Charmides

A literal translation, allowing the simplicity and vigor of the Greek diction to shine through.

This book argues that Plato's Charmides presents a unitary but incomplete argument intended to lead its readers to substantive philosophical insights. Through careful, contextually sensitive analysis of Plato's arguments concerning the virtue of sophrosyne, Thomas M. Tuozzo brings the dialogue's lines of inquiry together, carrying Plato's argument forward to a substantive conclusion. This innovative reading of Charmides reverses misconceptions about the dialogue that stemmed from an impoverished conception of Socratic elenchus and unquestioned acceptance of ancient historiography's demonization of Critias. It views Socratic argument as a tool intended to move its addressee to substantive philosophical insights. It also argues, on the basis of recent historical research, a review of the fragments of Critias' oeuvre and Plato's use of Critias in other dialogues, that Plato had a nuanced, generally positive view of Critias. Throughout, readers are alerted to textual difficulties whose proper resolution is crucial to understanding Plato's often abstract arguments.

Offers a compelling, comprehensive and unified reading of the Charmides, one of Plato's most attractive but enigmatic dialogues.

A close text commentary showing the interplay of the philosophical issues, the characters and the dialectic across the dialogue.

The Charmides is among Plato's most intriguing and perplexing dialogues. The range of subjects touched or treated is extremely wide: matters logical, epistemological, moral, ethical, political, and religious. In many cases, these are discussed in a highly inconclusive and aporetic way, especially when it comes to the subject of knowledge. Finally, the dialogue is also difficult on almost every level of its expression; mock-reasonings, misunderstandings, ironies, paradoxes, and perplexities abound. As a result, the run of its many arguments, both on the short and the long range, and its overall structure are not easy to discern. If a text of such a character is to be made completely accessible, a full-scale commentary is required; it is much to be regretted, therefore, that there is no commentary in which the difficulties of the Greek, the argument, and the place of the philosophical problems in the development of Plato's thought are comprehensively and coherently explained. This monograph does not aspire to that status, but makes an essential contribution towards achieving that aim (in addition to the many other works in the field, Lamb's scrupulous translation of 1927 and Bloch's penetrating study of 1973 in particular) by presenting a detailed examination of forty-two passages of which the interpretation is disputed; many more minor problems are dealt with along the way. In all matters of interpretation, special attention has been paid to defining the exact place of the passage within the run of the, often intricate, argument. The result of this attention can also be observed in an analytical 'Summary of the contents of the Charmides'.

Presents the translations of "The Laches and Charmides." This title includes notes and a bibliography.

Although wisdom and beauty are prized everywhere, in what exactly they consist is a matter of dispute that even has tragic political implications. As the traditional elites of fifth-century BCE Athens felt their social privileges being chipped away by democratic encroachments, they clung to their traditional belief that they—and they alone—were “beautiful and good” enough to rule. Plato’s alternately comic and serious dialogue Charmides is set in this Athens and explores the nature of temperance (sōphrosunē: in eating, in drinking, in life in general). In this book,. Cohen-Taber uses the dramatic structure of this dialogue to show how Socrates challenges the elitist views of his two interlocutors, revealing Plato’s critiques of aristocrats’ smug complacency about their supposed exclusive natural beauty and intellectual capacities (kalokagathia) that grant them the natural right to rule. Plato decided to write the dialogue because he saw this claim of superiority as continuously threatening to destabilize his polis. This leads Plato, Cohen-Taber argues, to suggest alternative, and more egalitarian, accounts of wisdom and beauty as the drama about sōphrosunē unfolds. These accounts are thoroughly moral, and therefore open to people from any economic class.

Papers presented to the Society for Ancient Greek Philosophy since its beginnings in the 1950's.