Musings on the Meno / Edition 1by J.E. Thomas
Pub. Date: 03/31/1980
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
The objectives of this book are to provide a new translation of Plato's M eno together with a series of studies on its philcisophical argument in the light of recent secondary literature. My translation is based mainly on the Oxford Classical Text, 1. Burnet's Platonis Opera (Oxford Clarendon Press 1900) Vol. III. In conjunction with this I have made extensive use of… See more details below
The objectives of this book are to provide a new translation of Plato's M eno together with a series of studies on its philcisophical argument in the light of recent secondary literature. My translation is based mainly on the Oxford Classical Text, 1. Burnet's Platonis Opera (Oxford Clarendon Press 1900) Vol. III. In conjunction with this I have made extensive use of R.S. Bluck's Plato's Meno (Cam bridge University Press, 1964). At critical places in the dialogue I have also consulted A. Croiset's Gorgias, Menon (Bude text). My debt ~o two other sources will be clearly in evidence. They are E.S. Thompson's Plato's Meno (London, MacMillan 1901), and St. George Stock's The Meno of Plato (Oxford Clarendon Press, 1894). One of the greatest difficulties facing a translator is to achieve a balance between accuracy and elegance. Literal translations are more likely to be accurate, but, alas, they also tend to be duller. Free translations run into the opposite danger of paying for elegance and liveliness with the coin of inaccuracy. Another hurdle, for a translator of a Platonic dialogue, is posed by the challenge to maintain the conversational pattern and fast moving character of the discussion. This is easier where the exchang~s are short, but much more difficult where Socrates gets somewhat long-winded.
Table of Contentsto the Meno.- A. Plato, the Man.- B. Plato’s Use of Dialogue Form.- C. The Meno as a Transitional Dialogue.- D. Plato on Socrates and Sophistry.- E. The Date of the Meno.- F. The Characters of the Meno.- Translation of the Meno.- Commentary.- I. Socrates’ Elenchos at Work (70a1–81a7).- 1. The Opening Conversation: The Relevance of the Ti-Poion Distinction (70a1–71b7).- 2. Lesson One: Definition Is Not Enumeration (71e–73c5).- 3. Lesson Two: Correct Form Isn’t Everything (73c8–75a9).- 4. Models for Muddles (75b1–77a5).- 5. Digression on the Logic of the What-is-X Question.- 6. Lesson Three: You Can’t Teach an Old Dog New Tricks (77a5–79e4).- 7. Perplexity and Paradox (79e5–81a7).- II. Anamn?sis (81a10–86c6).- 1. Knowledge as Recollection: (i) Narration (81a10–82a6).- A. The Mythical-Religious View.- B. Vlastos: Anamn?sis as Inference.- C. Hare: Anamn?sis as a Dimension of Meaning.- D. Moravcsik: The Entitative Aspect of Remembering.- E. Chomsky on Innate Ideas.- F. The Enigma of “the Knowledge That Is in Us”.- 2. Knowledge as Recollection: (ii) Demonstration (82a8–86c6).- A. The Slave-Boy Interview.- B. Stages of Recollection.- C. The Slave-Boy Interview as a Mini-Meno.- III. The Method of Hypothesis (86c7–100c2).- 1. Introduction of the Method: The Geometrical Example (86c7–87b2.- 2. Application of the Method: ‘Virtue is Knowledge’ Established (87b2–89c4).- 3. Ramification of the Method: ‘Virtue is Knowledge’ Challenged (89c5–96c10).- 4. True Opinion versus Knowledge (96d1–100c2).- Name Index.
and post it to your social network
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
See all customer reviews >