Платон
Список книг автора ПлатонPhaedo
Phædo or Phaedo (Greek: Φαίδων, Phaidōn), also known to ancient readers as On The Soul, is one of the best-known dialogues of Plato's middle period, along with the Republic and the Symposium. The philosophical subject of the dialogue is the immortality of the soul. It is set in the last hours prior to the death of Socrates, and is Plato's fourth and last dialogue to detail the philosopher's final days, following Euthyphro, Apology, and Crito. One of the main themes in the Phaedo is the idea that the soul is immortal. In the dialogue, Socrates discusses the nature of the afterlife on his last day before being executed by drinking hemlock. Socrates has been imprisoned and sentenced to death by an Athenian jury for not believing in the gods of the state (though some scholars think it was more for his support of «philosopher kings» as opposed to democracy) and for corrupting the youth of the city. By engaging in dialectic with a group of Socrates' friends, including the two Thebans, Cebes, and Simmias, Socrates explores various arguments for the soul's immortality in order to show that there is an afterlife in which the soul will dwell following death. Phaedo tells the story that following the discussion, he and the others were there to witness the death of Socrates. The Phaedo was first translated into Latin from Greek by Henry Aristippus in 1160. Today, it is generally considered one of Plato's great works. The dialogues of Plato – Early, Transitional and middle, Later middle, Phaedo, Later middle, Late, Of doubtful authenticity.
Meno
Meno (Greek: Μένων, Menōn) is a Socratic dialogue scripted by Plato. It appears to attempt to determine the definition of virtue, or arete, meaning virtue in general, rather than particular virtues, such as justice or temperance. The first part of the work is written in the Socratic dialectical style and Meno is reduced to confusion or aporia. In response to Meno's paradox (or the learner's paradox), however, Socrates introduces positive ideas: the immortality of the soul, the theory of knowledge as recollection (anamnesis), which Socrates demonstrates by posing a mathematical puzzle to one of Meno's slaves, the method of hypothesis, and, in the final lines, the distinction between knowledge and true belief. Plato's Meno is a Socratic dialogue in which the two main speakers, Socrates and Meno (also transliterated as Menon), discuss human virtue: whether or not it can be taught, and what it is. Additional participants in the dialogue include one of Meno's slaves and the Athenian politician Anytus, a prosecutor of Socrates with whom Meno is friendly. Meno is visiting Athens from Thessaly with a large entourage of slaves attending him. Young, good-looking and well-born, Meno is a student of Gorgias, a prominent sophist whose views on virtue clearly influence Meno's. He claims early in the dialogue that he has held forth many times on the subject of virtue, and in front of large audiences. One feature of the dialogue is Socrates' use of one of Meno's slaves to demonstrate his idea of anamnesis, that certain knowledge is innate and «recollected» by the soul through proper inquiry. The dialogues of Plato – Early, Transitional and middle, Later middle, Phaedo, Later middle, Late, Of doubtful authenticity.
Menexenus
The Menexenus (Greek: Μενέξενος) is a Socratic dialogue of Plato, traditionally included in the seventh tetralogy along with the Greater and Lesser Hippias and the Ion. The speakers are Socrates and Menexenus, who is not to be confused with Socrates' son Menexenus. The Menexenus of Plato's dialogue appears also in the Lysis, where he is identified as the «son of Demophon», as well as the Phaedo. The Menexenus consists mainly of a lengthy funeral oration, referencing the one given by Pericles in Thucydides' account of the Peloponnesian War. Socrates here delivers to Menexenus a speech that he claims to have learned from Aspasia, a consort of Pericles and prominent female Athenian intellectual. Menexenus is unique among the Platonic dialogues in that the actual 'dialogue' serves primarily as exposition for the oration. For this reason, perhaps, the Menexenus has come under some suspicion of illegitimacy, although Aristotle's invocation of the text on multiple occasions seems to reinforce its authenticity. Much of the interest in the Menexenus stems from the fact that it is one of the few extant sources on the practice of Athenian funeral oratory, even though it parodies the medium. Famous dialogues of Plato – Early: Apology, Charmides, Crito, Ion, Euthyphro, Hippias MinorIon, Laches, Lysis; Transitional and middle: Cratylus, Euthydemus, Gorgias, Menexenus, Meno, Phaedo, Protagoras, Symposium; Later middle: Parmenides, Phaedrus, Republic, Theaetetus; Late: Critias, Laws, Philebus, Sophist, Statesman, Timaeus.
Lysis
Lysis (Greek: Λύσις), is a dialogue of Plato which discusses the nature of philia (φιλία), often translated as friendship, while the word's original content was of a much larger and more intimate bond. It is generally classified as an early dialogue. The main characters are Socrates, the boys Lysis and Menexenus who are friends, as well as Hippothales, who is in unrequited love with Lysis and therefore, after the initial conversation, hides himself behind the surrounding listeners. Socrates proposes four possible notions regarding the true nature of loving friendship as: Friendship between people who are similar, interpreted by Socrates as friendship between good men. Friendship between men who are dissimilar. Friendship between men who are neither good nor bad and good men. Gradually emerging: friendship between those who are relatives (οἰκεῖοι «not kindred») by the nature of their souls. Of all those options, Socrates thinks that the only logical possibility is the friendship between men who are good and men who are neither good nor bad. In the end, Socrates seems to discard all these ideas as wrong, although his para-logical refutations have strong hints of irony about them. Famous dialogues of Plato – Early: Apology, Charmides, Crito, Ion, Euthyphro, Hippias MinorIon, Laches, Lysis; Transitional and middle: Cratylus, Euthydemus, Gorgias, Menexenus, Meno, Phaedo, Protagoras, Symposium; Later middle: Parmenides, Phaedrus, Republic, Theaetetus; Late: Critias, Laws, Philebus, Sophist, Statesman, Timaeus.
Laches
The Laches (Greek: Λάχης) is a Socratic dialogue written by Plato. Participants in the discourse present competing definitions of the concept of courage. Laches – Athenian general and statesman, son of Melanopus. Famous dialogues of Plato – Early: Apology, Charmides, Crito, Ion, Euthyphro, Hippias MinorIon, Laches, Lysis; Transitional and middle: Cratylus, Euthydemus, Gorgias, Menexenus, Meno, Phaedo, Protagoras, Symposium; Later middle: Parmenides, Phaedrus, Republic, Theaetetus; Late: Critias, Laws, Philebus, Sophist, Statesman, Timaeus.
Ion
In Plato's Ion (Greek: Ἴων) Socrates discusses with the titular character, a professional rhapsode who also lectures on Homer, the question of whether the rhapsode, a performer of poetry, gives his performance on account of his skill and knowledge or by virtue of divine possession. It is one of the shortest of Plato's dialogues. Famous dialogues of Plato – Early: Apology, Charmides, Crito, Ion, Euthyphro, Hippias MinorIon, Laches, Lysis; Transitional and middle: Cratylus, Euthydemus, Gorgias, Menexenus, Meno, Phaedo, Protagoras, Symposium; Later middle: Parmenides, Phaedrus, Republic, Theaetetus; Late: Critias, Laws, Philebus, Sophist, Statesman, Timaeus.
Euthyphro
Euthyphro (Ancient Greek: Εὐθύφρων, romanized: Euthyphrōn; c. 399–395 BC), by Plato, is a Socratic dialogue whose events occur in the weeks before the trial of Socrates (399 BC), between Socrates and Euthyphro. The dialogue covers subjects such as the meaning of piety and justice. The Euthyphro dialogue occurs near the court of the archon basileus (king magistrate), where Socrates and Euthyphro encounter each other; each man is present at the court for the preliminary hearings to possible trials. Euthyphro has come to present charges of murder against his own father who, after arresting one of his workers for killing a slave from the family estate on Naxos Island, tied him and threw him in a ditch where he died of exposure to the elements without proper care and attention while Euthyphro's father awaited to hear from the exegetes about how to proceed. Socrates is astonished by Euthyphro's confidence in being able to prosecute his own father for the serious charge of manslaughter, despite the fact that Athenian Law allows only relatives of the dead man to file suit for murder. Euthyphro dismisses the astonishment of Socrates, which confirms his overconfidence in his own critical judgment of matters religious and ethical. The dialogues of Plato – Early, Transitional and middle, Later middle, Phaedo, Later middle, Late, Of doubtful authenticity.
Crito
Crito (Ancient Greek: Κρίτων [krítɔːn]) is a dialogue by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato. It depicts a conversation between Socrates and his wealthy friend Crito regarding justice (δικαιοσύνη), injustice (ἀδικία), and the appropriate response to injustice. Socrates thinks that injustice may not be answered with injustice, and refuses Crito's offer to finance his escape from prison. The dialogue contains an ancient statement of the social contract theory of government. In contemporary discussions, debate over the meaning of Crito attempt to determine whether it is a plea for unconditional obedience to the laws of a society. The conversation, which may be based on a true historical event, was published in 399 BC. Since his trial in Apology, Socrates has been imprisoned for four weeks, with his execution coming in a matter of days. Historians are not aware of the exact location of Socrates' cell, but according to excavations, it is about 100 meters southwest of the Heliaia court, just outside the site of the agora. Other than Socrates, Crito is the only other character in the story. Crito himself is a rich Athenian, who like Socrates is from Demos Alopeke. Once charged with corrupting the youth and atheism, Crito unsuccessfully vouched to pay Socrates' bail. Additionally, after Socrates was sentenced to death, Crito was ready to pledge to the court that Socrates would not flee in order to spare him the prison sentence. This plea was ultimately rejected. Through both the trial and the execution, Crito was present. In other dialogues, Crito is a conventional Athenian, who cannot understand Socrates' philosophy, despite his attempts to do so. The dialogues of Plato – Early, Transitional and middle, Later middle, Phaedo, Later middle, Late, Of doubtful authenticity.
Платон. Диалоги
Наследие Платона дошло до наших дней не отрывками или цитатами, а почти целиком. «Диалоги» Платона удивляют простым изложением и одновременно глубиной мысли. А далогичная форма повествования, наблюдение за разговором как бы со стороны значительно улучшают понимание текста. В это произведение включены избранные диалоги Платона, представляющие наибольший интерес. Среди них «Апология Сократа», «Критон», «Федон», «Федр», «Софист» и «Пир».
Федр
"Нам следует уяснить причину утраты крыльев и почему они отпадают от души” Согласно рукописной традиции, диалог “Федр” имеет два варианта подзаголовка: “о прекрасном” или “об эросе”. В рукописях указывается и жанр сочинения: этический диалог. Хотя все эти уточнения принадлежат не автору, а являются позднейшими вставками, цель написания “Федра” всегда интересовала его читателей и стала камнем преткновения для специалистов. Диалог «Федр» – одно из самых противоречивых произведений Платона, породившее длинный шлейф толкований, самые ранние из которых возникли еще в Античности. В качестве предмета диалога называли: любовь, риторическое искусство, душевное начало и даже многообразие прекрасного в целом. Поэтическая образность «Федра» заставляет пересмотреть сложившиеся представления о творчестве великого грека, а логические парадоксы этого текста бросают вызов современным философским и литературоведческим теориям. Перевод Для любой развитой научной традиции является нормой регулярное обращение к классическим текстам с целью пересмотра имеющихся переводов и трактовок. Изменение научного горизонта, научного языка, накопление новых данных, появление новых трактовок историко-философских доктрин, которые казались школьными и незыблемыми, приобрело в последние десятилетия кумулятивный характер. Все это накладывает свой отпечаток и на переводческую деятельность: переводы не просто уточняют какие-то детали или недочеты. Они готовятся на основе иных методологических позиций и учитывают – в меру сил – имеющийся зарубежный опыт исследования платоновского корпуса (там появление очередных переводов классических текстов каждые 20-25 лет является нормой). Настоящий перевод подготовлен в рамках деятельности Платоновского философского общества. Издательство: Студия озвучания «Глагол», 2019 г. Перевод: Алексей Анатольевич Глухов Чтец: Дмитрий Оргин Корректор: Любовь Германовна Каретникова Обложка: Анна Колесниченко