Defending the Socratic Interpretation of Plato’s Dialogues

  • J. Angelo Corlett
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter provides an in-depth set of replies to several objections that either have been raised or might be raised to the Socratic Anti-Mouthpiece Interpretation of Plato’s dialogues. It is the goal of this chapter to defend the Socratic Anti-Mouthpiece Interpretation as the most plausible approach to Plato’s dialogues because it is the least problematic and because there are no discernible objections to it that render it implausible. This chapter also articulates the value of the Socratic Anti-Mouthpiece Interpretation in explaining their purpose as the Platonic Question raises the problem of Plato’s purpose in composing philosophy in mostly dialogue form.

References

  1. Annas, Julia. 1981. An introduction to Plato’s Republic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. ———. 2006. Ethics and argument in Plato’s Socrates. In The virtuous life in Greek ethics, ed. B. Reis, 32–46. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Beversluis, John. 2006. A defence of dogmatism in the interpretation of Plato. In Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, ed. David Sedley, vol. 31, 85–112. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bobonich, Christopher. 2008. Plato’s politics. In The Oxford handbook of Plato, ed. Gail Fine, 311–335. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Burnyeat, Myles, and Michael Frede. 2015. The pseudo-Platonic Seventh Letter, ed. Dominic Scott. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Cherniss, Harold. 1945. The riddle of the early academy. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  7. ———. 1962. Aristotle’s criticism of Plato and the academy. New York: Russell & Russell.Google Scholar
  8. Corlett, J. Angelo. 1996. Analyzing social knowledge. Totowa: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  9. ———. 2005. Interpreting Plato’s dialogues. Las Vegas: Parmenides Publishing.Google Scholar
  10. Deane, P. 1973. Stylometrics do not exclude the Seventh Letter. Mind 82: 113–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fiske, Susan T., and Shelley E. Taylor. 1991. Social cognition. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  12. Gerson, Lloyd. 2000. Plato Absconditus. In Who speaks for Plato? ed. Gerald Press, 201–210. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  13. ———. 2002. Elenchos, Protreptic, and Platonic philosophizing. In Does Socrates have a method? ed. G.A. Scott, 217–231. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
  14. ———. 2005. What is Platonism? Journal of the History of Philosophy 43: 253–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goodspeed, E.J. 1916. The story of the new testament. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  16. Grant, F.C. 1933. The growth of the gospels. New York: Abingdon Press.Google Scholar
  17. Grant, M. 1977. Jesus: An historian’s review of the gospels. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
  18. Grice, Paul. 1971. Meaning. In Philosophy of language, ed. Jay Rosenberg and Charles Travis, 436–444. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  19. Guthrie, W.K.C. 1975. A history of Greek philosophy: Plato: The man and his dialogues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Irwin, Terence. 1995. Plato’s ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. ———. 2008. The Platonic corpus. In The Oxford handbook of Plato, ed. Gail Fine, 63–87. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Kennedy, J.B. 2010. Plato’s forms, Pythagorean mathematics, and Stichometry. Aperion 43: 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Koester, Helmut. 1990. Ancient Christian gospels: Their history and development. London: SCM Press.Google Scholar
  24. Lehrer, Keith. 2000. Theory of knowledge. 2nd ed. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  25. Levinson, M., A.Q. Morton, and A.D. Winspear. 1968. The Seventh Letter of Plato. Mind 77: 309–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lewis, V.B. 2000. The rhetoric of philosophical politics in Plato’s Seventh Letter. Philosophy & Rhetoric 33: 23–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McCabe, M.M. 2008. “Plato’s ways of writing,” In The Oxford handbook of Plato, ed. Gail Fine, 88–113. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Mulhern, John J. 1971. Two interpretive fallacies. Systematics 9: 168–172.Google Scholar
  29. ———. 2011. Plato’s putative mouthpiece and ancient authorial practice: A reply. Presented at the Society for Ancient Greek Philosophy, Fordham University, 17 October 2011.Google Scholar
  30. Murphy, David. 2011. ‘A certain Socrates swinging around there and claiming…’ Characters’ Utterances and authors’ views in Plato’s practice. Presented at the Society for Ancient Greek Philosophy, Fordham University, 22 October 2011.Google Scholar
  31. Nails, Debra. 1995. Agora, academy, and the conduct of philosophy. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  32. ———. 2011. The structures of Plato’s dialogues. Presented at the Society for Ancient Greek Philosophy, Fordham University, 22 October 2011.Google Scholar
  33. Press, Gerald, ed. 2000. Who speaks for Plato? Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  34. Reshotko, N. 2006. Socratic virtue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rowe, Christopher. 2006. Interpreting Plato. In A companion to Plato, ed. Hugh Benson, 13–24. London: Blackwell Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Shields, Christopher. 2008. Plato and Aristotle in the academy. In The Oxford handbook of Plato, ed. Gail Fine, 504–525. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Streeter, B.H. 1924. The four gospels: A study of origins. London: MacMillan and Company Limited.Google Scholar
  38. Taylor, A.E. 1963. Plato: The man and his work. London: Methuen & Co., LTD.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Angelo Corlett
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophySan Diego State UniversitySan DiegoUSA

Personalised recommendations