Пожалуйста, используйте этот идентификатор, чтобы цитировать или ссылаться на этот ресурс:
http://hdl.handle.net/11701/44117
Полная запись метаданных
Поле DC | Значение | Язык |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Deretić, Irina | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-10-06T11:38:49Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2023-10-06T11:38:49Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2022 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Deretić I. Historical-philosophical debates on Plato’s “unwritten doctrines”: Current positions. Philosophy of the History of Philosophy, 2022, vol. 3, рр. 129–146. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu34.2022.109 (In Russian) | en_GB |
dc.identifier.other | https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu34.2022.109 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11701/44117 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Ever since a new way of reading Plato based on “unwritten doctrines” was articulated, it became a matter of dispute. However, the testimonies of its existence are undeniable. This expression was used by Aristotle in his Physics and its description can be found both in Aristotle and other in the classical thinkers. There are three key points crucial for Plato’s “unwritten doctrines” i. e. his oral lectures held at the Academy. These are: the doctrine about the Principles i. e. the One and the Indeterminate Dyad (hen and aoristos duas), the thesis about the geometrical construction of the world and the doctrine about ideal numbers. These numbers are referred to in both “direct” and “indirect” tradition. The controversy regarding arose in German academic circles where intensive study of Plato has a long and highly developed tradition. In the Anglo-Saxon world this discussion appears not to have been well received and has sometimes even provoked a rejection (especially in the circle of H. Chernis and his followers). However, this certainly does not lead to the conclusion that studies drawing on Plato’s “unwritten doctrines” have not appeared in the English-speaking world, which sought new ways of understanding the meaning of his philosophy. In this paper, first, I will assess the different readings, as well as their arguments regarding the importance of “unwritten doctrines” for accounting for Plato’s philosophy. Then, I will argue for my stance in this debate. | en_GB |
dc.language.iso | ru | en_GB |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | Philosophy of the History of Philosophy;Volume 3 | - |
dc.subject | Plato | en_GB |
dc.subject | unwritten doctrines | en_GB |
dc.subject | dialogues | en_GB |
dc.subject | H.-G. Gadamer | en_GB |
dc.subject | K. Gaiser | en_GB |
dc.subject | H. Krämer | en_GB |
dc.subject | Th. A. Szlezák | en_GB |
dc.title | Historical-philosophical debates on Plato’s “unwritten doctrines”: Current positions | en_GB |
dc.type | Article | en_GB |
Располагается в коллекциях: | Volume 3 (2022) |
Файлы этого ресурса:
Файл | Описание | Размер | Формат | |
---|---|---|---|---|
129-146.pdf | 659,9 kB | Adobe PDF | Просмотреть/Открыть |
Все ресурсы в архиве электронных ресурсов защищены авторским правом, все права сохранены.