There and Back Again as a Free Person 

Q4 Arts and Humanities
Wojciech Szczerba
{"title":"There and Back Again as a Free Person ","authors":"Wojciech Szczerba","doi":"10.35765/forphil.2022.2701.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article refers to the issue of freedom from a philosophical perspective. First of all, it discusses Plato’s metaphor of the cave in Politeia, in which the philosopher writes of freedom in its individual and collective forms. Then the article indicates how the metaphor was read by such contemporary philosophers as Martin Heidegger and Hannah Arendt, who interpret Plato’s metaphor from existential-phenomenological and political perspectives.\nHeidegger stresses the freedom of a human being, who in the light of the subjective existential experience begins to live objectively in an authentic way. He frees himself up from the impersonal-I. A person, who experienced the truth as un-concealment, is not enslaved anymore to the impersonality of the crowd. He is able to face his own mortality and to take responsibility for his own fate. A special expression of freedom is shown in his care for others, even if it means risking one’s life.\nHannah Arendt interprets Plato’s metaphor from the perspective of political philosophy. Her assessment becomes some kind of memento. What if the prisoners of the cave simply do not want to leave their place? Does the philosopher have a right forcefully to pull them out of the cavern? What is better, the attitude of Socrates, who dialogues with people or the attitude of Plato, who simply lectures the mob? In this way Arendt refers to the concept of freedom, as it is sketched in Plato’s cave. At the same time, she argues with Heidegger’s interpretation of the Platonic metaphor.\nHeidegger stresses the freedom of a human being, who in the light of the subjective existential experience begins to live objectively in an authentic way. He frees himself up from the impersonal-I. Human, who experienced the truth as un-concealment and freedom, is not enslaved anymore with the impersonality of the crowd, which reject individualism and authenticity. He is able to face his own mortality and to take responsibility for his own fate. A special expression of so understood freedom is shown in his care for others, even if this way he risks his own life. \n Hannah Arendt interprets Plato’s metaphor rather from the perspective of political philosophy. Her assessment, rooted in the very foundation of the political-philosophical thought becomes some kind of memento. What if the prisoners of the cave, simply do not want to leave their place? Does the philosopher have a right to forcefully pull them out of the cave of shadows? What is better, the attitude of Socrates, who dialogues with people and treats them as equal partners or the attitude of Plato, who simply lectures the mob?","PeriodicalId":34385,"journal":{"name":"Forum Philosophicum","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1970-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forum Philosophicum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35765/forphil.2022.2701.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article refers to the issue of freedom from a philosophical perspective. First of all, it discusses Plato’s metaphor of the cave in Politeia, in which the philosopher writes of freedom in its individual and collective forms. Then the article indicates how the metaphor was read by such contemporary philosophers as Martin Heidegger and Hannah Arendt, who interpret Plato’s metaphor from existential-phenomenological and political perspectives. Heidegger stresses the freedom of a human being, who in the light of the subjective existential experience begins to live objectively in an authentic way. He frees himself up from the impersonal-I. A person, who experienced the truth as un-concealment, is not enslaved anymore to the impersonality of the crowd. He is able to face his own mortality and to take responsibility for his own fate. A special expression of freedom is shown in his care for others, even if it means risking one’s life. Hannah Arendt interprets Plato’s metaphor from the perspective of political philosophy. Her assessment becomes some kind of memento. What if the prisoners of the cave simply do not want to leave their place? Does the philosopher have a right forcefully to pull them out of the cavern? What is better, the attitude of Socrates, who dialogues with people or the attitude of Plato, who simply lectures the mob? In this way Arendt refers to the concept of freedom, as it is sketched in Plato’s cave. At the same time, she argues with Heidegger’s interpretation of the Platonic metaphor. Heidegger stresses the freedom of a human being, who in the light of the subjective existential experience begins to live objectively in an authentic way. He frees himself up from the impersonal-I. Human, who experienced the truth as un-concealment and freedom, is not enslaved anymore with the impersonality of the crowd, which reject individualism and authenticity. He is able to face his own mortality and to take responsibility for his own fate. A special expression of so understood freedom is shown in his care for others, even if this way he risks his own life.  Hannah Arendt interprets Plato’s metaphor rather from the perspective of political philosophy. Her assessment, rooted in the very foundation of the political-philosophical thought becomes some kind of memento. What if the prisoners of the cave, simply do not want to leave their place? Does the philosopher have a right to forcefully pull them out of the cave of shadows? What is better, the attitude of Socrates, who dialogues with people and treats them as equal partners or the attitude of Plato, who simply lectures the mob?
作为一个自由人来去自如
这篇文章从哲学的角度讨论了自由问题。首先,本文讨论了柏拉图在《波利特利亚》中对洞穴的比喻,在这个比喻中,哲学家以个人和集体的形式描写了自由。然后,文章指出当代哲学家如马丁·海德格尔和汉娜·阿伦特是如何解读柏拉图的隐喻的,他们从存在现象学和政治的角度来解读柏拉图的隐喻。海德格尔强调人的自由,人在主观的存在经验的光照下,开始以一种真实的方式客观地生活。他把自己从非个人的自我中解放出来。一个人,当他经历了真相的不隐藏,就不会再被人群的客观所奴役。他能够面对自己的死亡,并为自己的命运负责。他对他人的关心体现了他对自由的特殊表达,即使这意味着冒着生命危险。汉娜·阿伦特从政治哲学的角度解读柏拉图的隐喻。她的评价成了某种记忆。如果洞穴里的囚犯只是不想离开他们的地方怎么办?哲学家有权利强行把他们拉出洞穴吗?哪一个更好,苏格拉底的态度,与人对话还是柏拉图的态度,只是对暴民说教?阿伦特以这种方式提到了自由的概念,正如柏拉图在洞穴中所描绘的那样。同时,她也对海德格尔对柏拉图式隐喻的解释提出了质疑。海德格尔强调人的自由,人在主观的存在经验的光照下,开始以一种真实的方式客观地生活。他把自己从非个人的自我中解放出来。经历了真理的不隐藏和自由的人,不再被拒绝个人主义和真实性的非人格化的群体所奴役。他能够面对自己的死亡,并为自己的命运负责。这种自由的一种特殊表达表现在他对他人的关心上,即使这样他冒着生命危险。汉娜·阿伦特更倾向于从政治哲学的角度解读柏拉图的隐喻。她的评价,根植于政治哲学思想的基础,成为某种纪念。如果洞穴里的囚犯,根本不想离开他们的地方怎么办?哲学家有权利强行把他们从阴影的洞穴中拉出来吗?苏格拉底的态度,他与人对话,把他们当作平等的伙伴,还是柏拉图的态度,他只是对暴民说教,哪个更好?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
30 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信