Thinking Of Death In Plato S Euthydemus

Thinking of Death places Plato's Euthydemus among the dialogues that surround the trial and death of Socrates. A premonition of philosophy's fate arrives in the form of Socrates' encounter with the two-headed sophist pair, Euthydemus and Dionysodorus, who appear as if they are the ghost of the Socrates of Aristophanes' Thinkery. The pair vacillate between choral ode and rhapsody, as Plato vacillates between referring to them in the dual and plural number in Greek. Gwenda-lin Grewal's close reading explores how the structure of the dialogue and the pair's back-and-forth arguments bear a striking resemblance to thinking itself: in its immersive remove from reality, thinking simulates death even as it cannot conceive of its possibility. Euthydemus and Dionysodorus take this to an extreme, and so emerge as the philosophical dream and sophistic nightmare of being disembodied from substance. The Euthydemus is haunted by philosophy's tenuous relationship to political life. This is played out in the narration through Crito's implied criticism of Socrates-the phantom image of the Athenian laws-and in the drama itself, which appears to take place in Hades. Thinking of death thus brings with it a lurid parody of the death of thinking: the farce of perfect philosophy that bears the gravity of the city's sophistry. Grewal also provides a new translation of the Euthydemus that pays careful attention to grammatical ambiguities, nuances, and wit in ways that substantially expand the reader's access to the dialogue's mysteries.

Thinking of Death places Plato's Euthydemus among the dialogues that surround the trial and death of Socrates, including a new translation of the Euthydemus that pays careful attention to grammatical ambiguities, nuances, and wit in ways that substantially expand the reader's access to the dialogue's mysteries.

Fashion | Sense is designed to explode “fashion,” and with it, the stigma in philosophy against fashion's superficiality. Fashion appears to be altogether differently occupied, disingenuous and insubstantial, even sophistic in its pretense to peddle surfaces as if they were something deep. But is fashion's apparent beguilement more philosophical than it seems? And is philosophy's longing for exposed depth concealing fashion in its anti-fashion stance? Using primarily ancient Greek texts, peppered with allusions to their echoes across the history of philosophy and contemporary fashion and pop culture, Gwenda-lin Grewal not only examines the rift between fashion and philosophy, but also challenges the claim that fashion is modern. Indeed, fashion's quarrel with philosophy may be at least as ancient as that infamous quarrel between philosophy and poetry alluded to in Plato's Republic. And the quest for fashion's origins, as if a quest for a neutrally-outfitted self, stripped of the self-awareness that comes with thinking, prompts questions about human agency and our immersion in time. The touch of reality's fabric bristles in our relationship to our looks, not simply through the structure of clothes but in the plot of our wearing them. Meanwhile, the fashion of our words sharpens our meaning like a cutting silhouette. Grewal's own writing is playfully and daringly self-conscious, aware of its style and the entrapment it arouses from the very first line. The reactions provoked by fashion's flair, not only among the philosophical set but also among those who would never deck themselves out in the title, “philosopher,” show it forth as perhaps philosophy's most important and underestimated doppelgänger.

Plato studied under Socrates and was Aristotle's teacher. Together these three Greeks developed the basis of philosophical thinking for the entire Western world. Plato was also a writer, mathematician, and founder of the Academy in Athens, which was the first university in Europe. Written in 380 B C, Euthydemus satirizes the logical fallacies of the Sophists. It describes a visit paid by Socrates and various youths to two brothers, Euthydemus and Dionysodorus, Plato hopes through satire to contrast Socratic arguments and education with Sophism and prove the latter inferior. Euthydemus and Dionysodorus continually attempt to trap Socrates with deceptive and meaningless arguments, to demonstrate their professed philosophical superiority.

Richard Rojcewicz’s Heidegger, Plato, Philosophy, Death: An Atmosphere of Mortality offers an original perspective on the bond between philosophy and death in the thought of Martin Heidegger and Plato. For Heidegger, authentic being-toward-death is not preoccupation with death as such, nor resoluteness in the face of one's demise, but preoccupation with the meaning of the beings—ourselves—who comport themselves understandingly toward death and who breathe an atmosphere of mortality. Authentic dying is then nothing other than the practice of philosophy. For Plato, philosophy is the practice of dying, the separating of the soul to its own autonomous existence. This separation, however, is not that of the soul from the body. Instead, it is separation from common understanding, hearsay, everydayness, and mediocrity. Accordingly, both Heidegger and Plato see an intimate connection between philosophy and death. Rather than a morbid focus on negativity and dissolution, however, this connection leads to a call to being authentic, thinking for oneself, and repudiating the superficiality of the crowd. For both Heidegger and Plato, philosophizing and dying are, most concretely, a matter of heeding the Delphic oracle: Know thyself. Rojcewicz pursues this theme of philosophy and death through the topics of signs, anxiety, conscience, music, and the COVID-19 pandemic.

THE Euthydemus, though apt to be regarded by us only as an elaborate jest, has also a very serious purpose. It may fairly claim to be the oldest treatise on logic; for that science originates in the misunderstandings which necessarily accompany the first efforts of speculation. Several of the fallacies which are satirized in it reappear in the Sophistici Elenchi of Aristotle and are retained at the end of our manuals of logic. But if the order of history were followed, they should be placed not at the end but at the beginning of them; for they belong to the age in which the human mind was first making the attempt to distinguish thought from sense, and to separate the universal from the particular or individual. Aeterna Press

Death has long been a pre-occupation of philosophers, and this is especially so today. The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Death collects 21 newly commissioned essays that cover current philosophical thinking of death-related topics across the entire range of the discipline. These include metaphysical topics--such as the nature of death, the possibility of an afterlife, the nature of persons, and how our thinking about time affects what we think about death--as well as axiological topics, such as whether death is bad for its victim, what makes it bad to die, what attitude it is fitting to take towards death, the possibility of posthumous harm, and the desirability of immortality. The contributors also explore the views of ancient philosophers such as Aristotle, Plato and Epicurus on topics related to the philosophy of death, and questions in normative ethics, such as what makes killing wrong when it is wrong, and whether it is wrong to kill fetuses, non-human animals, combatants in war, and convicted murderers. With chapters written by a wide range of experts in metaphysics, ethics, and conceptual analysis, and designed to give the reader a comprehensive view of recent developments in the philosophical study of death, this Handbook will appeal to a broad audience in philosophy, particularly in ethics and metaphysics.