柏拉图对梭伦的看法

Q4 Arts and Humanities
M. Giammarco
{"title":"柏拉图对梭伦的看法","authors":"M. Giammarco","doi":"10.6092/ISSN.2421-4124/12590","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Solon’s reform in Athens (early 6th century BC) is the subject of wide discussions: an organic constitutional reform (politeia) or individual sectoral laws? Plato’s testimony has received limited attention from critics, who are mainly focused on the passages from Charmides and Timaeus, alluding to the kinship (syngheneia) between the two. Indeed, the philosopher is not generous with details and does not explicitly describe the ‘constitution of Solon’; however, a thorough examination of the references – in as chronological an order as was possible – has revealed clear data and an evolving thought. Unlike Aristotle and Herodotus, Plato outlines a somewhat reductive portrait of Solon as a poet and wise man; but, as a legislator, in his dialogues of maturity Plato repeatedly counts Solon among the ‘greats’ of the past, those who, through reforming the politeia, have fixed their State bodies identity. Finally, in the Laws, his last work, Plato shows his expertise on some of the Solonic laws and expresses a mild appreciation for their author.  \nOn the whole, while Plato’s testimony does not contradict Aristotle’s much more thorough and favorable one, neither does it coincide with it: on the person of the legislator, as well as on the thorny questions connected to his ‘constitution’– such as the ideology of the ‘mixed constitution’ and that of the Athenian patrios politeia – the positions of the two philosophers prove to be distant, both in the conceptual framework and in the political judgment.","PeriodicalId":36096,"journal":{"name":"Montesquieu.it","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cosa pensava Platone di Solone\",\"authors\":\"M. Giammarco\",\"doi\":\"10.6092/ISSN.2421-4124/12590\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Solon’s reform in Athens (early 6th century BC) is the subject of wide discussions: an organic constitutional reform (politeia) or individual sectoral laws? Plato’s testimony has received limited attention from critics, who are mainly focused on the passages from Charmides and Timaeus, alluding to the kinship (syngheneia) between the two. Indeed, the philosopher is not generous with details and does not explicitly describe the ‘constitution of Solon’; however, a thorough examination of the references – in as chronological an order as was possible – has revealed clear data and an evolving thought. Unlike Aristotle and Herodotus, Plato outlines a somewhat reductive portrait of Solon as a poet and wise man; but, as a legislator, in his dialogues of maturity Plato repeatedly counts Solon among the ‘greats’ of the past, those who, through reforming the politeia, have fixed their State bodies identity. Finally, in the Laws, his last work, Plato shows his expertise on some of the Solonic laws and expresses a mild appreciation for their author.  \\nOn the whole, while Plato’s testimony does not contradict Aristotle’s much more thorough and favorable one, neither does it coincide with it: on the person of the legislator, as well as on the thorny questions connected to his ‘constitution’– such as the ideology of the ‘mixed constitution’ and that of the Athenian patrios politeia – the positions of the two philosophers prove to be distant, both in the conceptual framework and in the political judgment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36096,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Montesquieu.it\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Montesquieu.it\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.6092/ISSN.2421-4124/12590\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Montesquieu.it","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6092/ISSN.2421-4124/12590","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

摘要

梭伦在雅典的改革(公元前6世纪早期)是广泛讨论的主题:是一个有机的宪法改革(politeia)还是单独的部门法?柏拉图的证词受到评论家的关注有限,他们主要集中在查米得斯和蒂迈奥的段落上,暗指两人之间的亲属关系(syngheneia)。事实上,哲学家并不慷慨地提供细节,也没有明确地描述“梭伦的构成”;然而,对参考文献的彻底检查——尽可能按时间顺序排列——揭示了清晰的数据和不断发展的思想。与亚里士多德和希罗多德不同,柏拉图把梭伦描绘成一个诗人和智者;但是,作为一个立法者,柏拉图在他的成熟对话中一再把梭伦列为过去的“伟人”之一,这些人通过改革政治,确定了他们的国家机构的身份。最后,在他的最后一部著作《律法》中,柏拉图展示了他对一些所罗门律法的专业知识,并对这些律法的作者表达了温和的赞赏。总的来说,虽然柏拉图的证词与亚里士多德的更彻底、更有利的证词并不矛盾,但也不一致:关于立法者的人,以及与他的“宪法”有关的棘手问题,如“混合宪法”的意识形态和雅典的爱国主义政治,两位哲学家的立场证明是遥远的,无论是在概念框架上还是在政治判断上。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cosa pensava Platone di Solone
Solon’s reform in Athens (early 6th century BC) is the subject of wide discussions: an organic constitutional reform (politeia) or individual sectoral laws? Plato’s testimony has received limited attention from critics, who are mainly focused on the passages from Charmides and Timaeus, alluding to the kinship (syngheneia) between the two. Indeed, the philosopher is not generous with details and does not explicitly describe the ‘constitution of Solon’; however, a thorough examination of the references – in as chronological an order as was possible – has revealed clear data and an evolving thought. Unlike Aristotle and Herodotus, Plato outlines a somewhat reductive portrait of Solon as a poet and wise man; but, as a legislator, in his dialogues of maturity Plato repeatedly counts Solon among the ‘greats’ of the past, those who, through reforming the politeia, have fixed their State bodies identity. Finally, in the Laws, his last work, Plato shows his expertise on some of the Solonic laws and expresses a mild appreciation for their author.  On the whole, while Plato’s testimony does not contradict Aristotle’s much more thorough and favorable one, neither does it coincide with it: on the person of the legislator, as well as on the thorny questions connected to his ‘constitution’– such as the ideology of the ‘mixed constitution’ and that of the Athenian patrios politeia – the positions of the two philosophers prove to be distant, both in the conceptual framework and in the political judgment.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Montesquieu.it
Montesquieu.it Arts and Humanities-History
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
审稿时长
20 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