Suchergebnisse

This article works backwards by contextualizing the metaphorical explosion of metaphor, especially in the last century or so, and works back to Plato and Aristotle, who help us to see the outlines of metaphor in relation to poetics, rhetoric, philosophy and politics, as well as the critical and theoretical issues arising subsequently down to the present age, including the views of Zoltán Kövecses, Northrop Frye, Paul Ricoeur, Hegel, Shakespeare, Thomas Aquinas and others. The nub of the matter is whether metaphor helps us get at the core of philosophy, that is truth, justice and beauty, the good life, or whether it deflects and deludes or both. My argument is that they do both for Plato and even for Aristotle, who is less severe on poetry and on poetic mimesis than is Plato. This friction between actual and fictional worlds might be resolved or at least meet in the possible. ; Este artículo procede retrospectivamente, contextualizando la explosión de estudios sobre la metáfora en la perspectiva de Platón y Aristóteles, de manera que podemos distinguir los contornos de la metáfora en relación con la poética, la retórica, la filosofía y la política, así como las cuestiones críticas y teóricas surgidas en el presente, incluyendo el tratamiento por Zoltán Kövecses, Northrop Frye, Paul Ricoeur, Hegel, Shakespeare, Tomás de Aquino y otros. El quid de la cuestión es si la metáfora nos permite llegar al núcleo de la filosofía –verdad, justicia, belleza, la vida buena– o si nos desvía o distrae (o ambas cosas). Mi propuesta es que la ambivalencia vale tanto para Platón como, incluso, para Aristóteles, aunque este es menos severo que aquel para con la poesía y la mimesis. La fricción entre los mundos reales y ficcionales puede resolverse o al menos acercarse en el ámbito de lo posible.

This article concerns the 'ancient quarrel between philosophy and poetry' (Plato, Rep. 607b). With the guidance of Leo Strauss, and with reference to French cultural anthropology and the Hebrew Bible, I offer close readings of the origin myths told by the characters of Aristophanes in Plato's Symposium and Socrates in book 2 of the Republic. I contrast Aristophanes' prudential and political esotericism with Socrates' pedagogical esotericism, connecting the former with poetry's affirmation of the primacy of chaos and the latter with philosophy's openness to the measures of nature or phusis. Aristophanes regards the political poetry of Olympianism as a necessary corrective of original human disorder, while Socrates traces the sickness of souls and cities to an excess of poiēsis, 'poetry' or 'production' in all of its cultural and material senses. The quarrel between Socrates and Aristophanes illuminates fundamental questions that were of central concern to Strauss: What is the status of nature? Must we orient ourselves by the forceful impressions of culture, or can we make out natural standards of how to live? Is war the primary human condition, or peace? Are human beings essentially erotic, or thumotic? Is philosophy an expression of reckless boldness, or of saving moderation?

In recent years philosophers have produced important books on nearly all the major arts: the novel and painting, music and theatre, dance and architecture, conceptual art and even gardening. Poetry is the sole exception. This is an astonishing omission, one this collection of original essays will correct. If contemporary philosophy still regards metaphors such as 'Juliet is the sun' as a serious problem, one has an acute sense of how prepared it is to make philosophical and aesthetic sense of poems such W. B. Yeats's 'The Second Coming', Sylvia Plath's 'Daddy', or Paul Celan's 'Todesfuge'. The Philosophy of Poetry brings together philosophers of art, language, and mind to expose and address the array of problems poetry raises for philosophy. In doing so it lays the foundation for a proper philosophy of poetry, setting out the various puzzles and paradoxes that future work in the field will have to address. Given its breadth of approach, the volume is relevant not only to aesthetics but to all areas of philosophy concerned with meaning, truth, and the communicative and expressive powers of language more generally. Poetry is the last unexplored frontier in contemporary analytic aesthetics, and this volume offers a powerful demonstration of how central poetry should be to philosophy

A reply to S. Burckhardt's criticism of the author's article on Othello and Jaffa's article on King Lear (See SA A0626, A1446). Burckhardt objected to the pol'al interpretations of the 2 plays but did so only on the grounds of their unconventionality & from the standpoint of specialization. Shakespeare dramatized men in pol'al situations, & a proper understanding of the passions of the heroes depends upon an adequate analysis of those situations. Pol'al philosophy was traditionally the fountainhead of pol'al & moral understanding, & it is useful & necessary to study it in order to see the deepest levels of Shakespeare's thought. His plays are incarnations of the problems of man, the pol'al animal, & a purely personal interpretation impoverishes their sense & trivializes the moral issues presented in them. Shakespeare was an educator of citizens. AA-IPSA.

This paper examines the relationship between poetry and philosophy in the sophists, asking what role earlier traditions of poetry and song played in their work. The sophists' influence on various genres of literature and philosophy is widely acknowledged, but, as this paper shows, the influence of earlier traditions of poetry and myth on their work was no less important. The paper demonstrates too how the sophists' engagement with the poetic tradition, like that of the Presocratics, was geared primarily to serve their philosophical or didactic goals, even if the aesthetic benefits of poetic language and style were also appreciated and exploited. Moreover, the sophists recognized poetry's important role in education, and their varied use of poetic language, style, and content in their own teaching was a continuation of this traditional aspect of poetry. In conclusion, the sophists' work on rhetorical, political, and ethical issues engaged with, and was enriched by, the shared poetic culture of their time.

Sigurd Burckhardt has rendered a service in providing the occasion for a thematic presentation of the principles underlying the interpretations of Shakespearean drama by Jaffa and me, to which he has taken such exception. The issue does not primarily concern literary criticism but rather has to do with the relation of art to political philosophy and, in turn, with their relation to life. Burckhardt, however, has not joined the debate on the level of the issues. He does not argue against the substance of our interpretations, and does not say wherein and why they are in error. Characteristic of his method is his offer of three statements "admittedly out of context" from my article for which he then proposes the following test: "Choose," he says, "a jury of widely read, intelligent men, show them these statements (with the information that they are meant to describe two main characters in a play known to all of them), and then make them guess who is being talked about." Burckhardt thinks he is "safe in claiming that there will not be a single correct identification." The moment seems somewhat inappropriately chosen for suggesting the method of a quiz program for deciding a matter of validity. But seriously, does any scholar, however he may wish for public acceptance, make this his standard? Agreement may produce peace, but it can never by itself be a criterion of truth. In presenting my conclusions, I have a right to ask that they be tested in the light of my evidence and my arguments. In the court of scholarly judgment it is a weak argument that rests on the number of witnesses who can be summoned to support an opinion.

This paper examines the relationship between poetry and philosophy in the sophists, asking what role earlier traditions of poetry and song played in their work. The sophists' influence on various genres of literature and philosophy is widely acknowledged, but, as this paper shows, the influence of earlier traditions of poetry and myth on their work was no less important. The paper demonstrates too how the sophists' engagement with the poetic tradition, like that of the Presocratics, was geared primarily to serve their philosophical or didactic goals, even if the aesthetic benefits of poetic language and style were also appreciated and exploited. Moreover, the sophists recognized poetry's important role in education, and their varied use of poetic language, style, and content in their own teaching was a continuation of this traditional aspect of poetry. In conclusion, the sophists' work on rhetorical, political, and ethical issues engaged with, and was enriched by, the shared poetic culture of their time.