I anticipate someone who dismisses Sophocles as mere literary craftsperson of high skill, arguing that such craftspeople turn up generationally and that the credit should go to the mythmakers.

A closer look at the character of Odysseus in the opening passages of the Philoctetes reveals a more nuanced psychology of guilt and justification than commentators have thus far appreciated in the cunning hero's role. This paper examines the relations of sympathy between Odysseus, Neoptolemus, and Philoctetes as a way of entering into the complicated political drama of the work. Conceiving politics in the Philoctetes as a hybrid construction of the demands of nature and the demands of the gods, this (...) study provides a reading of Sophocles' play as an observation of the necessity for political regimes to efface the very conditions of sympathy that made them possible in the first place. On this reading, Sophocles' tragedy is to be seen as an explorarion of the damage incurred by individuals when such effacement takes place. (shrink)

Sophocles’ Oedipus the King is an extended meditation on the limits of human intelligence, or more precisely, on how a man renowned for the power of his intellect could fail to know the most important truths. One could argue, however, that Sophocles intended for his audiences to take away a second, narrower lesson: namely that divinely inspired seers such as Tiresias have a surer claim on truth than do those who, like Oedipus, seek to gain knowledge through their (...) own efforts. Thus, the Oedipus can be seen as a defense of prophecy and a reaction against the complex of scientific and philosophical ideas known as “the 5th-century Enlightenment.” I offer some support for this reading of the Oedipus. I also argue that part of the cultural background of the Oedipus consisted of ideas about knowledge introduced into Greek thought by the outspoken critic of Greek popular religion, Xenophanes of Colophon. (shrink)

Abstract: William Conklin takes on Hegel’s interpretation of Sophocles’ Antigone in this essay. Hegel asked what makes human laws human and what makes divine laws divine? After outlining Hegel’s interpretation of Antigone in the light of this issue, Conklin argues that we must address what makes human law law? and what makes divine law law? Taking his cue from Michel Foucault’s “What is an Author?”, the key to understanding Sophocles’ Antigone and Hegel’s interpretation to it, according to Conklin, (...) is the relationship between legal authority and an author. Antigone’s divine law opposes Creon’s human law in terms of whether the sense of legal authority presupposes an author. Antigone’s tribe recognises divine laws as nested in an impersonal Fate or Moira common to the Helenes as experienced through rituals and other personal experiences. Such an unwritten law lacks an author “whose origin we know not when”. The city-state’s citizens recognize authority in terms of whether a law has a source in a juridical representer of an invisible author. The invisible author is the city-state external to the representers. The representers interpret human laws in a manner which tries to access the invisible author. What becomes important is that philosophical consciousness observes how the characteristics of the two senses of legal authority clash. (shrink)

Hegel's interpretation of Sophocles' play Antigone is central to an understanding of woman's role in the Hegelian system. Hegel is fascinated by this play and uses it in both the Phenomenology and the Philosophy of Right to demonstrate that familial ethical life is woman's unique responsibility. Antigone is revealed as the paradigmatic figure of womanhood and family life in both the ancient and modern worlds, although there are fundamental differences between these two worlds for Hegel. Through an immanent critique (...) of both the Phenomenology and the Philosophy of Right which focuses on the role of woman as presented by Hegel in the figure of Antigone, my analysis reveals the limitations of Hegel’s dialectical theory. (shrink)

This essay claims that a rupture between two languages permeates human rights discourse in contemporary Anglo-American legal thought. Human rights law is no exception. The one language is written in the sense that a signifying relation inscribed by institutional authors represents concepts. Theories of law have shared such a preoccupation with concepts. Legal rules, doctrines, principles, rights and duties exemplify legal concepts. One is mindful of the dominant tradition of Anglo-American conceptual jurisprudence in this regard. Words have been thought to (...) copy ready-made concepts. Acts of intellectualisation and the accompanying analytic technique have excluded a consideration of a very different sense of legal language. The second sense of a language concentrates upon unwritten acts of meaning which lack a discrete and assignable author. This essay aims to unconceal the importance of an unauthored language. Drawing from Edmund Husserl’s early writings, particularly his Logical Investigations, I shall argue that an unwritten language embodies the written language with acts of meaning. An act of meaning confers one’s experiential body into the content of a concept signified in a written language. In order to understand the importance of such pre-legal acts of meaning in human rights laws, I begin by outlining how universal human rights have been signified as universal by virtue of their content-independence. I then raise the problem of the exclusion of social-cultural phenomena as elements of human rights laws. The clue to this exclusionary character of human rights law rests in the analytic leap from an unwritten to a written legal language. The essay then addresses the effort to link legality with the social world: namely, the effort of grounding legality in a social convention. I examine how a social convention itself is conceptualized, leaving the remainder of acts of meaning. This failure of social conventions to access social-cultural phenomena encourages me to turn to acts of meaning as such acts were understood by Edmund Husserl in his earlier works. Meaning-constituting acts exist prior to intuitions and prior to social conventions. This priority exists analytically as well as phenomenologically. In order to exemplify this prior character of acts of meaning, I retrieve Antigone’s experiential knowledge in Sophocles’ Antigone. Antigone’s unwritten laws are characterized by an absence of mediating concepts. I then identify several elements of an act of meaning in an unwritten language: the experiential body as the source of the acts of meaning, praeiudicia (prejudgements), collective memories, the act character of meaning, and the act of interpretation of social behaviour. My final section raises the prospect of whether human rights can be considered universal if acts of meaning are that important in the identity of a law. (shrink)

The present article has as its purpose to analyze the “spectacle” (ὄψις), from the conceptions developed in the Poetics of Aristotle, as a fundamental part in the tragic conception of Sophocles, in the work Oedipus Tyrannus. The analysis focused on the exodus of the play to demonstrate how aspects of theatrical representation are present in the tragic text.

With the positively ending Elektra, Sophocles wanted to show the audience how political and moral independence, judgment and the courage to act are necessary - to a sometimes extreme extent - for the good of the family and the state. Even in the old democracy, virtue - which for Hegel was a principle of democracy - was not enough on its own. The downfall of democracy was probably due to a lack of individuality rather than the emergence of that (...) individuality. We find the negative result of Hegel's general assessment of the contribution of an individual to democracy not only in relation to ancient democracy. In a similar sense he expresses himself about contemporary conditions. In the Reform Bill article he describes how a French voter makes up a ninety-millionth part of the legislative power and will therefore pay little attention to his contribution to the general public. Although the Athenian democracy was smaller and different from the French one, its citizens probably needed proof of the need for individual participation in it too. Sophocles' Electra served this purpose. How Elektra and Orestes re-paved the way for an essential institution of democracy, the court of justice, will not have escaped the onlookers' attention. In this play it was shown that individuality could have negative as well as positive consequences. After all, it was only through the appearance of Electra and Orestes that justice could be saved and become a public matter again. (shrink)

Mimesis and the portrayal of reflective life in action : Aristotle's Poetics and Sophocles' Oedipus the King -- The portrayal of reflective life in action in poetry : Shakespeare's dramatization of the poet in Sonnets 1-126 -- The portrayal of reflective life in action in music : Bach's Prelude and Fugue in B flat minor (The Well-Tempered Clavier, Book 1) and Beethoven's String Quartet in A minor, opus 132 -- The portrayal of reflective life in action in painting : (...) discovery of the inner life of sensory perception in watercolours by Turner and oil paintings by Cézanne. (shrink)

This article aims to develop a Lacanian approach to bioethics. Point of departure is the fact that both psychoanalysis and bioethics are practices of language, combining diagnostics with therapy. Subsequently, I will point out how Lacanian linguistics may help us to elucidate the dynamics of both psychoanalytical and bioethical discourse, using the movie One flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest and Sophocles’ tragedy Antigone as key examples. Next, I will explain the ‘topology’ of the bioethical landscape with the help of (...) Lacan’s three dimensions: the imaginary, the symbolical and the real. This will culminate in an assessment of the dynamics of bioethical discourse with the help of Lacan’s theorem of the four discourses. Bioethics, I will argue, is not a homogeneous discourse. Rather, four modalities of bioethical discourse can be distinguished, all of them displaying specific weaknesses and strengths, opportunities and threats. This will be elucidated with the help of two case studies, namely the debates on human reproductive technologies and on the use of animals as biomedical research models. (shrink)

Contrapondo-se às interpretações que sobrevalorizam o papel da razão nas escolhas dos fins morais, pretendo resgatar o papel positivo que a virtude do caráter, uma virtude não-racional, pode exercer em tais escolhas. Isto será feito levando em consideração a análise que Aristóteles faz da crise moral de Neoptólemo na tragédia Filoctetes.

A new interpretation of Hegel's reading of Sophocles's Antigone, focussing on Antigone's urge to action grounded in her religious feeling, on her facing the risk of death and the consequences of this move for her sense of self-awareness, becoming also conscious of her onesidedness in respect to Creon's (equally onesided) reasons.

This paper proposes that before the opening of Sophocles’ play Oedipus the King, the “hero” had to solve a lot of riddles.

P.E. Easterling presents a brief description of the life of Sophocles according to which he was “evidently a classic from the start.” I note a concern about the description, that all classics would seem to be classics from the start.

The author undertakes the problem of the identity of Western civilization in the light of a correlation between politics and religion. First, he traces the theoretical debates about the mutual correspondence of politics and religion in ancient Greece. Following two extreme errors depicted by Sophocles in his “Antigone,” and by Plato in his “Apology of Socrates,” he infers that the “Golden Mean” is necessary in resolving the problem of politics and religion. Then, he examines the underlying errors put forward (...) in the history. His investigations show the erroneousness of endowing either politics or religion with sovereign status in culture. There is always a conflict between politics and religion unless man regains his own sovereignty from them. Ultimately the author arrives at the conclusion that the “Golden Mean” correlating politics and religion distinctly strengthens the identity of the Western Civilization, and consists in respecting all real and universal parameters of human person life, such as cognition, freedom (and responsibility), love, agency in law, ontological sovereignty, and religious dignity. (shrink)

This paper presents two accounts of how Oedipus might have arrived at the answer to the Sphinx's riddle by proceeding methodically.

Ciência Política: Introdução à Sófocles*1 -/- Science Politics: Introduction to Sophocles -/- Emanuel Isaque Cordeiro da Silva*2 -/- Sófocles (496/4-406 a.C.) -/- 1 CONTEXTO HISTÓRICO: TEATRO E POLÍTICA -/- Na Grécia antiga, o teatro fazia parte das celebrações religiosas, especialmente nos rituais e representações dos festivais em homenagem ao deus Dionísio. A tragédia nasceu de tais circunstâncias, culminando seu apogeu no século V a.C., com as peças de Ésquilo*3 (525-456a.C.), SÓFOCLES*4 (496/4-406 a.C.) e Eurípedes*5 (480-406 a.C.). Pode-se dizer que, (...) contrário ao que ocorre normalmente, a arte não se deixou preceder pela filosofia, pois os poetas eram filósofos, pensando com sua própria mente e constituindo-se na vanguarda intelectual do seu tempo. -/- SÓFOCLES, em 468 a.C., ganhou do já consagrado Ésquilo, seu primeiro prêmio de tragédia, quando tinha vinte e sete anos. Ele nasceu em Colono, nas imediações de Atenas, filho de fabricante de espadas, que, com as guerras da Pérsia e do Peloponeso, aumentou seus serviços consideravelmente, enriquecendo a família. Não obstante, os demais atenienses empobreceram miseravelmente. SÓFOCLES era considerado bonito, inclusive sua estátua, que o representa na velhice, indica-lhe como um vigoroso homem. Era muito habilidoso em tudo o que fazia, tanto nas tragédias, como nas guerras e nos esportes. -/- Foi contemporâneo e amigo de Péricles*6 (495-429 a.C.), grande líder de Atenas, que lhe 6 ajudou a ocupar altos cargos, como o de tesoureiro e general, em 443 a.C. Em 440 a.C., encontrava-se entre os generais e comandantes das forças atenienses contra Pomos. Foi, ainda, membro do Comitê de Segurança Pública, votando a favor da Constituição oligárquica, em 411 a.C. Exerceu, também, funções de sacerdote. Era um homem alegre e amante dos prazeres, emanando encanto e simpatia, que lhes faziam perdoar os erros, envolvido com rapazes e cortesãs, inclusive teve um filho da célebre hetera Têoris.*7 Foi também contemporâneo de Eurípedes, ainda que nascido bem antes deste, mas ambos morreram no mesmo ano, em 406 a.C. -/- SÓFOCLES escreveu cento e treze peças, das quais só nos chegaram sete, nesta ordem de procedência, Ajax (c. 445 a.C.) As Traquínias (c. 445 a.C.), Antígona (c. 442), Édipo Rei (c. 425), Electra (c. 415), Filoteuto (409) e Édipo em Colono (401). Ganhou o primeiro prêmio de teatro, por dezenove vezes, tendo vinte e sete anos na primeira, e oitenta e cinco, na última. Governou o teatro ateniense por mais de trinta anos, da mesma maneira que seu amigo Péricles governava Atenas. -/- Escreveu uma trilogia não intencional, com as tragédias Édipo Rei (425 a.C.), Édipo em Colono (401 a.C.) e Antígona (442 a.C.). A primeira foi o mais famoso dos dramas gregos, tendo uma abertura impressionante, com a população diante do palácio real de Tebas. Havia uma peste que assolava a cidade, e isso os oráculos identificaram como decorrência de um grande crime. A clássica narrativa tratava de um filho, Édipo, que inadvertidamente matara o pai, Laio, e se casara com a mãe, Jocasta, com a qual teve quatro filhos: Antígona, Polinice, Etéocles e Ismênia. Quando tudo fora descoberto, Jocasta se enforcara e Édipo, enlouquecido, arrancara os próprios olhos e abandonara Tebas, partindo para o exílio em companhia apenas de Antígona. Já em Édipo em Colonos, este estava envelhecido a mendigar em Colono, perto de Atenas, apoiado apenas pela filha. -/- Antígona foi a última peça da trilogia, ainda que tenha sido a primeira a ser escrita. Ao tomar conhecimento de que seus irmãos Polinice e Etéocles estavam em guerra pelo trono de Tebas, regressou apressada para tentar apaziguá-los. Não obstante, eles lutaram até a morte. Creonte aliado de Etéocles, tomou o reino e puniu a rebeldia de Polinice, proibindo que fosse sepultado. Antígona, evocando a crença de que o espírito de um morto só se livrava das torturas da morte depois do corpo ser enterrado, violou o decreto de Creonte e sepultou seu irmão Polinice. Houve, então, o conflito entre as leis dos homens com as leis dos deuses, optando ela por esta, como esperavam as pessoas dignas de se comportarem. Antígona foi condenada pelo tio a ser enterrada viva, colocada em uma catacumba. Seu noivo, Hêmam, filho de Creonte, que desaparecera quando ela desobedecera o decreto real, voltou e encontrou sua prometida morta, suicidando-se em seguida.*8 O drama era denso em todos os seus elementos, mas se elevava quando discutia o comportamento que o cidadão devia ter frente às leis opressivas. -/- 2 DESOBEDIÊNCIA CIVIL: RECUSA DE ANTÍGONA -/- Antígona e sua irmã Ismênia representavam, respectivamente, os símbolos de resistência à tirania e de obediência à razão, colocando a lei de Creonte frente à lei da justiça. Diante do édito que impedia Antígona de sepultar Polinice, considerava a existência do direito natural de enterrá-lo, sendo este o seu drama político. Devia obedecer às leis da polis ou da consciência e dos princípios religiosos? Este drama é representado pelo magnífico texto de SÓFOCLES, quando Creonte perguntou se Antígona tripudiava sobre suas leis. Antígona lhe respondeu que: -/- “Essas leis não foram promulgadas por Zeus, nem mesmo a Justiça, que convive com os deuses do inferno, foi a que estabeleceu tais princípios para os homens. Ele ainda afirmou que os anúncios das leis de Creonte não tinham o poder que eles imaginavam que o tinha, e que um simples mortal pudesse suplantar os preceitos, não escritos e imutáveis dos deuses. Antígona ainda afirma que tais preceitos não foram de hora, como também não fora de ontem, mas que sempre vigoraram no mundo sensível, e que ninguém sabia ao certo de sua existência. Antígona afronta Creonte dizendo que por causa das leis do mesmo, não queria ser ela castigada perante os deuses por ter, de alguma forma, medo da ira e afronta de um reles mortal. Ainda diz que sua morte é algo inevitável, uma vez que é a única certeza dos homens, e que ela há de vir em um tempo, pois isso não se pode ignorar, todavia se sua morte não a tivesse sido anunciada antes, e que com isso morrera antes do tempo, o tomaria como vantagem, uma vez que, submetido as mais variadas intempéries da vida, como não iria considerar sua morte um benefício? E com isso, essa dor de nada vale no tocante de seu destino. Antígona continua dizendo que em nada o afeta ao ver o cadáver do filho morto de sua mãe na condição de insepulto, uma vez que isso não lhe causa dor . O mesmo conclui dizendo que se achara que ele cometera um ato de loucura após a proclamação de sua resposta, talvez o achasse louco aquele que viera a condená-lo.”*9 -/- O conflito entre a lei positiva, enunciava o drama grego, e a lei natural, significava que esta identificava-se com a Justiça dos deuses, que era superior à lei da terra.*10 Para Antígona, aquela deveria sempre prevalecer, mas a sua morte representou o triunfo, mesmo que trágico, da lei da polis.*11 SÓFOCLES foi quem primeiro falou do direito de resistência, inclusive com a possibilidade de se sofrer uma grave sanção, como ocorreu com Antígona, e ainda assim sabendo suportar a dor.*12 A teoria não logrou desenvolvimento na Grécia antiga, nem na teoria política antiga. Deixou, porém, uma indagação que só no século XVIII começou a ser respondida, pela forma clássica do direito de resistência. -/- NOTAS: *1: In. COSTA, N. N. Ciência Política. 3. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Forense, 2012. p. 61-67. *2: Tecnólogo em agropecuária pelo Instituto Federal de Pernambuco campus Belo Jardim. Normalista pela Escola Frei Cassiano Comacchio. Pesquisador assíduo de assuntos de cunho filosófico, com ênfase em política. *3: “Ésquilo, poeta grego (Elêusis, c. 525 – Gela, Sicília, 456 a.C.). Suas obras, As Suplicantes (c. 490), Os Persas (472), Os Sete contra Tebas (467), Prometeu Acorrentado (depois de 467) e a trilogia da Oréstia(Agamênom, Os Coéforos, As Eumênides) (458), fazem dele o verdadeiro criador da tragédia grega” (KOOGAN/HOUAISS. Enciclopédia e Dicionário Ilustrado, op. cit., p. 622). *4: “Sofócles, o poeta trágico grego (Colono, perto de Atenas, entre 496 e 494 a.C., Atenas 406 a.C.). Amigo de Péricles e Heródoto, cidadão completo, obteve, durante sua carreira excepcional, mais de 20 vitórias em concursos dramáticos. De sua obra, apenas sete tragédias, entre as mais de uma centena, e um drama satírico, do qual só restam longos fragmentos, Os Cães de Caça, chegaram até nós: Ajax (c. 445 a.C.), Trachiniani (c. 445?), Antígona(442), Édipo rei (c. 425), Electra (c. 415), Filotecto (409), Édipo em Colono (401). Deu à tragédia sua configuração definitiva: elevando de 12 para 15 o número de integrantes do coro,acrescentou um terceiro ator e substituiu atrilogia unida pela trilogia livre, onde cada drama forma um todo. Em Sófocles, a ação da tragédia é levada a termo pela vontade e pelas paixões do herói, indivíduo excepcional que, em luta contra um destino que o oprime, continua livre” (Grande Enciclopédia Larousse Cultural, op. cit., vol. 22, p. 5.441). *5: “Eurípedes, poeta trágico grego (Salamina, 480 – Macedônia, 406,a.C.), cujas obras mais célebres são: Alcestes (438), Medeia (431), Hipólito (428), Andrômaca (c. 426), Hécuba (c. 424), Íon (c. 418), Ifigênia em Áulida, As Bacantes. Eurípedes introduziu várias inovações na tragédia: ênfase na análise psicológica, preocupações científica e filosóficas, coros independentes da ação, introdução de personagens do povo” (KOOGAN/HOUAISS. Enciclopédia e Dicionário Ilustrado, op. cit., p. 642). *6: Vide nota 7 do capítulo II, Herôdotos. *7: “Más-línguas afirmam que Sófocles consumou sua velhice com a hetera Têoris, tendo um filho. Seu filho legítimo Iófas, talvez temendo que o poeta legasse ao filho de Têoris, levantou contra ele uma ação judicial,acusando-o de servil e incapaz da administração dos bens, Sófocles, para provar sua lucidez, fez perante os juízes a leitura de certos trechos da peça que na ocasião estava escrevendo, e que se julgou ser Édipo em Colono, ao término da leitura, os juízes não só o absolveram como o acompanharam até sua casa” (DURANT, Will. História da Civilização Mundial: nossa herança clássica, op. cit., vol. II, p. 314). *8: SÓFOCLES. Antígona. Brasília: Universidade de Brasília, 1997, p. 45. *9: Idem, op. cit., pp. 41-2. *10: “Aquela (Antígona), porém, prefere ficar com as ordens mais altas dos deuses, inacessíveis à maldade humana” (MACHADO PAUPÉRIO, A. O Direito Político de Resistência. 2ª ed. Rio de Janeiro: Forense, 1978, p. 38). *11: “Antígona, entretanto, rebelou-se contra o edital de Creonte, considerando o sepultamento um dever mais forte que as leis dos homens, principalmente em se tratando de parentes, e cumpriu, embora sumariamente, os ritos fúnebres de Polinice” (KURY, Mário da Gama. Dicionário de Mitologia Grega e Romana. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Sales, 1990, p. 35). *12: “No século V a.C., os grandes trágicos gregos, Ésquilo, Sófocles e Eurípedes, empregavam os mitos antigos para explorar os mais profundos temas da condição humana” (TARNAS, Richard. A Epopeia do Pensamento Ocidental: para compreender as ideias que molduram nossa visão de mundo. 2ª ed. Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand Brasil, 2000, p. 33). -/- . (shrink)

This study investigates Phillipe Lacoue-Labarthe's claim in "The Caesura of the Speculative" that Hölderlin is a "modern" writer. Its aim is to establish what is at stake in this claim and to evaluate whether it can be substantiated. In Chapter One I discuss the relationship between tragedy and philosophy. I show that the uneasy relationship between philosophy and the arts is premised upon Plato's understanding and judgement of mimesis. I contrast Plato and Aristotle's treatment of poetry by examining how they (...) understand the mimetic process. In Chapter Two I focus on Hölderlin's understanding of the relationship between Ancient Greece and 18th Century Germany. After discussing the background to Hölderlin's work I provide detailed readings of two texts, The Perspective from which We Have to Look at Antiquity, (1799) and the first letter to Böhlendorff, dating from 1801. I argue that in these texts Hölderlin, through his acknowledgement of the divided nature of Greek culture, offers a unique understanding of the relationship between Greece and Germany which isolates him from his contemporaries. In Chapters Three and Four, I examine Hölderlin's understanding of tragedy. After establishing the centrality of the aesthetic presentation for Hölderlin's project I examine the "poetological" writings which date from 1798-1800. I give a close analysis of the implications of Hölderlin's statement that the tragic "is the metaphor of an intellectual intuition" which occurs in the text On the Difference of the Poetic Modes, (1800), showing why the tragic form is central to Hölderlin's poetological project. To illustrate the problems inherent in this project, in Chapter Four I examine Hölderlin's attempts to write a tragic drama which corresponds to his theoretical beliefs. I discuss the two theoretical texts - The Ground to Empedocles and Becoming in Dissolution - which accompany Hölderlin's drama Empedocles. In analysing these texts I argue that there is an inherent tension between the presuppositions of the theory and the way they can be realised in the drama. In Chapter Five, I turn to Hölderlin's final work, his project to translate Sophocles' tragedies. Through close analysis of the theoretical Remarks which accompany the translations, I show how Hölderlin's theoretical and poetological interests in Greece and Tragedy are brought together through this project. I argue that these texts give an insight into the problems which confront Hölderlin's poetological project. However, simultaneously, these texts provide an alternative way of understanding the function of the tragic form. In this discussion I show how the questions concerning the status of dramatic mimesis and the "mimetic" relation between Greece and Germany coincide in the analysis of Sophocles' dramas. In conclusion I return briefly to the questions that I raised in the introduction concerning the status of tragedy in the present time, and assess the accuracy of the claim that Hölderlin is a "modern" thinker. (shrink)

In the 5th century BCE, Sophocles wrote a tragedy about the rivalry between the Greek heroes Ajax and Odysseus. The two competed for the title of most valuable man in the army that was laying siege to Troy. The prize was Achilles’ armor (he was dead, you know), which was forged by none other than the god Hephaestus. The Greeks’ leader, Agamemnon, was a bit of a coward, and he made a jury of soldiers decide the contest instead of (...) taking responsibility for the decision himself. The soldiers unanimously awarded the armor to Odysseus (who eventually did lead them to victory, via his Trojan Horse stratagem), even though Ajax had arguably been the more valiant soldier, and many owed their life to his bravery in battle. As a result of the decision against him, Ajax was irreparably wounded in his honor, became temporarily mad, attacked his superiors, and ended up committing suicide. (shrink)

This book presents a new account of Thales based on the idea that Acheloios, a deity equated with water in the ancient Greek world and found in Miletos during Thales’ life, was the most important cultic deity influencing the thinker, profoundly shaping his philosophical worldview. In doing so, it also weighs in on the metaphysical and epistemological dichotomy that seemingly underlies all academia—the antithesis of the methodological postulate of Marxian dialectical materialism vis-à-vis the Platonic idea of fundamentally real transcendental forms. (...) Unbeknownst to many scholars, there are various Neo-Marxian thinkers that position the origin of coinage as the pivotal technological development giving rise to impersonal “metaphysical cosmology,” suggesting that the value of money was more-or-less projected back onto the cosmos in the form of “ideal substances.” While the arguments are incredibly sophisticated and persuasive, their conclusions (either stated or implied) are rather difficult to swallow: the self is merely an illusion, abstract ideas of an ultimate source of value, like God or the Good, are totally delusional (as is the soul, and presumably any notion of inherent human dignity), and essentially everything is reducible to mankind’s enslavement to commodities and the notion of our own objectified labor, which is the true source of all value according to Marx. Not only is this an alarming belief that many scholars (consciously or unconsciously) have adopted, since essentially any action could be “justified,” it is also demonstrably false, since it rests on a misunderstanding of Thales and misconception of philosophy as such. -/- My work rectifies that misunderstanding. In an important sense, it is an attempt at redefining philosophy as a “love of wisdom,” which I argue was accurate even in the Presocratic setting, and it uses the influence of Acheloios on Thales to do so. Throughout its pages I explore the etymology and historical uses of the word ὔδωρ, examine the archaeological context of 7th to 6th century Miletos, consider various aquatic myths Thales encountered, and highlight a hitherto overlooked tradition stemming from Thales and influencing such thinkers as Pythagoras, Empedokles, and Hippo, which culminates in a completely new reading of Plato’s Phaedrus, a dialogue in which Plato responds to the exact type of thinking employed by the Neo-Marxians. It is there that we find Socrates and Phaedrus surrounded by the iconography of Acheloios and the nymphs, all while they lie reclined like river gods (the sinews of Acheloios) on the banks of the Ilisos. And it is in that dialogue that Plato defines philosophy as a love of wisdom—the beholding of a multiplicity of hermeneutical frameworks—and alludes to the fact that it began with the sacrifice of Acheloios, the initial philosophical maneuver which he attributes to Thales. The book ends with a threefold rejoinder to the Neo-Marxian school, corresponding to the λόγος, μῦθος, and ἔργον of Acheloios. It turns out that, (1) the λόγος of Acheloios contained the ideal preconditions conducive to an abstraction to a more refined philosophical worldview in which divine water operated as the One among the Many; (2) the μῦθος of Acheloios actually encouraged the application of the notion of sacrifice to Acheloios himself (thus revealing his essence as divine water); and, (3), the ἔργον of Acheloios, in which he kneels in assent to sacrifice, is found on a coin that was probably designed by Thales. In the final analysis, I suggest that the tradition of Acheloios is reflective of a greater philosophical truth, and that by following Thales’ lead, we transcend the Marxian hermeneutic of doubt and reorient ourselves toward the οὐσια ὄντως οὖσα. (shrink)

At first glance, Aristotle’s Politics is a repository of dry, professorial lecture notes. Although the work contains the occasional literary reference or historical digression, analysis, argumentation, and socio-political taxonomies predominate. Beneath the surface of such prose, Pangle locates an Aristotle who seeks to involve the reader in dialogical exchange—much like as in a Platonic dialogue—by means of dialectical, rhetorical and literary devices. Pangle—a student of the political theorist Leo Strauss, a translator of Plato, Aristophanes and Sophocles, and the author (...) of books on modern political theorists such as Montesquieu, Locke, and the Federalist Papers—has written a study of the Politics informed not only by a close reading of the text, but also its relationship to modern republicanism, and the conflict between rationalism and religion. A previously published introduction presents what Pangle takes to be Aristotle’s rhetorical strategy in the Politics; it is followed by chapters organized around individual books in the Politics (a chapter each for Politics I, II, and III, and consolidated chapters for Politics IV-VI and VII-VIII—the last of which had been previously published in part). The text is followed by almost 50 pages of notes, notes in which Aquinas is cited as frequently (and sometimes more frequently) than contemporary Aristotle scholars like P. Simpson, R. Kraut, and E. Schütrumpf and Alfarabi is cited more frequently than F. Miller (although by far the most frequently cited authorities are the 19th century scholars F. Susemihl, R.D. Hicks, and above all, W. Newman). The book is clearly a mature work of scholarship, informed by extended reflection on Aristotle’s Politics and the subsequent western tradition of political theory and philological commentary which has responded to it. (shrink)