What do you think?
Rate this book
De store tænkere
Plato: Complete Works
Outstanding translations by leading contemporary scholars--many commissioned especially for this volume--are presented here in the first single edition to include the entire surviving corpus of works attributed to Plato in antiquity. In his introductory essay, John Cooper explains the presentation of these works, discusses questions concerning the chronology of their composition, comments on the dialogue form in which Plato wrote, and offers guidance on approaching the reading and study of Plato's works. Also included are concise introductions by Cooper and Hutchinson to each translation, meticulous annotation designed to serve both scholar and general reader, and a comprehensive index. This handsome volume offers fine paper and a high-quality Smyth-sewn cloth binding in a sturdy, elegant edition.
1848 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 348
About the author
Plato
5,163 books7,397 followersPlato (Greek: Πλάτων), born Aristocles (c. 427 – 348 BC), was an ancient Greek philosopher of the Classical period who is considered a foundational thinker in Western philosophy and an innovator of the written dialogue and dialectic forms. He raised problems for what became all the major areas of both theoretical philosophy and practical philosophy, and was the founder of the Platonic Academy, a philosophical school in Athens where Plato taught the doctrines that would later become known as Platonism.
Plato's most famous contribution is the theory of forms (or ideas), which has been interpreted as advancing a solution to what is now known as the problem of universals. He was decisively influenced by the pre-Socratic thinkers Pythagoras, Heraclitus, and Parmenides, although much of what is known about them is derived from Plato himself.
Along with his teacher Socrates, and Aristotle, his student, Plato is a central figure in the history of philosophy. Plato's entire body of work is believed to have survived intact for over 2,400 years—unlike that of nearly all of his contemporaries. Although their popularity has fluctuated, they have consistently been read and studied through the ages. Through Neoplatonism, he also greatly influenced both Christian and Islamic philosophy. In modern times, Alfred North Whitehead famously said: "the safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato."
Plato's most famous contribution is the theory of forms (or ideas), which has been interpreted as advancing a solution to what is now known as the problem of universals. He was decisively influenced by the pre-Socratic thinkers Pythagoras, Heraclitus, and Parmenides, although much of what is known about them is derived from Plato himself.
Along with his teacher Socrates, and Aristotle, his student, Plato is a central figure in the history of philosophy. Plato's entire body of work is believed to have survived intact for over 2,400 years—unlike that of nearly all of his contemporaries. Although their popularity has fluctuated, they have consistently been read and studied through the ages. Through Neoplatonism, he also greatly influenced both Christian and Islamic philosophy. In modern times, Alfred North Whitehead famously said: "the safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 227 reviews
October 1, 2021
Complete Works (The Collected Works #1-4), Plato
The collection includes works such as the Apology, Creighton, Protagoras, Lineris, Lames, Pharmides; Otifren, Gerelias, Menon, Party, Feydon; Hippus the Great, Eun, Alcibiades, Hippiasus, Menxus, Cratilus, Otidem; Republic; ؛ Parmands, Phyllis, Nimagus, Critias, Samas.
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز نخست ماه سپتامبر سال 1977میلادی؛ دومین خوانش: روز چهارم ماه مارس سال 1997میلادی
عنوان: دوره آثار افلاطون چهار جلدی؛ افلاطون؛ مترجم: محمدحسن لطفی؛ تهران، خوارزمی، 1356، در 2508ص؛ شامل: آپولوژی، کریتون، پروتاگوراس، لین‍ریس، لامس، فارمیدس؛ اوتیفرن، گرلیاس، منون، مهمانی، فایدون؛ هیپیاس بزرگ، ایون، آلکیبیادس، هیپیاس کوچک، منکسوس، کراتیل‍وس، اوتیدم؛ جمهوری؛ فایدروس، ته مه تئوس، سوفیست، مرد سیاسی؛ پارمیندس، فیلس، نیماژوس، کریتیاس، سامه ها؛ نوشتارهای نویسندگان یونان - سده 04پیش از میلادی
شرح کتاب: «آریستوکلس»، نامدار به «افلاطون»، یا «پلاتون»، یکی از فیلسوفان بزرگ سه گانه ی یونانی («سقراط»، «افلاطون» و «ارسطو») است؛ «افلاطون» نخستین فیلسوفی است، که آثار مکتوب، از ایشان، بر جای مانده است؛ بسیاری ایشان را بزرگ‍ترین فیلسوف تاریخ می‌دانند؛ در «آتن» در سال427پیش از میلاد، در یک خانواده ی توانمند سیاسی، و اشرافی، به این دنیا آمدند؛ «فیثاغورث» تأثیر بسیاری بر ایشان گذاشت؛ ایشان در بیست سالگی، دانشجو و شاگرد «سقراط» شدند؛ این مصاحبت و شاگردی، به مدت هشت سال ادامه یافت؛ «افلاطون» در سال399پیش از میلاد، شاهد اعدام خودخواسته ی آموزگار، و استاد خویش «سقراط»، به حكم دادگاه «آتن» بود؛ و ایشان در اینباره نوشته اند که «سقراط، پیشنهاد فرار از «آتن» را رد کرد»؛ مهمترين برهان آن گزینش، برای اثبات حقانیت «سقراط»، برای انكار «خدايان المپ»، و نفی نظام دموكرات «یونان» بود؛ پس از «سقراط»، «افلاطون» «آتن» را ترک کردند؛ ایشان برای چندین سال در شهرهای «یونان»، و کشورهای بیگانه به گردش پرداختند؛ پس از سفری به «سیسیل» در سال387پیش از میلاد، در چهل سالگی خویش، دوباره به «آتن» بازگشتند؛ و مکتبی فلسفی ایجاد کردند، که به نام «آکادمی» مشهور است؛ تعلیمات ایشان، در آن‌جا بر اثر دو بار سفری که در سال366پیش از میلاد، و سال361پیش از میلاد، به «سیسیل» داشتند، به تعویق افتاد؛ «افلاطون» در سال347پیش از میلاد از این جهان درگذشتند، و رهبری آکادمی را به خواهرزاده ی خود، که شاگردش نیز بود، واگذاشتند؛
مهم‌ترین کتابی که از «افلاطون» بر جای مانده، «رساله ی جمهور» است؛ برخی از «افلاطون» شناسان باور دارند، «افلاطون» جملاتی را به این رساله افزوده، و در حقیقت ایشان سخن‌ها، و اندیشه های خودش را، از زبان «سقراط» بیان کرده است؛ در همه ی آثار «افلاطون»، می‌توان گفتگوهای «سقراط» را، با اشخاص گوناگون، به طور دقیق و با ذکر نام دید.؛ «رساله ی جمهور»، هنر و زیبایی را، از دیدگاه «افلاطون»، و «سقراط»، به بهترین وجه نشان می‌دهد.؛ این رساله، گفتگوی «سقراط» با «گلاوکن (برادر افلاطون)»، «سیمیاس»، «هیپوکراتس» و چند فرد دیگر است؛ اثر دیگر «افلاطون»: «ضیافت» یا «سمپوزیوم» است، که رساله ای درباره ی عشق است.؛ این رساله یک حالت روایی و داستانی دارد، که در یکی از مهمانی‌های «آتن»، که «سقراط» نیز حضور دارد، روی می‌دهد.؛ «افلاطون» در دو اثر مهم خود «جمهور» و «ضیافت» به دو اصل مهم «منطق» و «احساس» می‌پردازد.؛ در رور سوم ماه اکتبر سال1469میلادی، «مارچیلیو فی چینو» در شهر «فلورانس ایتالیا»، ترجمه ی نوشتارهای «افلاطون» را به پایان رسانید، که با انتشار آنها، اروپا وارد عصر روشنگری شد.؛ این آثار و آثار سایر متفکران عهد باستان «یونان»، که نخست به زبان «لاتین» و سپس «فرانسه»، «انگلیسی» و «آلمانی» ترجمه شد، افق تازه ای را به روی اروپاییان باز کرد.؛ این آثار که در «قسطنطنیه (استانبول)» نگهداری می‌شد، پس از تصرف شهر، به دست «عثمانی»ها در سال1453میلادی، توسط دانشمندان فراری به «ایتالیا» برده شد؛
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 03/09/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 08/07/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
The collection includes works such as the Apology, Creighton, Protagoras, Lineris, Lames, Pharmides; Otifren, Gerelias, Menon, Party, Feydon; Hippus the Great, Eun, Alcibiades, Hippiasus, Menxus, Cratilus, Otidem; Republic; ؛ Parmands, Phyllis, Nimagus, Critias, Samas.
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز نخست ماه سپتامبر سال 1977میلادی؛ دومین خوانش: روز چهارم ماه مارس سال 1997میلادی
عنوان: دوره آثار افلاطون چهار جلدی؛ افلاطون؛ مترجم: محمدحسن لطفی؛ تهران، خوارزمی، 1356، در 2508ص؛ شامل: آپولوژی، کریتون، پروتاگوراس، لین‍ریس، لامس، فارمیدس؛ اوتیفرن، گرلیاس، منون، مهمانی، فایدون؛ هیپیاس بزرگ، ایون، آلکیبیادس، هیپیاس کوچک، منکسوس، کراتیل‍وس، اوتیدم؛ جمهوری؛ فایدروس، ته مه تئوس، سوفیست، مرد سیاسی؛ پارمیندس، فیلس، نیماژوس، کریتیاس، سامه ها؛ نوشتارهای نویسندگان یونان - سده 04پیش از میلادی
شرح کتاب: «آریستوکلس»، نامدار به «افلاطون»، یا «پلاتون»، یکی از فیلسوفان بزرگ سه گانه ی یونانی («سقراط»، «افلاطون» و «ارسطو») است؛ «افلاطون» نخستین فیلسوفی است، که آثار مکتوب، از ایشان، بر جای مانده است؛ بسیاری ایشان را بزرگ‍ترین فیلسوف تاریخ می‌دانند؛ در «آتن» در سال427پیش از میلاد، در یک خانواده ی توانمند سیاسی، و اشرافی، به این دنیا آمدند؛ «فیثاغورث» تأثیر بسیاری بر ایشان گذاشت؛ ایشان در بیست سالگی، دانشجو و شاگرد «سقراط» شدند؛ این مصاحبت و شاگردی، به مدت هشت سال ادامه یافت؛ «افلاطون» در سال399پیش از میلاد، شاهد اعدام خودخواسته ی آموزگار، و استاد خویش «سقراط»، به حكم دادگاه «آتن» بود؛ و ایشان در اینباره نوشته اند که «سقراط، پیشنهاد فرار از «آتن» را رد کرد»؛ مهمترين برهان آن گزینش، برای اثبات حقانیت «سقراط»، برای انكار «خدايان المپ»، و نفی نظام دموكرات «یونان» بود؛ پس از «سقراط»، «افلاطون» «آتن» را ترک کردند؛ ایشان برای چندین سال در شهرهای «یونان»، و کشورهای بیگانه به گردش پرداختند؛ پس از سفری به «سیسیل» در سال387پیش از میلاد، در چهل سالگی خویش، دوباره به «آتن» بازگشتند؛ و مکتبی فلسفی ایجاد کردند، که به نام «آکادمی» مشهور است؛ تعلیمات ایشان، در آن‌جا بر اثر دو بار سفری که در سال366پیش از میلاد، و سال361پیش از میلاد، به «سیسیل» داشتند، به تعویق افتاد؛ «افلاطون» در سال347پیش از میلاد از این جهان درگذشتند، و رهبری آکادمی را به خواهرزاده ی خود، که شاگردش نیز بود، واگذاشتند؛
مهم‌ترین کتابی که از «افلاطون» بر جای مانده، «رساله ی جمهور» است؛ برخی از «افلاطون» شناسان باور دارند، «افلاطون» جملاتی را به این رساله افزوده، و در حقیقت ایشان سخن‌ها، و اندیشه های خودش را، از زبان «سقراط» بیان کرده است؛ در همه ی آثار «افلاطون»، می‌توان گفتگوهای «سقراط» را، با اشخاص گوناگون، به طور دقیق و با ذکر نام دید.؛ «رساله ی جمهور»، هنر و زیبایی را، از دیدگاه «افلاطون»، و «سقراط»، به بهترین وجه نشان می‌دهد.؛ این رساله، گفتگوی «سقراط» با «گلاوکن (برادر افلاطون)»، «سیمیاس»، «هیپوکراتس» و چند فرد دیگر است؛ اثر دیگر «افلاطون»: «ضیافت» یا «سمپوزیوم» است، که رساله ای درباره ی عشق است.؛ این رساله یک حالت روایی و داستانی دارد، که در یکی از مهمانی‌های «آتن»، که «سقراط» نیز حضور دارد، روی می‌دهد.؛ «افلاطون» در دو اثر مهم خود «جمهور» و «ضیافت» به دو اصل مهم «منطق» و «احساس» می‌پردازد.؛ در رور سوم ماه اکتبر سال1469میلادی، «مارچیلیو فی چینو» در شهر «فلورانس ایتالیا»، ترجمه ی نوشتارهای «افلاطون» را به پایان رسانید، که با انتشار آنها، اروپا وارد عصر روشنگری شد.؛ این آثار و آثار سایر متفکران عهد باستان «یونان»، که نخست به زبان «لاتین» و سپس «فرانسه»، «انگلیسی» و «آلمانی» ترجمه شد، افق تازه ای را به روی اروپاییان باز کرد.؛ این آثار که در «قسطنطنیه (استانبول)» نگهداری می‌شد، پس از تصرف شهر، به دست «عثمانی»ها در سال1453میلادی، توسط دانشمندان فراری به «ایتالیا» برده شد؛
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 03/09/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 08/07/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
October 2, 2021
Complete Works, Plato
Plato was a philosopher in Classical Greece and the founder of the Academy in Athens, the first institution of higher learning in the Western world. He is widely considered the most pivotal figure in the development of philosophy, especially the Western tradition. Unlike nearly all of his philosophical contemporaries, Plato's entire work is believed to have survived intact for over 2,400 years. Others believe that the oldest extant manuscript dates to circa. AD 895, 1100 years after Plato's death.
"Platonism" and its theory of Forms (or theory of Ideas) denies the reality of the material world, considering it only an image or copy of the real world. The theory of Forms is first introduced in the Phaedo dialogue (also known as On the Soul), wherein Socrates refutes the pluralism of the likes of Anaxagoras, then the most popular response to Heraclitus and Parmenides, while giving the "Opposites Argument" in support of the Forms.
According to this theory of Forms there are at least two worlds: the apparent world of concrete objects, grasped by the senses, which constantly changes, and an unchanging and unseen world of Forms or abstract objects, grasped by pure reason. which ground what is apparent.
It can also be said there are three worlds, with the apparent world consisting of both the world of material objects and of mental images, with the "third realm" consisting of the Forms. Thus, though there is the term "Platonic idealism", this refers to Platonic Ideas or the Forms, and not to some platonic kind of idealism, an 18th-century view which sees matter as unreal in favor of mind. For Plato, though grasped by the mind, only the Forms are truly real.
Plato's Forms thus represent types of things, as well as properties, patterns, and relations, to which we refer as objects. Just as individual tables, chairs, and cars refer to objects in this world, 'tableness', 'chairness', and 'carness', as well as e. g. justice, truth, and beauty refer to objects in another world. One of Plato's most cited examples for the Forms were the truths of geometry, such as the Pythagorean theorem.
In other words, the Forms are universals given as a solution to the problem of universals, or the problem of "the One and the Many", e. g. how one predicate "red" can apply to many red objects. For Plato this is because there is one abstract object or Form of red, redness itself, in which the several red things "participate". As Plato's solution is that universals are Forms and that Forms are real if anything is, Plato's philosophy is unambiguously called Platonic realism. According to Aristotle, Plato's best known argument in support of the Forms was the "one over many" argument.
تاریخ آخرین خوانش: در ماه مارس سال 1997میلادی
عنوان: آثار افلاطون؛ نویسنده: افلاطون؛ موضوع آثار نویسندگان یونان - سده 04پیش از میلادی
عنوان: دوره آثار افلاطون؛ نویسنده: افلاطون؛ مترجم: محمدحسن لطفی؛ رضا کاویانی؛ تهران، در 6 جلد؛
افلاطون (428/427پ.م تا 348/347پ.م)، یکی از فیلسوفان بزرگ «آتنی» در عصر کلاسیک «یونان» بوده است؛ به تعبیر «دیوگنوس لائرتیوسی» نام ایشان «آریستوکلِس» بود، و چون ایشان هیکل تنومندی داشتند، به ایشان لقب «افلاطون» را دادند؛ همچنین بسیاری ایشانرا بزرگ‍ترین فیلسوف تاریخ می‌دانند، «افلاطون» در کنار استاد خویش «سقراط» و شاگرد خویش «ارسطو»، یکی از سه فیلسوف بزرگ «یونان» باستان بوده اند؛ دو ایده ی اصلی «افلاطون»، در اندیشه و آثار ایشان، نخستینش ایده ی «شهریاران فیلسوف» است، آنها کسانی هستند، که اگر قرار باشد؛ آرمانشهر ایشان شکل بپذیرد، می‌بایست قدرت را در دست بگیرند، و دومین ایده «مُثُل»، یا نظریه ی «ایده ها»، همان برهان «افلاطون» است بر اینکه «مُثُل (یا ایده‌ها) غیر فیزیکی (اما مادی)، نمودار درست‌ترین راستی هستند، «افلاطون» تنها از زبان شخصیت‌های دیالوگ‌هایش (بیشتر «سقراط») از این راست بودن سخن ��ی‌گویند؛ شخصیت‌هایی که برخی مواقع می‌گویند که این «مُثُل» تنها اموری هستند، که می‌توانند «دانش» را فراهم کنند؛ بدین ترتیب، جدا از نظریات بسیار بحث انگیز در اینباره، دیدگاه‌های خود «افلاطون» نیز، پر از شک و تردیدند؛ با اینحال، این نظریه «مُثُل»، راه حلی کلاسیک، برای گشودن «مسئله ماوراء الطبیعه» است؛ «مُثُل» جمع مثال است، و به معنی فرم‌ها یا شکل‌ها (اشکال) به کار می‌رود؛ این واژه، به معنی شکل (فرم) یا نمود (ظاهر)، مورد استفاده ی ایشان قرار می‌گیرد؛ پرسشی که درباره ی «نمود» یا «ظاهر» می‌آید، اینست که «فرم یا مُثُل واقعی» چیست؟، و چگونگی ارتباطش با ماده چگونه است؟ بدین ترتیب است، که «تئوری ماده و فرم» با نام امروزین «هایلومورفیسم» زاده می‌شود؛ نظریه ی «مُثُل» را، بی‌تردید می‌توان نقطه ی سنگینی و اتکای «فلسفه ی افلاطون» دانست، که کل منظومه ی فکری ایشان، اعم از «هستی شناسی»، «معرفت شناسی»، «منطق»، «اخلاق»، «سیاست» و حتی «هنر» بر مدار آن می‌چرخدد
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 22/08/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 09/07/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
Plato was a philosopher in Classical Greece and the founder of the Academy in Athens, the first institution of higher learning in the Western world. He is widely considered the most pivotal figure in the development of philosophy, especially the Western tradition. Unlike nearly all of his philosophical contemporaries, Plato's entire work is believed to have survived intact for over 2,400 years. Others believe that the oldest extant manuscript dates to circa. AD 895, 1100 years after Plato's death.
"Platonism" and its theory of Forms (or theory of Ideas) denies the reality of the material world, considering it only an image or copy of the real world. The theory of Forms is first introduced in the Phaedo dialogue (also known as On the Soul), wherein Socrates refutes the pluralism of the likes of Anaxagoras, then the most popular response to Heraclitus and Parmenides, while giving the "Opposites Argument" in support of the Forms.
According to this theory of Forms there are at least two worlds: the apparent world of concrete objects, grasped by the senses, which constantly changes, and an unchanging and unseen world of Forms or abstract objects, grasped by pure reason. which ground what is apparent.
It can also be said there are three worlds, with the apparent world consisting of both the world of material objects and of mental images, with the "third realm" consisting of the Forms. Thus, though there is the term "Platonic idealism", this refers to Platonic Ideas or the Forms, and not to some platonic kind of idealism, an 18th-century view which sees matter as unreal in favor of mind. For Plato, though grasped by the mind, only the Forms are truly real.
Plato's Forms thus represent types of things, as well as properties, patterns, and relations, to which we refer as objects. Just as individual tables, chairs, and cars refer to objects in this world, 'tableness', 'chairness', and 'carness', as well as e. g. justice, truth, and beauty refer to objects in another world. One of Plato's most cited examples for the Forms were the truths of geometry, such as the Pythagorean theorem.
In other words, the Forms are universals given as a solution to the problem of universals, or the problem of "the One and the Many", e. g. how one predicate "red" can apply to many red objects. For Plato this is because there is one abstract object or Form of red, redness itself, in which the several red things "participate". As Plato's solution is that universals are Forms and that Forms are real if anything is, Plato's philosophy is unambiguously called Platonic realism. According to Aristotle, Plato's best known argument in support of the Forms was the "one over many" argument.
تاریخ آخرین خوانش: در ماه مارس سال 1997میلادی
عنوان: آثار افلاطون؛ نویسنده: افلاطون؛ موضوع آثار نویسندگان یونان - سده 04پیش از میلادی
عنوان: دوره آثار افلاطون؛ نویسنده: افلاطون؛ مترجم: محمدحسن لطفی؛ رضا کاویانی؛ تهران، در 6 جلد؛
افلاطون (428/427پ.م تا 348/347پ.م)، یکی از فیلسوفان بزرگ «آتنی» در عصر کلاسیک «یونان» بوده است؛ به تعبیر «دیوگنوس لائرتیوسی» نام ایشان «آریستوکلِس» بود، و چون ایشان هیکل تنومندی داشتند، به ایشان لقب «افلاطون» را دادند؛ همچنین بسیاری ایشانرا بزرگ‍ترین فیلسوف تاریخ می‌دانند، «افلاطون» در کنار استاد خویش «سقراط» و شاگرد خویش «ارسطو»، یکی از سه فیلسوف بزرگ «یونان» باستان بوده اند؛ دو ایده ی اصلی «افلاطون»، در اندیشه و آثار ایشان، نخستینش ایده ی «شهریاران فیلسوف» است، آنها کسانی هستند، که اگر قرار باشد؛ آرمانشهر ایشان شکل بپذیرد، می‌بایست قدرت را در دست بگیرند، و دومین ایده «مُثُل»، یا نظریه ی «ایده ها»، همان برهان «افلاطون» است بر اینکه «مُثُل (یا ایده‌ها) غیر فیزیکی (اما مادی)، نمودار درست‌ترین راستی هستند، «افلاطون» تنها از زبان شخصیت‌های دیالوگ‌هایش (بیشتر «سقراط») از این راست بودن سخن ��ی‌گویند؛ شخصیت‌هایی که برخی مواقع می‌گویند که این «مُثُل» تنها اموری هستند، که می‌توانند «دانش» را فراهم کنند؛ بدین ترتیب، جدا از نظریات بسیار بحث انگیز در اینباره، دیدگاه‌های خود «افلاطون» نیز، پر از شک و تردیدند؛ با اینحال، این نظریه «مُثُل»، راه حلی کلاسیک، برای گشودن «مسئله ماوراء الطبیعه» است؛ «مُثُل» جمع مثال است، و به معنی فرم‌ها یا شکل‌ها (اشکال) به کار می‌رود؛ این واژه، به معنی شکل (فرم) یا نمود (ظاهر)، مورد استفاده ی ایشان قرار می‌گیرد؛ پرسشی که درباره ی «نمود» یا «ظاهر» می‌آید، اینست که «فرم یا مُثُل واقعی» چیست؟، و چگونگی ارتباطش با ماده چگونه است؟ بدین ترتیب است، که «تئوری ماده و فرم» با نام امروزین «هایلومورفیسم» زاده می‌شود؛ نظریه ی «مُثُل» را، بی‌تردید می‌توان نقطه ی سنگینی و اتکای «فلسفه ی افلاطون» دانست، که کل منظومه ی فکری ایشان، اعم از «هستی شناسی»، «معرفت شناسی»، «منطق»، «اخلاق»، «سیاست» و حتی «هنر» بر مدار آن می‌چرخدد
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 22/08/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 09/07/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
May 3, 2018
The dialogues of Plato have helped renew my faith in life and humanity. In college I learned that 1) there is no truth, 2) every assertion is merely someone's perspective and 3) all meaningful inquiry involves a deconstruction of someone else's thoughts (i.e. someone deluded enough not to know that there isn't any truth and that all is perspective). But Plato believed in reason, in the reality of goodness (i.e., the better choice), and in the value of the struggle to understand ourselves and the world. He is always fascinating and often hilarious. Sometimes my mouth drops open at the depth of his thought. Throw in the tinge of gay erotica always around the corner (many dialogues begin with Socrates admiring a brave young buck tossing a discus) and you have a spicy, life-loving, humorous mixture. The sheer respect Plato shows his reader is heads and shoulders above the attitude of most writers. If you've got the time, do yourself the favor of reading this book.
January 24, 2023
Doth Socrates not like young beautiful males?
And is it not true I am young, relatively beautiful, and biologically male?
Not just on the outside, but inside beauty too?
In pursuit of wisdom, and aware of folly?
Oh yes Socrates yes, please will you instill seeds of virtue in me?
Teach me, and punish me, of the ways of virtue?
Show me the Form, of the Good?
Let it fill me, and my soul?
In every deed I do, let it show?
Have I mistaken the form of Socrates for The Form?
Is it so bad, to be misled in paramour?
For it is not possible, the socratic problem be my socratic paradox?
Did lady Diotima not teach loving beauty of a single body, to all, and to the Thing itself?
So too...have I taken...this journey...with you?
You wise old man! You wonderfully ironic boy!
Through your example and existence, not just what you express, have I glimpsed the Good?
Oracle of Delphi, wise her rule? That you are, wisest of them all?
But what have you done to me?
What curse has beset me?
Have I become so awakened, that I can not stop asking?
How can I be availed of this existence?
How can I escape this enslavement?
...
Ah yes, but what even is a question?
And is it not true I am young, relatively beautiful, and biologically male?
Not just on the outside, but inside beauty too?
In pursuit of wisdom, and aware of folly?
Oh yes Socrates yes, please will you instill seeds of virtue in me?
Teach me, and punish me, of the ways of virtue?
Show me the Form, of the Good?
Let it fill me, and my soul?
In every deed I do, let it show?
Have I mistaken the form of Socrates for The Form?
Is it so bad, to be misled in paramour?
For it is not possible, the socratic problem be my socratic paradox?
Did lady Diotima not teach loving beauty of a single body, to all, and to the Thing itself?
So too...have I taken...this journey...with you?
You wise old man! You wonderfully ironic boy!
Through your example and existence, not just what you express, have I glimpsed the Good?
Oracle of Delphi, wise her rule? That you are, wisest of them all?
But what have you done to me?
What curse has beset me?
Have I become so awakened, that I can not stop asking?
How can I be availed of this existence?
How can I escape this enslavement?
...
Ah yes, but what even is a question?
April 23, 2007
It's practically a Bible.
December 6, 2020
I don’t think I have ever had a more satisfying reading experience than this book of the complete works of Plato and some that aren’t but at one time were believed to have been written by Plato.
The introduction by the editor to each book are welcomed and gives the reader an indication of what is to come. The editor says, for example, Alcibiades almost certainly wasn’t written by Plato and the reader can tell because it has a clear overall message with a coherent resolution and that is not Plato’s way, but belongs in this collection just in case and besides works incredibly well as a follow up to Symposium and is just as edifying. A small trivia point, symposium in Greek means drinking party, so the next time you are forced to go to a symposium just remember that it’s not a real one since you don’t get to drink booze and pontificate, but, rather, you have to listen to others bloviate and if your lucky the most you can have is a cup of coffee and the satisfaction that us moderns are doing symposiums all wrong.
There’s a reason why I see a lot of people react negatively to perhaps the greatest book ever written or at least arguably the most influential, Plato’s Republic. In the absence of the context of what Plato was writing elsewhere before and even after he wrote Republic and his time period he was living in and what he is really all about Republic can seem weird and nonsensical and the novitiate can miss its importance and relevance to the human experience.
Like most people, I’ve read my Plato from time to time and I would do it in a scatter shot approach and read whatever of his that would cross my notice and therefore would not get the coherence that Plato requires. This book provides a much-needed cohesion to my previous Plato wanderings. I did not realize how important Homer was to Plato and I’ve started reading Hind’s graphic novel on The Iliad to plug up some of my holes on the true Gods, Greek history and its meaning and why Homer is worth understanding today.
Of all the books I have ever read the Complete Works of Plato would be on the top of my short list to take with me when I invent a time machine and go to the far distant future, because it is always satisfying and never really answers the unanswerable questions which drive us as humans (why am I here, what is true, what is deserving of my time, ….) while it always gives a road map for how one should answer those kind of nagging questions.
Plato will say within Laws ‘that all change except for evil is destructive’. That is a guiding principle within Plato. He also gets at that we are in a paradox and that irony is jealous of authenticity while showing Socrates as the true ironist (c.f. Kierkegaard), and he argues that we most of all need to cure ourselves of our own ignorance, or he asks whether or not if virtue can be taught; and he questions what is real from appearance, being verse becoming, what is justice, and about a hundred other such other worthwhile considerations.
At times, especially within Gorgias and Protagoras and a couple of other books, I felt like I was reading Nietzsche, and within other books such as Timaeus and Republic one gets Plotinus, the most important writer ever. Oh heck, I could go on, because the connections between later writers and what is within this book overwhelms who we are today. Just an odd note, the least satisfying of all the books to me was Laws, it went on and on and Plato was taking himself seriously and wanted to make the Republic less of a metaphor about justice and more about how a real republic should be formed while laying a foundation for a divine power that will later be reconciled with a Christian world (the soul comes before things and reason moves the universe of things). Overall, it’s easy to see how Christianity latches on to the complete works of Plato and makes the Pagan Plato one of their own.
I’ve been concurrently reading Livy’s History of Rome and the contrast between Plato and Livy is remarkable. On almost every other page Livy will speak about liberty (freedom) as the ultimate virtue for the Romans and Plato speaks about justice as the ultimate virtue for the Greeks, and Plato thinks that if we can just learn what justice is we can become virtuous all the while never quite realizing that if we can ask the question about something that it doesn’t really mean it necessarily exist (who won the Cubs game last night? maybe, perhaps, the Cubs just didn’t play last night!).
I would say that if you ever get the urge to read a modern-day self-help book, or a book on religion just do yourself a favor and read (or even better, reread) this book. You won’t regret it and you will learn something about who we and you are today. By the way, Plato is just a good writer and explains the world deductively. Aristotle is a bad writer and explains the world inductively. Regretfully, Aristotle with his bad writing is also worthwhile for today’s audience, and I will try to read his complete works soon.
The introduction by the editor to each book are welcomed and gives the reader an indication of what is to come. The editor says, for example, Alcibiades almost certainly wasn’t written by Plato and the reader can tell because it has a clear overall message with a coherent resolution and that is not Plato’s way, but belongs in this collection just in case and besides works incredibly well as a follow up to Symposium and is just as edifying. A small trivia point, symposium in Greek means drinking party, so the next time you are forced to go to a symposium just remember that it’s not a real one since you don’t get to drink booze and pontificate, but, rather, you have to listen to others bloviate and if your lucky the most you can have is a cup of coffee and the satisfaction that us moderns are doing symposiums all wrong.
There’s a reason why I see a lot of people react negatively to perhaps the greatest book ever written or at least arguably the most influential, Plato’s Republic. In the absence of the context of what Plato was writing elsewhere before and even after he wrote Republic and his time period he was living in and what he is really all about Republic can seem weird and nonsensical and the novitiate can miss its importance and relevance to the human experience.
Like most people, I’ve read my Plato from time to time and I would do it in a scatter shot approach and read whatever of his that would cross my notice and therefore would not get the coherence that Plato requires. This book provides a much-needed cohesion to my previous Plato wanderings. I did not realize how important Homer was to Plato and I’ve started reading Hind’s graphic novel on The Iliad to plug up some of my holes on the true Gods, Greek history and its meaning and why Homer is worth understanding today.
Of all the books I have ever read the Complete Works of Plato would be on the top of my short list to take with me when I invent a time machine and go to the far distant future, because it is always satisfying and never really answers the unanswerable questions which drive us as humans (why am I here, what is true, what is deserving of my time, ….) while it always gives a road map for how one should answer those kind of nagging questions.
Plato will say within Laws ‘that all change except for evil is destructive’. That is a guiding principle within Plato. He also gets at that we are in a paradox and that irony is jealous of authenticity while showing Socrates as the true ironist (c.f. Kierkegaard), and he argues that we most of all need to cure ourselves of our own ignorance, or he asks whether or not if virtue can be taught; and he questions what is real from appearance, being verse becoming, what is justice, and about a hundred other such other worthwhile considerations.
At times, especially within Gorgias and Protagoras and a couple of other books, I felt like I was reading Nietzsche, and within other books such as Timaeus and Republic one gets Plotinus, the most important writer ever. Oh heck, I could go on, because the connections between later writers and what is within this book overwhelms who we are today. Just an odd note, the least satisfying of all the books to me was Laws, it went on and on and Plato was taking himself seriously and wanted to make the Republic less of a metaphor about justice and more about how a real republic should be formed while laying a foundation for a divine power that will later be reconciled with a Christian world (the soul comes before things and reason moves the universe of things). Overall, it’s easy to see how Christianity latches on to the complete works of Plato and makes the Pagan Plato one of their own.
I’ve been concurrently reading Livy’s History of Rome and the contrast between Plato and Livy is remarkable. On almost every other page Livy will speak about liberty (freedom) as the ultimate virtue for the Romans and Plato speaks about justice as the ultimate virtue for the Greeks, and Plato thinks that if we can just learn what justice is we can become virtuous all the while never quite realizing that if we can ask the question about something that it doesn’t really mean it necessarily exist (who won the Cubs game last night? maybe, perhaps, the Cubs just didn’t play last night!).
I would say that if you ever get the urge to read a modern-day self-help book, or a book on religion just do yourself a favor and read (or even better, reread) this book. You won’t regret it and you will learn something about who we and you are today. By the way, Plato is just a good writer and explains the world deductively. Aristotle is a bad writer and explains the world inductively. Regretfully, Aristotle with his bad writing is also worthwhile for today’s audience, and I will try to read his complete works soon.
Read
October 12, 2009تقریبا 3 سال طول کشید اما بعد از تمام شدنش مطمئن بودم که هنوز هیچی نفهمیدم ...
April 30, 2018
In Greek literature, there are many authors who are excellent and a smaller subset whose ideas and technical literary skills are simply breathtaking. Purely in terms of influence -- by which I mean the degree to which a particular author has reconfigured the intellectual landscape for future generations -- it is undisputed that the two greatest writers in the Greek literary tradition are Homer and Plato.
Homer is the poet’s poet. His vivid descriptive power, dramatic scene building, timeless characters and storytelling power are utterly unrivaled. It has been famously observed that all Western philosophy is but a footnote to Plato. Likewise, all Western literature is but a footnote to Homer.
Plato took philosophy to an entirely new level, and few if any philosophers who wrote subsequently have matched the extraordinary artistry that marks everything he touched.
He was of course intimately familiar with the entire literary tradition that preceded him, and chose the dialogue as the vehicle for expounding his ideas. The dialogue is by definition a dramatic medium, and Plato exploits its possibilities in many ingenious ways.
Plato wrote at a time when human knowledge had yet to become fragmented, and this is what makes reading his work so exciting. He was interested in a wide range of subjects that today go by the names of psychology, sociology, metaphysics, ethics, political science, education, linguistics, epistemology, anthropology, jurisprudence, and much else besides.
This much, if nothing more, must be observed about Plato: he is a consummate literary artist, and his prose is the best there is in Greek. The give and take between speaking participants and the soaring flights of his most awe-inspiring passages hold up well in translation, and this volume in particular contains versions that are faithful to the original Greek without being stilted or prosaic.
Homer is the poet’s poet. His vivid descriptive power, dramatic scene building, timeless characters and storytelling power are utterly unrivaled. It has been famously observed that all Western philosophy is but a footnote to Plato. Likewise, all Western literature is but a footnote to Homer.
Plato took philosophy to an entirely new level, and few if any philosophers who wrote subsequently have matched the extraordinary artistry that marks everything he touched.
He was of course intimately familiar with the entire literary tradition that preceded him, and chose the dialogue as the vehicle for expounding his ideas. The dialogue is by definition a dramatic medium, and Plato exploits its possibilities in many ingenious ways.
Plato wrote at a time when human knowledge had yet to become fragmented, and this is what makes reading his work so exciting. He was interested in a wide range of subjects that today go by the names of psychology, sociology, metaphysics, ethics, political science, education, linguistics, epistemology, anthropology, jurisprudence, and much else besides.
This much, if nothing more, must be observed about Plato: he is a consummate literary artist, and his prose is the best there is in Greek. The give and take between speaking participants and the soaring flights of his most awe-inspiring passages hold up well in translation, and this volume in particular contains versions that are faithful to the original Greek without being stilted or prosaic.
March 19, 2018
As a pupil at one of the branches of the school of practical philosophy (the school of economic science), I am keen to explore different philosopher’s work in more detail. Plato, I find to be extremely transparent, very insightful and knowledgeable. His dialogues in this collection come from various sources; from his Republic, Phaedo, Timaeus, Meno, Phaedrus, Symposium and Parmenides. It is a good English translation of the Greek text, and one that is ideal for philosophy students. Plato places specific importance upon pure love in knowing the truth, for after all ‘philosophy’ translates as loving wisdom. One should be in Plato’s book as willing to be refuted, and is thus free from ignorance.
This book containing extracts for study, begins with passages on the similitude of the sun and the divided line. It covers all the levels of one’s perception, and how the soul may rise out of the shadows. Plato then explains his allegory of the cave, which is a reflection of reality or the truth. And asks the question, when one is introduced to the light as to what they see.
‘Certain professors of education must be wrong when they say that they can put a knowledge into the soul which was not there before… The power and capacity for learning exists in the soul already.’
The instrument of knowledge according to Plato requires tuning of the soul. This book then also covers the dialectic, which is where science and reason correlate. It explores discovering the Absolute by the power of reason and with pure intelligence finding all that is good. The intellect, understanding, belief and perception. Education and the chance to answer questions to Plato is always highly regarded. This book then looks at the immortality of the soul; a challenge for the mind to contemplate in reality! Then, there is the myth of Er, on what is justice and just versus unjust action.
‘Hear the word. Mortal souls behold a new cycle of life and mortality. Your genius will not be allotted to you, but you will choose your genius; and let him who draws the first lot have the first choice, and the life which he chooses will be his destiny.’
Then, this book covers Platonic solids such as various shapes in three-dimensional forms. Music is also another largely covered topic, being the most potent form of education. It discusses the various harmonies and their effects. Valuing simplicity, and the ability of music to impart grace to the soul. One’s melody, softness and style.
‘Rhythm and harmony find there way into the inward places of the soul’
This book finally then covers the four virtues, the location of justice in the newly created state. The nature of justice, including bits about law and politics. Then there are sections on the philosopher, democracy and the forms of government; Oligarchy, timarchy, democracy and tyranny, as all learning is a recollection, beauty and Diotima on love.
This collection of Plato’s most iconic writings is illuminating and insightful and something that I would definitely recommend to economics, law and philosophy students. A worthwhile read.
September 29, 2012
Many reviewers have noted how this book is the Bible of Plato. They are correct.
I recommend this book for anyone who plans to study Plato in-depth. Containing all the extant works of Plato, this book will not disappoint those who want to experience all of Plato's thought. Most pages have footnotes explaining unclear references to historical places, or other important concepts.
The introduction is superb, providing details to approaching the writings of Plato. It is a helpful guide for those who are unfamiliar with Plato or the study of philosophy.
Alfred Whitehead once said, "the European Philosophical tradition consists of a series of footnotes to Plato." After reading the works of Plato contained in this volume, it will be clear as to why he made this statement. Plato explores nearly all the major branches of Philosophy. In fact, he defines them. Metaphysics, Epistemology, Ethics, and Aesthetics are all included in Plato's philosophy. Only formal logic is absent. Those looking for the historical foundations of logic will need to turn to Aristotle.
Plato's philosophy is not without flaws. For instance, his political philosophy argues for a society that would restrict much of the freedoms and individuality of its citizens. A society ruled over by a so-called "philosopher king." And, while his metaphysics are profound, they also contradict much of the findings of modern science. However, it is important for the reader to reach his own interpretations of the text. One of the greatest gifts of Plato and any good philosopher are their ability to make you question your preexisting notions of the world. Regardless of whether I think Plato is right or wrong on these issues, the reader should carefully consider Plato's words and decide for himself. Having done this, most diligent first-time readers will begin to question and think like a philosopher.
Overall, I highly recommend this volume.
April 7, 2017
Well, I'm not finished , you can't be finished with Plato, but I gotta move on. I'll be coming back to this volume sooner or later.
September 1, 2007
made me think too much! philosophy just spurs on more questions.
March 24, 2018
Farewell, study your philosophy, and try to interest the other young men in it. —Letter XIII
...these are the studies. Whether they are difficult, whether they are easy, this is the way we must proceed. —Epinomis 992a
...If we live truly the life of philosophy —Letter VI
__________
I'm not going to presume to review Plato's works. I'm not qualified to do that; I've read them, not studied them.
What I have decided to do is talk a little about the volume itself, and give my opinion on which works I think are must-reads, and which ones I enjoyed. And also sprinkle in some quotes for good measure, which should also give you a flavour of the translations.
And if you're looking for a reason to read his works; your mind will be opened and you will be exposed to so many ideas. Now you probably won't enjoy reading all of them, but you'll be glad you did...
..."After all, this is the object of the exercise — I'm not going through all this simply for the story. —Laws III 699e
__________
First of all, the translation. There is no single translator for this volume, but rather a number of different translators. I thought that the translations were all superb. No troubles reading them whatsoever.
The volume contains a good general introduction, and contains excellent, brief introductions prior to each work.
How are the works arranged? Into the nine-tetralogies, followed by 8 spurious works, and ending with 18 epigrams.
(The organisation into tetralogies is ascribed by Diogenes Laërtius to one Thrasyllus, a 1st. century AD. scholar, and the court astrologer to the Emperor Tiberius.)
There are notes, and these are: textual, quoting references, and give some background information.
But the text isn't packed with explanatory notes; this simply wouldn't be possible in a single volume complete collection.
However, I really didn't find this a problem as the dialogues themselves are fairly easy to read (mostly), and I had no major problems following along. They are not, as I may have thought, very densely written or packed with obscure philosophical terminology.
The text (Palatino) is a good size, is printed on high quality paper, and the volume is bound strongly.
Definitely an edition made to last, and I would highly recommend it. If you know you want to read all of Plato at some point, get this.
You can always get other editions (with notes) of his major works.
__________
Absolute Must-Reads
-Euthyphro
-Apology
-Crito
-Phaedo
(Collectively known as The Last Days of Socrates or The Trial and Execution of Socrates, these four dialogues give an account of the last days of Socrates and his execution.)
-Republic
-Laws
__________
Favourites
-Euthyphro
-Apology
-Crito
-Phaedo
-Alcibiades
-Protagoras
-Gorgias
-Meno
-Lesser Hippias
-Republic
-Timaeus
-Laws
-Definitions
-Sisyphus
-Axiochus
__________
...I usually praise the ancients who came before us more highly than I praise the people of our own day —Greater Hippias 282a
It looks to us, my friend, as if you mean to imply that passing the time with friends over a drink —provided we behave ourselves —is a considerable contribution to education.
Most certainly. —Laws I 641d
But for a man to acquire good judgement, and unshakeable correct opinions, however late in life, is a matter of good luck: a man who possesses them, and all the benefits they entail, is perfect. —Laws II 653a
We do not hold the common view that a man's highest good is to survive and simply continue to exist. His highest good is to become as virtuous as possible and to continue to exist in that state as long as life lasts. —Laws IV 707d
However, it would be pretty fatuous to spend our time talking about the length or brevity of the text: it's high quality that we should value I think, not extreme brevity or length, —Laws IV 722b
My good Crito, why should we care so much for what the majority think? —Crito 44c
The soul of the philosopher achieves a calm from such emotions; it follows reason and ever stays with it complementing the true, the divine, which is not the object of opinion. —Phaedo 84a
February 3, 2017
Other than the Bible, I'm not sure there's a collection of writings that have influenced Western civilization more than Plato's.
Given it's cumbersome size, I had recently read many of the dialogues here in other translations in volumes of more manageable size. I read all the dialogues in this collection that I had not yet read elsewhere.
Given it's cumbersome size, I had recently read many of the dialogues here in other translations in volumes of more manageable size. I read all the dialogues in this collection that I had not yet read elsewhere.
June 15, 2020
For the long version of this review, see my notes and highlights. For the short version of this review: feel free to skip the early dialogues, and read for cultural weirdness and prompts to thinking rather than "wise Plato will tell me how to be virtuous" or the equally understandable and equally useless counter-reaction of "wow look at how bad Plato's opinions are."
(I didn't read any of these as closely as they deserved - though I did make a daily discursive meditation practice out of it, which is another valuable thing I got from this - and I tried to stay away from secondary literature, because you only get to go in blind once. Both are reasons to revisit many of these dialogues, obviously.)
For the medium version, a few themes that stuck out at me.
The division of labor
The economics of the division of labor play a central role in all of the most seminal thinkers of the transition to modernity - Smith, Marx, Weber. I was surprised to find that this was true of Plato as well, because it seems incidental in just about every dialogue other than Laws (which no one reads) and Republic (which, to be fair, everyone does.) But you read every dialogue and it looms in every single one, I think it's fair to say that there's something going on. Socrates asks some variation of "is this knowledge like the knowledge of a medical doctor?... of a ship's pilot?... of a cobbler?" so consistently that there are even meta-jokes around it, like a TV show where the writers start responding to the fans' memes.
Plato's position as an aristocrat in a sort-of-democratic society with a huge slave population and a booming commercial economy is the obvious background here. He's got snobbery towards manual workers of all kinds and especially towards the enslaved, whose capacity for virtue is constantly impeached (and not as an overt condemnation of slavery, though you could probably develop it in that direction.) He's got a hierachical model of metaphysics (and love) that matches this vertical principle. But the division of labor, and its creation of bonds of mutual dependence, exists in a constant dialectical tension with this. The specialized knowledge of the philosopher and of virtue is constantly adduced from examples to specialized knowledge in other fields, as is the need to always defer to the relevantly specialized person. In Republic, most prominently, the need for specialized production forms the basis for civilization as such, no less than in Smith (and, no less than in Marx, a multitude of evils flow from the establishment of class society, though that is glossed over) and "justice" comes to be defined as everyone sticking to their own place.
Form, medium, and irony
From the beginning, when Socrates protests to the criminal court that he's at a loss because he lacks natural eloquence and launches into a highly eloquent and stylized speech, to written condemnations of writing, to sophistical refutations of sophists, Plato is really interested in form-content tensions. And dialogues are great at this, because (1) while a wholly written form they are one more obviously in imitation of speech than other genres, and (2) by placing the words in the mouth of another, you get more critical distance between what is said and what Plato thinks.
That said, despite or rather alongside all the critical comments on writing, you can see the shift from a more "speakerly" style in the beginning to a more "writerly" one later on, one that redounds to the benefit of the subtlety and interestingness of the dialogues. That is, the most frustrating thing about the early dialogues is how, with granted a bit of stylistic smoothing over, they seem like the sort of philosophical conversation Socrates might have had with real-life Athenians - something that would be more satisfying if they weren't constantly leaning on the fact that people are a lot easier to lead around, and a lot less capable of spotting a contradiction, in spoken than written word. The problem with the early dialogues, then, is that Socrates has few worthy opponents, and so his tripping them up doesn't lead to many interesting conclusions.
Later on, we shift from this to worthier opponents, longer speeches, and more abiguous and subtle claims, which increasingly take the form of myths. And the myths are just great. (Can you spot the structural parallels/inversions between the Ring of Gyges and the Cave?) And I suspect they are great largely because they force you to do what the early "Socrates" doesn't, which is read charitably.
The power of words
This is perhaps an expansion of the above, but Plato is very concerned with the power that words have, and the ability to derive truth value from discourse or dialectic alone. This is clear in his two most consistent opponents - the Sophists, who argue cynically, too unfaithfully to dialectic - and then the worthy opponent, Parmenides, who speaks seemingly too faithfully to dialectic, so constrained that he can't speak of anything but a metaphysical abstraction. Both of these are temptations to "Socrates" and Plato's entire project of arriving at a not merely instrumentally practical (as the sophists') and not merely self-consistent (as the Eleatics') form of dialectic.
Numerology
There's something going on with the number four in Plato, with it signifying, maybe, completion? Is this a Pythagorean thing??????? idk guess i should get around to that secondary reading
(I didn't read any of these as closely as they deserved - though I did make a daily discursive meditation practice out of it, which is another valuable thing I got from this - and I tried to stay away from secondary literature, because you only get to go in blind once. Both are reasons to revisit many of these dialogues, obviously.)
For the medium version, a few themes that stuck out at me.
The division of labor
The economics of the division of labor play a central role in all of the most seminal thinkers of the transition to modernity - Smith, Marx, Weber. I was surprised to find that this was true of Plato as well, because it seems incidental in just about every dialogue other than Laws (which no one reads) and Republic (which, to be fair, everyone does.) But you read every dialogue and it looms in every single one, I think it's fair to say that there's something going on. Socrates asks some variation of "is this knowledge like the knowledge of a medical doctor?... of a ship's pilot?... of a cobbler?" so consistently that there are even meta-jokes around it, like a TV show where the writers start responding to the fans' memes.
Plato's position as an aristocrat in a sort-of-democratic society with a huge slave population and a booming commercial economy is the obvious background here. He's got snobbery towards manual workers of all kinds and especially towards the enslaved, whose capacity for virtue is constantly impeached (and not as an overt condemnation of slavery, though you could probably develop it in that direction.) He's got a hierachical model of metaphysics (and love) that matches this vertical principle. But the division of labor, and its creation of bonds of mutual dependence, exists in a constant dialectical tension with this. The specialized knowledge of the philosopher and of virtue is constantly adduced from examples to specialized knowledge in other fields, as is the need to always defer to the relevantly specialized person. In Republic, most prominently, the need for specialized production forms the basis for civilization as such, no less than in Smith (and, no less than in Marx, a multitude of evils flow from the establishment of class society, though that is glossed over) and "justice" comes to be defined as everyone sticking to their own place.
Form, medium, and irony
From the beginning, when Socrates protests to the criminal court that he's at a loss because he lacks natural eloquence and launches into a highly eloquent and stylized speech, to written condemnations of writing, to sophistical refutations of sophists, Plato is really interested in form-content tensions. And dialogues are great at this, because (1) while a wholly written form they are one more obviously in imitation of speech than other genres, and (2) by placing the words in the mouth of another, you get more critical distance between what is said and what Plato thinks.
That said, despite or rather alongside all the critical comments on writing, you can see the shift from a more "speakerly" style in the beginning to a more "writerly" one later on, one that redounds to the benefit of the subtlety and interestingness of the dialogues. That is, the most frustrating thing about the early dialogues is how, with granted a bit of stylistic smoothing over, they seem like the sort of philosophical conversation Socrates might have had with real-life Athenians - something that would be more satisfying if they weren't constantly leaning on the fact that people are a lot easier to lead around, and a lot less capable of spotting a contradiction, in spoken than written word. The problem with the early dialogues, then, is that Socrates has few worthy opponents, and so his tripping them up doesn't lead to many interesting conclusions.
Later on, we shift from this to worthier opponents, longer speeches, and more abiguous and subtle claims, which increasingly take the form of myths. And the myths are just great. (Can you spot the structural parallels/inversions between the Ring of Gyges and the Cave?) And I suspect they are great largely because they force you to do what the early "Socrates" doesn't, which is read charitably.
The power of words
This is perhaps an expansion of the above, but Plato is very concerned with the power that words have, and the ability to derive truth value from discourse or dialectic alone. This is clear in his two most consistent opponents - the Sophists, who argue cynically, too unfaithfully to dialectic - and then the worthy opponent, Parmenides, who speaks seemingly too faithfully to dialectic, so constrained that he can't speak of anything but a metaphysical abstraction. Both of these are temptations to "Socrates" and Plato's entire project of arriving at a not merely instrumentally practical (as the sophists') and not merely self-consistent (as the Eleatics') form of dialectic.
Numerology
There's something going on with the number four in Plato, with it signifying, maybe, completion? Is this a Pythagorean thing??????? idk guess i should get around to that secondary reading
May 8, 2017
NB I did NOT read this kindle book, but did read the Compete Works of Plato translated by Jowett, however, it was so long it was printed in more than one volume, this is the one I chose to use; in fact, I read more than 31 books, but not many more.
This rating is an average rating. There are several works that are 4 and 5 star works; make no mistake, Plato was extremely bright. But there is also a lot of drivel, and much of this is written like arguments with one of those people who just LOVE to argue and think that if they win an argument that makes the right (logic doesn't generally win arguments).
One of the interesting things about this, since it covers 40-50 years of Plato's life and thought process, is how he changes some of his views over time. However, some of his more inane ideas and reasoning manage to remain the same. An example of one of his major fallacies is the idea that children raised without parents by a group will raise superior citizens. Anyone with any understanding of how this works in real life (eg most orphanages) knows that this does not work. This goes far beyond "it takes a village to raise a child" into no parent should know which children are theirs, and no child knows who their parents are. This comes up in great detail in both The Republic and The Laws.
So, if you are interested in reading Plato, stick with his "greatest hits." One of the best ones is Crito, or a trilogy of three of his best is Apology/Crito/Phaedo. This isn't to say I agree with many of his premises or that there are zero fallacies in these, but they are quite brilliant despite problems (and this is ancient, archaic philosophy). My favourite is the Crito.
This rating is an average rating. There are several works that are 4 and 5 star works; make no mistake, Plato was extremely bright. But there is also a lot of drivel, and much of this is written like arguments with one of those people who just LOVE to argue and think that if they win an argument that makes the right (logic doesn't generally win arguments).
One of the interesting things about this, since it covers 40-50 years of Plato's life and thought process, is how he changes some of his views over time. However, some of his more inane ideas and reasoning manage to remain the same. An example of one of his major fallacies is the idea that children raised without parents by a group will raise superior citizens. Anyone with any understanding of how this works in real life (eg most orphanages) knows that this does not work. This goes far beyond "it takes a village to raise a child" into no parent should know which children are theirs, and no child knows who their parents are. This comes up in great detail in both The Republic and The Laws.
So, if you are interested in reading Plato, stick with his "greatest hits." One of the best ones is Crito, or a trilogy of three of his best is Apology/Crito/Phaedo. This isn't to say I agree with many of his premises or that there are zero fallacies in these, but they are quite brilliant despite problems (and this is ancient, archaic philosophy). My favourite is the Crito.
April 4, 2019
There is no rush. Let the dialogues seep in. I’m really glad I gave myself the gift of going patiently through the grand philosopher king’s collection.
December 2, 2021
I put this on my Kindle as a convenience, to have the complete Plato in some easily accessible form on it, but I'm not loving the translations so far. I'm reading The Laws, and I don't like the ease with which the translator interposes English colloquialisms into the piece, or renders muthos as "fiction", for example. I'll keep using it, but maybe I'd consider recommending Jowett's edition over this one. Jowett's edition is old, but seems to hold the text a little more sacrosanct. There's just no substitute, I'm afraid, for developing at least a slight familiarity with Greek when reading Plato.
May 5, 2013
This is a brilliant edition of Plato's collected works, which is excellent value for money. Of course, you can probably buy them all very cheaply in an eBook format now - but the hard-copy is easier to use if you are studying and therefore need to make cross references regularly. There are many many gems here, and you do not have to love everything about Plato to get huge value from this book.
The only drawback is the sheer size of the book - which is simply a result of Plato's prodigious output - and if that is the price to pay for getting everything at once, it is a very small price!
The only drawback is the sheer size of the book - which is simply a result of Plato's prodigious output - and if that is the price to pay for getting everything at once, it is a very small price!
March 14, 2020
مفهوم سوفسطایی: تقلید نیرنگ بازانە ی مبتنی بر پندار ،یعنی قسمی از هنر ساختن تصویر های دروغین و فریبندە کە خود نوعی از هنر تصویر سازی خاص آدمیان -نە خاص خدایان -است و آن خود نیز نوعی از هنر ساختن است،کەاز راەسخن دیگران را بەگفتار متناقض مجبور می سازد
May 26, 2018
این اثر ح��رت انگیز است و بسیار عمیق و شفاف است اینکه کسی در زمانی بیش از ۲۵۰۰ سال پیش این را نوشته برای من باور نکردنی است.
Read
February 7, 2021Partially read for school.
April 25, 2010
Having finally read this from cover to cover (with the exception of The Republic to which I went to Allan Bloom’s translation) one cannot help but feel some sense of achievement. The purist in me loves that the entire corpus of Plato’s works is easily accessible in one volume. But I wouldn’t recommend reading Plato: Complete Works as I have.
To read Plato, and actually digest Plato, is not an easy task. At times, I am not ashamed to admit that it’s a chore. Though the Complete Works contain short introductions to each piece, they are not thorough analyses. The footnotes are welcome but far too few and sparse to provide any significant aid to understanding context. Citing Plato as great is easy, but I question how many of us truly understand why. In contrast, when reading Bloom’s edition of The Republic it became painfully apparent how little I could appreciate Plato’s writing simply because I don’t have a full background of 5th and 4th century B.C. Athens. So much of what was written must be understood in context of the times and the people Plato is responding too. The arguments on their face are oftentimes specious in light of different values, science and presuppositions of modern times.
Each work and dialogue is probably worthy of, and has been subject of, an essay unto itself. It would be a mistake to try to make comprehensive summaries here. There is a reason that certain dialogues are more well known than others. For example, I think few readers would get much out of Cratylus which focuses on Greek etymology and whether the name of a thing reflects its intrinsic value. Etymology was a highly respected and philosophic study in ancient Greece; not so much today. There are some exceptional and foundational works that should be read if for no other reason than gaining familiarity with the core works referenced by others. My personal list would include Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Phaedrus, Gorgias, Protagoras and The Republic. I’d recommend Symposium simply as a good example of the need to read the works in context. I also plan on revisiting Parmenides when I can find a good interpretive essay to help explain it. It’s described as a challenging and enigmatic dialogue which is a vast understatement.
Some would include Laws as a necessary read as well. It seems to exist in the shadows of The Republic and I know some believe it’s an often missed gemstone. I’d disagree. I thought it tedious and lacking in any real engaging argument. Even Plato seems to abandon his dialectic form so that he can espouse his own legal code.
All in all, an excellent compilation to have on your bookshelf for reference or to impress people. However, if you are genuinely interested in understanding, I’d highly recommend buying select works individually with accompanying literature on the significance of each.
To read Plato, and actually digest Plato, is not an easy task. At times, I am not ashamed to admit that it’s a chore. Though the Complete Works contain short introductions to each piece, they are not thorough analyses. The footnotes are welcome but far too few and sparse to provide any significant aid to understanding context. Citing Plato as great is easy, but I question how many of us truly understand why. In contrast, when reading Bloom’s edition of The Republic it became painfully apparent how little I could appreciate Plato’s writing simply because I don’t have a full background of 5th and 4th century B.C. Athens. So much of what was written must be understood in context of the times and the people Plato is responding too. The arguments on their face are oftentimes specious in light of different values, science and presuppositions of modern times.
Each work and dialogue is probably worthy of, and has been subject of, an essay unto itself. It would be a mistake to try to make comprehensive summaries here. There is a reason that certain dialogues are more well known than others. For example, I think few readers would get much out of Cratylus which focuses on Greek etymology and whether the name of a thing reflects its intrinsic value. Etymology was a highly respected and philosophic study in ancient Greece; not so much today. There are some exceptional and foundational works that should be read if for no other reason than gaining familiarity with the core works referenced by others. My personal list would include Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Phaedrus, Gorgias, Protagoras and The Republic. I’d recommend Symposium simply as a good example of the need to read the works in context. I also plan on revisiting Parmenides when I can find a good interpretive essay to help explain it. It’s described as a challenging and enigmatic dialogue which is a vast understatement.
Some would include Laws as a necessary read as well. It seems to exist in the shadows of The Republic and I know some believe it’s an often missed gemstone. I’d disagree. I thought it tedious and lacking in any real engaging argument. Even Plato seems to abandon his dialectic form so that he can espouse his own legal code.
All in all, an excellent compilation to have on your bookshelf for reference or to impress people. However, if you are genuinely interested in understanding, I’d highly recommend buying select works individually with accompanying literature on the significance of each.
May 3, 2018
In reading Plato (or any of the greats) one of things that you must remember is that: We have no clue what his intent was. This means that a lot of reading is up in the air because we are not sure of *why* he wrote these things.
I think that if you look at Plato's works as writings with the purpose of allowing students to practice argument skills and presentation, then this is an interesting book. It makes the constant always-right Socrates seem much more useful and makes you want to re-read the book more slowly so that you can try and think of and practice your own counter-arguments and how to present them.
If you see it as a book of "Plato is awesome and the father of philosophy" then you might be greatly disappointed with a lot of the readings. While the stories and arguments are somewhat interesting, they fall into a redundant pattern of Socrates is always right, no matter what. The arguments feel and look weak, especially since you have a 21st century brain. At this point, if you feel Plato and them are just right, then you have to remember that they had less knowledge than we do now. Take the arguments for what they are in the time they were made and enjoy.
This is not a book for the faint of heart---reading all of Plato's works can be a bit mind-numbing at times, so take breaks. If you really find a rhythm, try to hold it as long as you can so you can get through as much as possible. I found myself intrigued at some points and annoyed at others, and just plain bored with some others. So keep that in mind.
I think that if you look at Plato's works as writings with the purpose of allowing students to practice argument skills and presentation, then this is an interesting book. It makes the constant always-right Socrates seem much more useful and makes you want to re-read the book more slowly so that you can try and think of and practice your own counter-arguments and how to present them.
If you see it as a book of "Plato is awesome and the father of philosophy" then you might be greatly disappointed with a lot of the readings. While the stories and arguments are somewhat interesting, they fall into a redundant pattern of Socrates is always right, no matter what. The arguments feel and look weak, especially since you have a 21st century brain. At this point, if you feel Plato and them are just right, then you have to remember that they had less knowledge than we do now. Take the arguments for what they are in the time they were made and enjoy.
This is not a book for the faint of heart---reading all of Plato's works can be a bit mind-numbing at times, so take breaks. If you really find a rhythm, try to hold it as long as you can so you can get through as much as possible. I found myself intrigued at some points and annoyed at others, and just plain bored with some others. So keep that in mind.
April 14, 2012
Ok, been throwing myself in at the deep end with this one.
I know, Plato/Socrates are best known by quotation.
Still, my absolute lack in knowledge of philosophy had me hesitant, since I tend to read cover to cover (and everything in between)....
But hey, a gift, nice hard cover, inviting typeface, sound introduction.
(and my weak spot for 'big' books, sorry to iPad)
I will surely re-read much of this tome.
In the first place because of its unrivalled value as a dictate of humanity.
Also, because I can finally make sense of all those references to ...
I don't feel ignorant anymore ;-)
But not in the least because it is good and fun reading, Socrates is amiable, the standards, vices and virtues, of the time are relieving as set off to our own.
To cut the crap; Plato is a mastermind of an age bygone, but an absolute inspiration for me in the present one.
I know, Plato/Socrates are best known by quotation.
Still, my absolute lack in knowledge of philosophy had me hesitant, since I tend to read cover to cover (and everything in between)....
But hey, a gift, nice hard cover, inviting typeface, sound introduction.
(and my weak spot for 'big' books, sorry to iPad)
I will surely re-read much of this tome.
In the first place because of its unrivalled value as a dictate of humanity.
Also, because I can finally make sense of all those references to ...
I don't feel ignorant anymore ;-)
But not in the least because it is good and fun reading, Socrates is amiable, the standards, vices and virtues, of the time are relieving as set off to our own.
To cut the crap; Plato is a mastermind of an age bygone, but an absolute inspiration for me in the present one.
Want to read
May 10, 2008I've read up to The Republic, which I've already read. I'm not sure what's after that. High Point: Crito.
February 19, 2010
I'm a philosophy major. Every philosopher I've ever read is really only writing a response to this.
Read
May 26, 2010حیف است کسی به فلسفه ریاضیات و مابعدالطبیعه را دوست داشته باشد و این کتاب را نخوانده باشد.
October 24, 2020
It's Plato.
September 23, 2011
There's a reason why Plato's stuck around for so long.
Socrates reminds me of Columbo sometimes. He asks questions ("Just one more thing..."), and he acts like he doesn't really know, but you can just hear the wheels turning as he puts things together.
Honestly, I don't remember what I got out of Symposium because I read it almost 6 months ago...but I took notes, so...oh, Diotima's Ladder was very interesting, even though I don't think I got all of it. But seeing it come back in Augustine was pretty exciting.
Euthyphro was...frustrating. You turn to the last page, and you think, "Wait...what?! That's it??"
Republic was really good. I mean, a lot of people have to read it, but I can see why. It's very layered, probably more than any person can pick up in just one or two read-throughs. Our class discussion went through the character of Glaucon, and just that one element of Republic was fascinating.
I really liked Timaeus. I'm not entirely sure why. I think I liked the poetic idea of order and harmony and balance in the universe, especially combined with the four elements and music.
I'm not really sure what I can say about Plato, other than that you should read more of Plato and less of whatever drivel I'm writing here.
Socrates reminds me of Columbo sometimes. He asks questions ("Just one more thing..."), and he acts like he doesn't really know, but you can just hear the wheels turning as he puts things together.
Honestly, I don't remember what I got out of Symposium because I read it almost 6 months ago...but I took notes, so...oh, Diotima's Ladder was very interesting, even though I don't think I got all of it. But seeing it come back in Augustine was pretty exciting.
Euthyphro was...frustrating. You turn to the last page, and you think, "Wait...what?! That's it??"
Republic was really good. I mean, a lot of people have to read it, but I can see why. It's very layered, probably more than any person can pick up in just one or two read-throughs. Our class discussion went through the character of Glaucon, and just that one element of Republic was fascinating.
I really liked Timaeus. I'm not entirely sure why. I think I liked the poetic idea of order and harmony and balance in the universe, especially combined with the four elements and music.
I'm not really sure what I can say about Plato, other than that you should read more of Plato and less of whatever drivel I'm writing here.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 227 reviews