Loading...

Xenophon, the Philosopher

Argumentation and Ethics

by Claudia Mársico (Volume editor) Daniel Rossi Nunes Lopes (Volume editor)
©2023 Edited Collection 266 Pages

Summary

Xenophon was considered a talented writer and quick-witted political philosopher, which won him many readers and praise, especially during the Renaissance and early Modernity, but the storm of the nineteenth century that swept away in disdain and derision

Table Of Contents

  • Cover
  • Title
  • Copyright
  • About the author
  • About the book
  • This eBook can be cited
  • Contents
  • Introduction: Xenophon as Philosopher
  • 1. Explorations on Akrasia and Happiness
  • Akrasia in Xenophon’s Socrates, in the Light of the 5th and 4th Century Debate Over Akratic Patterns of Action (Alessandro Stavru)
  • On Enkrateia and Akrasia in Xenophon (Olga Chernyakhovskaya)
  • Things That Will Be Beneficial Always: Xenophon’s Eudaimonology and the Happiness of Socrates (Gabriel Danzig)
  • Notes on the Dynamics between Kingship and Tyranny in Xenophon (Rodrigo Illarraga)
  • 2. Towards Ethical Models
  • Xenophon’s Oeconomicus: Elements of New Ethics in Economics (Fiorenza Bevilacqua)
  • Sōphronein in Xenophon’s Spartan Constitution (Lakedaimoniōn Politeia) (Christopher Moore)
  • How to Become a Successful Tyrant. Ethics and Anthropology in Xenophon’s Hiero (Claudia Marsico)
  • Xenophon’s Agesilaus: Expedient Rhetoric or Ethical Paradigm (Noreen Humble)
  • 3. Argumentation and Philosophical Method
  • History and the Oeconomicus (David M. Johnson)
  • Some Sophistic Positions Held by Xenophon’s Socrates (Louis-André Dorion)
  • The Dialectical Method in Xenophon and Antisthenes (Santiago Chame)
  • The Term “sophist” in Xenophon (Francisco Villar)
  • List of Contributors

←6 | 7→

Introduction: Xenophon as Philosopher

Our comprehension of the present is rooted in hermeneutical keys dependent on historical notions. They provide a horizon combining interpretations of the past and foresight of possible futures. To think that the hallmark of tradition is the product of a few outstanding personalities is not the same as comprehending it as the result of a collective building set forth by a broad group of intellectuals with distinct profiles. To believe that philosophy came along because it left behind the agora and took refuge in the Academy is far from considering that it made an important step when viewpoints and opportunities for theoretical dialogue grew. The choice between those alternatives has much to do with the comprehension of the goals of philosophy today. In this sense, when we say that the attempts to put intellectual dialogue in the forefront are not recent innovations but the distinctive mark of the Western tradition, we are talking both about the beginnings and the future, drawing a line between those distant points. In the unpredictable contemporary world, fragile and always at risk of violent and dogmatic deviations, many times inspired paradoxically by the abandonment of dogmatism, a more careful look at antiquity may be reinvigorating. Far from the oppressive force of ancient “think tanks” that sometimes are associated with Plato, for instance, the broader context reveals a quite different scene, populated by discordant voices and phenomena, all of them coming straight out of collective energies.

It is worth remembering that philosophy was born as a discourse with disciplinary autonomy during the 4th century BC. Before that time, as Livio Rossetti claims, there is “virtual philosophy”, that is, developments in which we can recognize in retrospect “philosophical” features that their authors had not conceived as such. The turn that creates philosophy has much to do with the curious phenomenon of the Socratic dialogue, in which many intellectuals produced almost three hundred works with Socrates as a main character and spokesperson of conflicting ideas. Materialism, idealism, hedonism, rigorism, skepticism, eristics and a long list of other views collided in a game in which Socrates rebutted Socrates. Aristippus, Euclid, Phaedo, Antisthenes, Simon, to name but a few, feed the constellation of original and ingenious philosophies.

Xenophon was also in this curious group. The history of his reception is as surprising and as full of adventures as his biography. He was considered a talented writer and quick-witted political philosopher, which won him many readers and praise, especially during the Renaissance and early Modernity, but the ←7 | 8→storm of the nineteenth century that swept away in disdain and derision the other Socratics carried Xenophon along too. If by the number of his preserved works he could be compared with Plato, his supposed coarseness removed him from any comparison. Even recently, in the context of the recovery of the Socratic philosophies, most of the attention has turned to the subtleties of Aristippus, Antisthenes or the Megarians, with analyzes of Xenophon lagging far behind. Although his works had never been missing, it still often seems that he is regarded as offering only details and testimonies, but not truly interesting ideas.

However, this scene has begun changing in dribs and drabs, and this book is proof of this turn. In the line of significant works in the area carried out in recent years, in December 2017 a conference was held at the University of Sao Paulo (Brazil), whose host was Daniel Rossi Nunes Lopes. In the framework of joint activities with the group of Buenos Aires led by Claudia Marsico and based on previous works with Rodrigo Illarraga, this meeting was dedicated to reviewing Xenophon’s role in the philosophy of the classical period. The activity reunited Louis-André Dorion, Mariana Gardella, Santiago Chame, Francisco Villar, Gabriel Danzig, Claudia Marsico, Rodrigo Illarraga, Lucia Sano, Breno Battistin Sebastiani and Roberto Bolzani Filho during two days of intense discussion about many passages of the works of this Socratic.

Many conversations dealt with the theoretical features of certain notions raised by Xenophon. They resulted in the project about “Xenophon, the philosopher”, oriented to examine the aspects that received more attention during the conference: argumentation and ethics. To complete this task it was necessary to join forces with top scholars in the area. Fortunately, the project touched a cord, and many outstanding colleagues contributed with their work.

Although it has not been that long since that moment, many things have happened. The world was shocked by a pandemic that has put our communities’ fragility and organizational logic at the forefront. This situation has promoted the attention to topics much discussed by the Socratic group in general and Xenophon in particular. Furthermore, in the middle of so many troubles, the map of the studies in this area has changed. The meeting at Sao Paulo was an opportunity to prepare the SOCRATICA IV conference, held in Buenos Aires in November 2018, when the International Society for Socratic Studies was created, with the active participation of several of the contributors to this book, in the framework of the encounter with scholars from more than twenty-five countries from all over the world. The Executive Committee includes Louis-André Dorion, Gabriel Danzig, Noreen Humble, Rodrigo Illarraga, and Claudia Marsico as its Founding President.

←8 |
 9→

The relevance of the studies about Xenophon in this context is clear, and the impulse to strengthen the international dialogue led to a conference in Bar Ilan, Israel, in November 2019, organized by Gabriel Danzig. This meeting was the occasion to create the International Xenophon Society, with Christopher Tuplin as its first President, who then hosted the conference Xenophon 2021 at Liverpool, gathering dozens of scholars together to discuss Xenophon’s works from multiple angles. The future of these studies is promising and at the forefront of the overall reassessing of traditional views about ancient philosophy. We hope this book will contribute to this task.

An Overview of the Contributions

This book is divided into three sections, each of them gathering chapters with similar approach even if dealing with different Xenophotean works: 1. Explorations on akrasia and happiness; 2. Towards ethical models; and 3. Argumentation and philosophical method.

The first two chapters of the first section are concerned with the notion of akrasia (“Akrasia in Xenophon’s Socrates, in the light of the 5th and 4th century debate over akratic patterns of action”, by Alessandro Stavru; and “On akrasia and enkrateia in Xenophon”, by Olga Chernakhovskaya”). It is well known that in Xenophon’s works akrasia means in general the opposite condition of enkrateia –that is to say, the lack of self-control regarding bodily appetites and pleasures. But to what extent does Xenophon deal with the problem of akrasia understood in a strict sense as described in Plato’s Protagoras and Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics Book VII– namely, being forced by an irrational impulse to act contrarily to what one thinks the better course of action?

In order to grasp the proper place of akrasia within Xenophon’s ethics and its relationship with the treatment other Socratics gave to the same problem, Alexander Stavru starts with a survey of akratic patterns of action in Euripides (Medea and Hippolytus) and Aristophanes (Clouds) which can be related to Socrates’ thought and way of life. Especially in the case of Aristophanes, it is argued that the asceticism of Socrates’ character and his comrades at the “Thinkery” leads to a unrestrained way of life, whereas for the Socratics asceticism and exercise are necessary condition to attain self-control (enkrateia). In the case of Antisthenes, Phaedo, and Aristippus, Stavru shows that they offer different responses to the same ethical issue – namely, how to attain self-control and tame the akratic nature of the human being in order to be virtuous and happy. All of them agree to some extant that Socrates’ self-control is rooted in his peculiar non-cognitive strength that helps him to keep his desires and emotions under ←9 | 10→control, enabling him to act rightly whenever he is called upon to act – and consequently, that a lack of self-control (akrasia) leads to a vicious and miserable way of life. In the case of Plato, it is well known that the development of the theory of the tripartite soul in the so-called “middle dialogues” implies the possibility of akrasia in the strict sense referred above, as the story of Leontius in Book IV of the Republic evinces paradigmatically. However, it is a standard view that Socrates’ intellectualism of the so-called “early dialogues” entails the rejection of akrasia. From this standpoint, maybe the most radical interpretation put forward by Stavru in this chapter is concerned with Plato’s Protagoras: he defies the standard interpretation pursued by several scholars by arguing that the reference to the strength of knowledge throughout the argument against “the many” suggests that Socrates still recognizes the possibility of a weak sort of knowledge that could be overthrown by pleasure, and therefore the possibility of akrasia in these circumstances. In this sense, Stavru attempts to reconcile Plato’s Protagoras with the view of the other Socratics (Antisthenes, Phaedo, and Aristippus), insofar as the strong knowledge that appears as the only remedy against akrasia would involve some kind of non-cognitive strength. Finally, considering that self-control (enkrateia) is not deemed by Xenophon as a virtue in itself, but rather as a necessary condition to the acquisition of knowledge and moral virtue, Stavru shows that lack of self-control (akrasia) in a broader sense is a distorted condition related to the excessive pleasures of body: these can be overcome only by exercise and discipline, as the other Socratics also claim.

Details

Pages
266
Year
2023
ISBN (PDF)
9783631891773
ISBN (ePUB)
9783631891780
ISBN (Hardcover)
9783631890059
DOI
10.3726/b20284
Language
English
Publication date
2023 (February)
Published
Berlin, Bern, Bruxelles, New York, Oxford, Warszawa, Wien, 2023. 266 S.

Biographical notes

Claudia Mársico (Volume editor) Daniel Rossi Nunes Lopes (Volume editor)

Claudia Marsico is a Professor of Ancient Philosophy at the University of Buenos Aires, in Argentina, and the Founding President of the International Society for Socratic Studies (ISSS). Daniel Rossi Nunes Lopes is a Professor of Greek Language and Literature at the University of São Paulo, in Brazil. They held an international conference dedicated to exploring Xenophon’s philosophy which was the basis of this volume

Previous

Title: Xenophon, the Philosopher
book preview page numper 1
book preview page numper 2
book preview page numper 3
book preview page numper 4
book preview page numper 5
book preview page numper 6
book preview page numper 7
book preview page numper 8
book preview page numper 9
book preview page numper 10
book preview page numper 11
book preview page numper 12
book preview page numper 13
book preview page numper 14
book preview page numper 15
book preview page numper 16
book preview page numper 17
book preview page numper 18
book preview page numper 19
book preview page numper 20
book preview page numper 21
book preview page numper 22
book preview page numper 23
book preview page numper 24
book preview page numper 25
book preview page numper 26
book preview page numper 27
book preview page numper 28
book preview page numper 29
book preview page numper 30
book preview page numper 31
book preview page numper 32
book preview page numper 33
book preview page numper 34
book preview page numper 35
book preview page numper 36
book preview page numper 37
book preview page numper 38
book preview page numper 39
book preview page numper 40
268 pages