心理拟态:透特、柏拉图的《费德鲁斯篇》和埃及神话修辞学的语境

IF 0.2 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
S. Ramsey
{"title":"心理拟态:透特、柏拉图的《费德鲁斯篇》和埃及神话修辞学的语境","authors":"S. Ramsey","doi":"10.1525/rh.2022.40.3.233","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:In Phaedrus, Plato invokes a mythic exemplum concerning the Egyptian deity Thoth. Though often interpreted as an overt critique of writing, this argument posits Thoth is offered analogically to contrast Plato’s rhetorical epistemology with that of the ancient Egyptians. To do so, this argument addresses why a mythic Egyptian figure might be so significant to Plato in the 4th Century B.C. Greece, whose culture already had multiple gods and cultural heroes to whom the invention of writing is attributed, when the episode in Phaedrus is axiomatically described as a critique of writing. Because Plato may have had some degree of firsthand knowledge of Egyptian traditions it explores those traditions personified in the figure of Thoth, which should be examined as an analogical device advised by Egyptian rhetorical epistemology. A closer examination of the comparative rhetorical epistemological perspective not only illuminates Thoth’s appearance in Phaedrus but also the Egyptian rhetorical-epistemic tradition. Thoth’s role as epistemic mediator between humans and truth, in the broadest terms, was to act as psychopomp who moves both between humanity and the arrival at knowledge that prefigures rhetorical action.","PeriodicalId":40200,"journal":{"name":"Res Rhetorica","volume":"3 1","pages":"233 - 255"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychopompos: Thoth, Plato’s Phaedrus, and the Context of Egyptian Mythic Rhetoric\",\"authors\":\"S. Ramsey\",\"doi\":\"10.1525/rh.2022.40.3.233\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:In Phaedrus, Plato invokes a mythic exemplum concerning the Egyptian deity Thoth. Though often interpreted as an overt critique of writing, this argument posits Thoth is offered analogically to contrast Plato’s rhetorical epistemology with that of the ancient Egyptians. To do so, this argument addresses why a mythic Egyptian figure might be so significant to Plato in the 4th Century B.C. Greece, whose culture already had multiple gods and cultural heroes to whom the invention of writing is attributed, when the episode in Phaedrus is axiomatically described as a critique of writing. Because Plato may have had some degree of firsthand knowledge of Egyptian traditions it explores those traditions personified in the figure of Thoth, which should be examined as an analogical device advised by Egyptian rhetorical epistemology. A closer examination of the comparative rhetorical epistemological perspective not only illuminates Thoth’s appearance in Phaedrus but also the Egyptian rhetorical-epistemic tradition. Thoth’s role as epistemic mediator between humans and truth, in the broadest terms, was to act as psychopomp who moves both between humanity and the arrival at knowledge that prefigures rhetorical action.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40200,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Res Rhetorica\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"233 - 255\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Res Rhetorica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2022.40.3.233\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Res Rhetorica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2022.40.3.233","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:在《费德鲁斯篇》中,柏拉图引用了一个关于埃及神透特的神话例子。虽然经常被解释为对写作的公开批评,但这个论点假设透特被类比地提供,以对比柏拉图的修辞认识论和古埃及人的认识论。为了做到这一点,这个论点解释了为什么在公元前4世纪的希腊,一个神话般的埃及人物对柏拉图如此重要,希腊的文化已经有了许多神和文化英雄,书写的发明被归功于他们,而《费德鲁斯篇》的情节被理所当然地描述为对书写的批判。因为柏拉图可能对埃及传统有一定程度的第一手知识,他探讨了那些以透特为人格化的传统,这应该作为埃及修辞学认识论建议的类比手段来研究。对比较修辞学认识论观点的深入研究不仅揭示了《费德鲁斯篇》中透特的出现,也揭示了埃及修辞学认识论传统。透特作为人类与真理之间的认知中介者的角色,在最广泛的意义上,是作为一个心理上的角色,他在人类和预示修辞行动的知识之间移动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Psychopompos: Thoth, Plato’s Phaedrus, and the Context of Egyptian Mythic Rhetoric
Abstract:In Phaedrus, Plato invokes a mythic exemplum concerning the Egyptian deity Thoth. Though often interpreted as an overt critique of writing, this argument posits Thoth is offered analogically to contrast Plato’s rhetorical epistemology with that of the ancient Egyptians. To do so, this argument addresses why a mythic Egyptian figure might be so significant to Plato in the 4th Century B.C. Greece, whose culture already had multiple gods and cultural heroes to whom the invention of writing is attributed, when the episode in Phaedrus is axiomatically described as a critique of writing. Because Plato may have had some degree of firsthand knowledge of Egyptian traditions it explores those traditions personified in the figure of Thoth, which should be examined as an analogical device advised by Egyptian rhetorical epistemology. A closer examination of the comparative rhetorical epistemological perspective not only illuminates Thoth’s appearance in Phaedrus but also the Egyptian rhetorical-epistemic tradition. Thoth’s role as epistemic mediator between humans and truth, in the broadest terms, was to act as psychopomp who moves both between humanity and the arrival at knowledge that prefigures rhetorical action.
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
Res Rhetorica
Res Rhetorica HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
12 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