goes on to identify with the knowledge required by the guardians: ‘with this a person does not deliberate on behalf of any of the elements in the city, but for the whole city itself — how it may best have dealings with itself and with the other cities’ (428c–d). It is normally rather dangerous to draw an inference from the absence or rarity of a word to the absence or rarity of the idea expressed by the word. (shrink)

The word euboulia, which means excellence in counsel or sound judgement, occurs in only three places in the authentic writings of Plato. The sophist Protagoras makes euboulia the focus of his whole enterprise : What I teach a person is good judgement about his own affairs — how best he may manage his own household; and about the affairs of the city — how he may be most able to handle the business of the city both in action and in (...) speech. Thrasymachus, too, thinks well of euboulia. Invited by Socrates to call injustice kakoetheia ’, i.e. as simple-mindedness), he declines the sophistry and says : ‘No, I call it good judgement’. But Plato finds little occasion to introduce the concept in developing his own ethical and political philosophy. The one place where he mentions euboulia is in his defence of the thesis that his ideal city possesses the four cardinal virtues. He begins with wisdom, and justifies the ascription of wisdom to the city on the ground that it has euboulia — which he goes on to identify with the knowledge required by the guardians: ‘with this a person does not deliberate on behalf of any of the elements in the city, but for the whole city itself — how it may best have dealings with itself and with the other cities’ . It is normally rather dangerous to draw an inference from the absence or rarity of a word to the absence or rarity of the idea expressed by the word. (shrink)

This article argues that the episode in Il. 24.552–658 involving Achilles and Priam brings out the hero’s ability to control his emotions – even if he did lose them momentarily – by means of his calculation of what will come next. This interpretation fits the compositional structure of the epic, whose closure is highlighted by the hero’s dramatized emotions in his encounter with the Trojan king.

There is a major problem in connection with the wrath of Poseidon in Homer's Odyssey. We are told by Homer and Zeus that Poseidon raged continually against the hero from the time that the Cyclops was blinded until Odysseus reached Ithaca; and, when back on Ithaca the man complains to Athena about her absence and lack of help during the whole period of his wanderings after the fall of Troy, she says at 13.341-3 that she was avoiding confrontation with her (...) angry uncle during all that time. But the only specified manifestation of that anger is the storm roused by the sea-god after Odysseus leaves Calypso in Book 5, in the tenth year after Polyphemus’ prayer to his father for revenge. It seems extraordinary that Poseidon should have waited so long before acting against him, and then have attacked him only once, merely causing him difficulty before he reached Scheria, and not ensuring his late return in a miserable plight on another's ship after losing all his companions, as his blinded son had requested. (shrink)