Converting philology to philosophy A Platonic model and its inversion in Homer and Classical Philology

Paulo Alexander Lima

doi:10.24310/en.24.2024.18950

Autores/as

Paulo Alexander Lima Universade Nova Lisboa Portugal

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24310/en.24.2024.18950

Palabras clave:

Nietzsche, Platon, filología clásica, elenco socrático

Agencias: FCT («CEEC Individual», reference CEECIND/02734/2018), IFILNOVA («Programa Estratégico», reference UIDB/00183/2020)

Resumen

This article intends to demonstrate that Plato is present in the young Nietzsche’s thinking, particularly in the definition of philology that is proposed in Homer and Classical Philology. Indeed, Plato’s Sophist makes it possible to comprehend a core aspect of Nietzsche’s thinking on philology, that which is the starting point for all his thinking as it gets developed in the inaugural lecture: the contradiction between the two fundamental trends of philology (aesthetic classicism and historical criticism) and the paralyzing consequences for the practising of it if this contradiction is taken seriously. Furthermore, the Sophist makes it possible to point out an aspect relating to how Nietzsche, in his lecture, tries to overcome the paralyzing effect of the contradiction found in philology, namely through an inversion of Socratic-Platonic logic, according to which a contradiction cannot arise in a concept and has to be purged so as to clear the pathway towards obtaining true knowledge. Instead of adhering to this purging approach, he accepts the contradiction that, at the time, characterized philology. The result of his position is a completely different way of understanding the nature of concepts and truth.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Métricas

Cargando métricas ...

Citas

Benne, C. 2005, Nietzsche und die historisch-kritische Philologie, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Benson, H. 1989, «A Note on Eristic and the Socratic Elenchus»: Journal of the History of Philosophy 27/4, 591-9.

Candiotto, L. 2018, «Purification through Emotions: The Role of Shame in Plato’s Sophist 230b4-e5»: Educational Philosophy and Theory 50/6-7, 576-85.

Chappell, T. 2007, «Conversion or Conversation? A Note on Plato’s Philosophical Methods», in D. Cairns, F.-G. Herrmann and T. Penner, Pursuing the Good: Ethics and Metaphysics in Plato’s Republic, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 320-7.

Cornford, F. M. 1935, Plato’s Theory of Knowledge: The Theaetetus and the Sophist of Plato Translated with a Running Commentary, London: Routledge.

Delhey, N. 1994, «Periagôgê holês tês psuchês. Bemerkungen zur Bildungstheorie in Platons Politeia»: Hermes 122/1, 44-54.

D’Iorio, P. 2022, «Préface», in F. Nietzsche, Écrits philologiques IV. Homère et la philologie classique, Encyclopédie de la philologie classique, ed. P. D’Iorio and F. Fronterotta, Paris: Belles Lettres, 7-11.

Emden, C. 2004, «The Invention of Antiquity: Nietzsche on Classicism, Classicality, and the Classical Tradition», in P. Bishop, Nietzsche and Antiquity: His Reaction and Response to the Classical Tradition, Rochester NY: Camden House, 372-90.

Giannopoulou, Z. 2001, «“The Sophistry of Noble Lineage” Revisited: Plato’s Sophist 226b1-231b8»: Illinois Classical Studies 26, 101-24.

Grafton, A. 1981, «Prolegomena to Friedrich August Wolf»: Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 44, 101-29.

Hadot, P. 2002, «Conversion», in P. Hadot, Exercices spirituels et philosophie antique, ed. A. I. Davidson, Paris: Albin Michel, 223-35.

Lachtermann, D. 1992, «Die ewige Wiederkehr des Griechen: Nietzsche and the Homeric Question», in D. W. Conway and R. Rehn, Nietzsche und die antike Philosophie, Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier, 13-35.

Lampert, L. 2004, «Nietzsche and Plato», in P. Bishop, Nietzsche and Antiquity: His Reaction and Response to the Classical Tradition, Rochester NY: Camden House, 205-19.

Landfester, M. 1994, «Kommentar», in F. Nietzsche, Die Geburt der Tragödie. Schriften zur Literatur und Philosophie der Griechen, ed. M. Landfester, Frankfurt: Insel Verlag, 373-684.

Latacz, J. 2014, «On Nietzsche’s Philological Beginnings», in A. Jensen and H. Heit, Nietzsche as a Scholar of Antiquity, London: Bloomsbury, 3-26.

Lecznar, A. 2017, «Alcibiades in Love: Nietzsche, Plato and the Philosophy of Modernity»: Classical Receptions Journal 9/4, 447-69.

McNeill, D. N. 2004, «On the Relationship of Alcibiades’ Speech to Nietzsche’s “Problem of Socrates”», in P. Bishop, Nietzsche and Antiquity: His Reaction and Response to the Classical Tradition, Rochester NY: Camden House, 260-75.

Merker, A. 2019a, «Introduction à l’étude de Platon. Présentation», in F. Nietzsche, Écrits philologiques VIII. Platon, traductions, présentations et notes par A. Merker, Paris: Belles Lettres, 19-69.

Merker, A. 2019b, «Platon, Apologie. Présentation», in F. Nietzsche, Écrits philologiques VIII. Platon, traductions, présentations et notes par A. Merker, Paris: Belles Lettres, 237-44.

Müller, E. 2005, Die Griechen im Denken Nietzsches, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Nietzsche, F. 1933-40, Werke. Historisch-kritische Gesamtausgabe, ed. H. J. Mette, K. Schlechta and C. Koch, München: H. C. Beck.

Nietzsche, F. 1967-, Werke. Kritische Gesamtausgabe, ed. G. Colli and M. Montinari, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Nietzsche, F. 1975-, Briefwechsel. Kritische Gesamtausgabe, ed. G. Colli and M. Montinari, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Nietzsche, F. 2009-, Werke und Briefe. Digitale Kritische Gesamtausgabe, ed. P. D’Iorio, Paris: Nietzsche Source.

Nock, A. D. 1933, Conversion: The Old and the New in Religion from Alexander the Great to Augustine of Hippo, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Plato 1921, Theaetetus, Sophist, trans. H. N. Fowler, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

Porter, J. 2000a, Nietzsche and the Philology of the Future, Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.

Porter, J. 2000b, The Invention of Dionysus: An Essay on The Birth of Tragedy, Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.

Porter, J. 2004, «Nietzsche, Homer, and the Classical Tradition», in P. Bishop, Nietzsche and Antiquity: His Reaction and Response to the Classical Tradition, Rochester NY: Camden House, 7-26.

Porter, J. 2014, «Nietzsche’s Radical Philology», in A. Jensen and H. Heit, Nietzsche as a Scholar of Antiquity, London: Bloomsbury, 27-50.

Seneca 1925, Epistles 93-124, trans. M. R. Gummere, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

Siemens, H. 2004, «Nietzsche and the “Classical”: Traditional and Innovative Features of Nietzsche’s Usage, with Special Reference to Goethe», P. Bishop, Nietzsche and Antiquity: His Reaction and Response to the Classical Tradition, Rochester NY: Camden House, 391-410.

Stump, J. 2020, «On Socrates’ Project of Philosophical Conversion»: Philosopher’s Imprint 20/32, 1-19.

Thouard, D. 2000, «Le centaure et le cyclope. Nietzsche et la philologie entre critique et mythe», in M. Crépon, Nietzsche, Paris: Éditions de l’Herne, 155-74.

Trevaskis, J. R. 1955, «The Sophistry of Noble Lineage (Plato, Sophistes 230a5-232b9)»: Phronesis 1/1, 36-49.

Vlastos, G. 1994, «The Socratic Elenchus: Method is All», in G. Vlastos, Socratic Studies, ed. M. Burnyeat, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1-37.

Zhavoronkov, A. 2014, «Nietzsche’s Influence on Homeric Scholarship», in A. Jensen and H. Heit, Nietzsche as a Scholar of Antiquity, London: Bloomsbury, 139-55.

Zhavoronkov, A. 2021, Nietzsche und Homer. Tradition der klassischen Philologie und philosophischer Kontext, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.