<DIV>In this book a distinguished philosopher offers a comprehensive interpretation of Platoβs most controversial dialogue. Treating the <I>Republic </I>as a unity and focusing on the dramatic form as the presentation of the argument, Stanley Rosen challenges earlier analyses of the <I>Republic </I>
Plato's Republic: A Study
β Scribed by Stanley Rosen
- Publisher
- Yale University Press
- Year
- 2008
- Tongue
- English
- Leaves
- 431
- Category
- Library
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
β¦ Synopsis
β¦ Table of Contents
Contents
Preface
Introduction
Part One
1. Cephalus and Polemarchus
2. Thrasymachus
3. Glaucon and Adeimantus
Part Two
4. Paideia I: The Luxurious City
5. Paideia II: The Purged City
6. Justice
7. The Female Drama
Part Three
8. Possibility
9. The Philosophical Nature
10. The Good, the Divided Line, and the Cave: The Education of the Philosopher
Part Four
11. Political Decay
12. Happiness and Pleasure
13. The Quarrel between Philosophy and Poetry
14. The Immortal Soul
Epilogue
Notes
Index
π SIMILAR VOLUMES
In this book a distinguished philosopher offers a comprehensive interpretation of Platoβs most controversial dialogue. Treating the Republic as a unity and focusing on the dramatic form as the presentation of the argument, Stanley Rosen challenges earlier analyses of the Republic (including the iron
<DIV>In this book a distinguished philosopher offers a comprehensive interpretation of PlatoΠ²Πβ’s most controversial dialogue. Treating the <I>Republic </I>as a unity and focusing on the dramatic form as the presentation of the argument, Stanley Rosen challenges earlier analyses of the <I>Republic </
<p>A new interpretation of Plato's Republic. Craig investigates why this dialogue, ostensibly about justice, offers Plato's fullest account of philosophy and philosophers, and why it is preoccupied with war.</p>
This new examination of the Republic begins with questions ignored by most students of this famous and much-studied dialogue. Why is Plato's most extensive portrait of philosophy pervaded with the language and imagery of war? Why is a discussion supposedly about justice almost entirely about how to