Plato constructs the philosopher in contrast to the sophist. Both sophistical and rhetorical logos, in their epistemic closeness to philosophical logos, require a constant act of demarcation ...throughout Plato’s works. The challenge posed by the sophists creates a structural, instable tension in several Platonic dialogues. Why is the Athenian philosopher obsessed by a different yet comparable approach to virtue, knowledge and social order? Why does the Athenian philosopher need and, at the same time, reject the sophist when it comes to shaping his own self-image? To try to answer these questions, I will go back to a foundational moment where the Platonic philosopher is theoretically constructed and conceptually produced against the sophist, namely, Plato’s Sophist, Statesman, Protagoras, Gorgias and Phaedrus. The aim of the article is to show how the Platonic philosopher is conveniently defined through a series of partisan demarcations grounded on ontological privilege, epistemic exclusion, ethical circularity and, ultimately, political delegitimation.
This article approaches the problem of post-truth and the opposition between philosophical dialectics and sophistic rhetoric. The antagonism is addressed through a reading of Žižek's depiction of the ...ongoing discussion between Alain Badiou and Barbara Cassin, the “new version of the ancient dialogue between Plato and the sophists,” as stained by sexual difference, and the dialectics between Parmenides and Gorgias. The article argues that only through acknowledging the inescapable failure of these sides to ever establish a complete totality are we capable of overcoming the antagonism that resides at their core, thus making a dialectical sophistics, on the basis of Žižek's thought, possible. Thus, only by taking the path through post-truth can we attempt to reach the disavowed core of truth that haunts every failed system.
What if the language of the world were not Globish but translation? This article proposes translation to be the best paradigm for human sciences, exportable to other fields of politics and society. ...As a know-how with differences, translation provides an articulation between the one and the universal, on the one hand, and diversity or singularities, on the other. Translation helps to think anew the nature-culture relationship, far from any rootedness or nationalism, and it practices a consistent relativism. The author starts from her own experience of the Dictionary of Untranslatables to philosophize in tongues.
La hipótesis de este ensayo es que la fundación de la filosofía política, disciplina que Arendt definió como el intento de una huida completa de la política, puede entenderse como uno de los momentos ...decisivos de la conformación progresiva de lo que Foucault llamó la historia de la voluntad de saber occidental. A partir de esa suposición, examinamos en una lectura cruzada el análisis arendtiano del paso de la acción al gobierno en Platón y la lectura foucaultiana de la exclusión del sofisma en Aristóteles. Mostramos finalmente en qué la arqueología del mundo de la acción anterior a la filosofía política que Arendt propone, en torno a cierta figura ambigua de Sócrates, se diferencia de la teoría estratégica del discurso que Foucault encuentra en la sofística, y nos interrogamos por las implicaciones políticas de esta diferencia, especialmente en lo que apunta a repensar hoy las relaciones entre el pensamiento y la acción.
This article investigates the ambiguous status of rhetoric, situated between proper philosophy and mere sophistry, through Alan Badiou’s three exemplary figures of thought: the philosopher, the ...anti-philosopher, and the sophist. With the recent return of the sophist in politics in the form of populist politicians, contemporary rhetorical studies have expressed a need for the discipline to reconsider its alliance with relativist sophistics. However, by studying Badiou’s three exemplary figures, and relating them to his understanding of the three forms of negation, the article explores a possible rift between sophistical rhetoric and anti-philosophical populism that complicates prevalent understandings of the relationship between rhetoric, philosophy, and sophistics. Finally, the article brings up some issues concerning how to fit exemplarity in general, and the three exemplary figures in particular, into the framework of Badiou’s entire philosophy and discusses how to potentially counteract these limitations.
Tout est force, or la force agit comme séduction : elle est une relation qui modifie et se modifie. Dionysos est le dieu de la séduction, que Socrate tente de renverser par la modification de la ...tragédie. Socrate, Platon et les philosophies traditionnelles sont des individus et des pensées réactifs : ils refusent la séduction, mais pour cela doivent séduire le monde pour le figer, et séduire d’autres individus pour qu’ils adhèrent à leur pensée. Ce refus du devenir et de la transformation inaugure cependant toute une histoire humaine. Nietzsche veut renverser cette histoire, c’est-à-dire la séduire, afin de produire le surhomme. Pour ce faire, il faut inverser le langage, le défaire de l’identité pour le faire renouer avec la métaphore : sortir du figement pour retrouver la métamorphose. Le style et l’art permettent cela, ainsi que la sophistique. De cette façon, Nietzsche trouve un langage et une logique permettant une forme de connaissance ne trahissant pas la séduction, mais au contraire l’affirmant : sa pensée agit comme une force, transformant ce qu’elle « connaît ». La séduction est le système métaphysique décrivant le monde comme un jeu de séduction, autrement dit de forces en lutte. Cette métaphysique se décrit elle-même comme une force parmi les autres, luttant contre les autres. La pensée nietzschéenne est féminine : elle est double, contradictoire, stylée et masquée. Elle révèle la contradiction inhérente à toute pensée, et particulièrement dans celles qui rejettent la contradiction en se fondant sur l’identité, comme c’est le cas des métaphysiques traditionnelles. Elle reconnaît même la possibilité de sa propre inversion, c’est-à-dire qu’elle peut elle aussi devenir réactive en figeant par sa description le monde du devenir.
Everything is force. Now, force acts as seduction : it is a relation that modifies and is modified. Dionysus is the god of seduction, that Socrates attempts to topple by modifying tragedy. Socrates, Plato and traditional philosophies are reactive individuals and forms of thinking : they refuse seduction, but to do so, they have to seduce the world to freeze it, and seduce other individuals for them to embrace their line of thought. This refusal of becoming and transformation nevertheless opens up a whole human history. Nietzsche intends to topple this history, that is to say, to seduce it, in order to produce the superman. In order to do so, language needs to be reversed and parted from identity, for it to revive metaphor : break the freezing to renew with metamorphosis. Such a process is allowed by style and art, as well as sophistics. Thus, Nietzsche finds a language and logic allowing a form of knowledge which doesn’t betray seduction, but on the contrary, asserts it : his thinking acts as a force transforming what is « known » by it. Seduction is the metaphysical system which describes the world as a game of seduction, that is to say of struggling forces. Such metaphysics describes itself as a force among the others, struggling against the others. Nietzschean thinking is feminine : it is double-sided, contradictory, stylish and masked. It reveals the inherent contradiction in all forms of thinking, particularly in those rejecting contradiction on the basis of identity – and such is the case in traditional metaphysics. His thinking even acknowledges the possibility of its own inversion, that is to say that it can also become reactive, freezing the world of becoming by its description.
Sophist or Antiphilosopher? Norris, Christopher
Journal of critical realism,
20/1/1/, Letnik:
11, Številka:
4
Journal Article
Recenzirano
This essay takes Badiou's recently published book as an opportunity to discuss not only his complex (though generally hostile) approach to Wittgenstein but also his evolving critical stance in ...relation to various other movements in present-day philosophical thought. In particular it examines his distinction between 'sophistics' and 'anti-philosophy', as developed very largely through his series of encounters with Wittgenstein. Beyond that, I offer some brief remarks about the role of set-theoretical concepts in Badiou's thinking and the vexed question of their bearing on his other (including political) concerns. Finally - with an eye to certain CR-internal trends and debates - I focus on Badiou's powerful critique of the religious or mystical (hence 'anti-philosophical') dimension of Wittgenstein's thought.
In the Life of Appolonios of Tyana, Philostratos builds up, when his protagonist meets Iarchas, the chief of the Brahmins, a dialogue in which authority and charisma are essential. That staging ...allows him to produce a speech concerning Roman sway an dits representatives, addressing Greeks and Romans alike. The question of addressee enables him to highlight some of the more fundamental point at stake in the sophist’s work. It shows in what way Philostratos questions the Greeks about their life choices and their identity in the Greco-Roman worlf at the beginning of the IIIrd century.
AbstractAristotle in the central chapters of his Sophistical Refutations gives advice on how to counter unfair argumentation by similar means, all the while taking account not only of the adversary’s ...arguments in themselves, but also of his philosophical commitments and state of mind, as well as the impression produced on the audience. This has offended commentators, and made most of them, medieval and modern alike, pass lightly over the relevant passages. A commentary that received the last touch in the very early 13th century is more perceptive because, it is argued, the commentator had lived in a 12th-century environment of competing Parisian schools that was in important respects similar to the one of Aristotle’s Athens.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
BFBNIB, DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NMLJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
PDF
