Suchergebnisse

Previous scholars and writers have either celebrated the idealism in Plato's Laws or denounced its totalitarianism. Ryan K. Balot, by contrast, refuses to interpret the dialogue as a political blueprint, whether admirable or misguided. Instead, he shows that it constitutes Plato's greatest philosophical investigation of political life. In this transformative re-appraisal, Balot reveals that Plato's goal was to cultivate a tragic attitude toward our political passions, commitments, and aspirations.

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Preface and Acknowledgments -- Abbreviations -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Greed in Aristotle's Political Thought -- 3. Solonian Athens and the Archaic Roots of Greed -- 4. Herodotus and the Greed of Imperialism -- 5. Thucydides, Greed, and the Breakdown of Political Community -- 6. "Revolution Matters"? Oligarchic Rebellion and Democratic Hegemony in Athens -- 7. Epilogue: Plato's Republic in Context -- Bibliography -- Index Locorum -- General Index

In this careful and compelling study, Ryan K. Balot brings together political theory, classical history, and ancient philosophy in order to reinterpret courage as a specifically democratic virtue. Ranging from Thucydides and Aristophanes to the Greek tragedians and Plato, Balot shows that the ancient Athenians constructed a novel vision of courage that linked this virtue to fundamental democratic ideals such as freedom, equality, and practical rationality. The Athenian ideology of courage had practical implications for the conduct of war, for gender relations, and for the citizens' self-image

Abstract
Scholars generally agree that, according to Aristotle, factionalizers are motivated by a sense of injustice (the 'first cause') to redress imbalances in wealth and honor (the 'second cause'). Recent discussions, however, have offered a misleading interpretation of Aristotle's third cause, which he identifies as the origin of the factionalizers' sense of injustice. It involves, most importantly, greed, hubris, and other factors such as fear and 'disproportionate growth'. In conversation with a recent publication in Polis, this article restores the third cause to its proper place in Aristotle's account. Abusive power holders, driven by greed, hubris, and overreaching, oppress their fellow citizens – following in the tradition of Homer's Agamemnon, Hesiod's basileis, and Solon's aristocrats. These power holders prompt a sense of anger, indignation, and injustice in their fellow citizens, who ultimately form factions and take action on their own behalf.

Beginning with an analysis of the problematic relation of 'the particular' to 'the universal' in canonical political texts, this paper explores a variety of frameworks for the study of classical Greek political thought. Specifically, after investigating the influence of Quentin Skinner's contextualism, the paper examines the ideas, approaches, and methods of Bernard Williams, Leo Strauss, and Josiah Ober. I draw attention to each figure's distinctive motivations for returning to ancient Greece and to the influence of particular political ideals on those motivations. I also assess their strengths and weaknesses and offer a critical commentary on their chief ideas. Toward the end of the paper, I outline a novel dialectical framework for the study of classical Athens – one that emphasizes the remoteness of the ancient past and the contribution that our studies might make to self-knowledge. In sketching this framework, I focus on what I call 'ethical Athens', 'philosophical Athens', and 'critical Athens'.