Table Of Content

Plato’s Statesman Revisited Trends in Classics – Supplementary Volumes Edited by Franco Montanari and Antonios Rengakos Associate Editors Evangelos Karakasis · Fausto Montana · Lara Pagani Serena Perrone · Evina Sistakou · Christos Tsagalis Scientific Committee Alberto Bernabé · Margarethe Billerbeck Claude Calame · Jonas Grethlein · Philip R. Hardie Stephen J. Harrison · Richard Hunter · Christina Kraus Giuseppe Mastromarco · Gregory Nagy Theodore D. Papanghelis · Giusto Picone Tim Whitmarsh · Bernhard Zimmermann Volume 68 Plato’s Statesman Revisited Edited by Beatriz Bossi and Thomas M. Robinson ISBN 978-3-11-060463-4 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-060554-9 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-060491-7 ISSN 1868-4785 Library of Congress Control Number: 2018961056 Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Editorial Office: Alessia Ferreccio and Katerina Zianna Logo: Christopher Schneider, Laufen Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck www.degruyter.com Contents Introduction | 1 Part I: Defining the Place of the Statesman  Annie Larivée Taking Frustation Seriously: Reading Plato’s Statesman as a Protreptic to Political Science | 11 Maurizio Migliori The Multifocal Approach: The Statesman as the Key to Plato’s Political Philosophy | 35 Part II: What Kind of ‘Science’ of Government?  Dimitri El Murr Plato on the Unity of the Science of Government (258b–259d) | 55 Giovanni Casertano True and Right in the Statesman | 73 Part III: Interpreting the Myth  David A. White Paradigm, Form and the Good in Plato’s Statesman: The Myth Revisited | 87 Dougal Blyth God and Cosmos in Statesman 269c–270a and Aristotle | 107 José María Zamora Plato’s Reign of Kronos: Proclus’ Interpretation of the Myth in the Politicus | 119 VI | Contents Anna Motta Demiurgy in Heavens. An Ancient Account in Plato’s Statesman | 141 Part IV: Measuring, Weaving and Women  Josep Monserrat Molas The Avoidance of Errors: a Sense of Due Measure | 159 Gislene Vale dos Santos On the Art of Weaving and the Act of Thinking in Plato’s Statesman | 171 Nuria Sánchez Madrid Weaving the Polis. Reading Plato’s Statesman (279a–283d) | 183 Thomas More Robinson Plato’s Stateswomen | 195 Part V: The Statesman and the Sophist  Lidia Palumbo Mimesis in the Statesman | 209 Laura Candiotto The very Difficult Separation from the Chorus of the Greatest Magician of all the Sophists (Statesman 291a1–c6) | 231 Part VI: Wisdom and Law  Miriam C.D. Peixoto On the Limits of Law and the Sovereignity of the Wise. Conjectures about the Primacy of Law in Plato’s Statesman | 249 Contents | VII Part VII: Bonds and Virtues  Giovanni Giorgini Divine and Human Bonds: The Essence of the Art of Politics | 265 Beatriz Bossi On Virtue and Wisdom in the Protagoras, the Phaedo and the Statesman: One Thesis or Several? | 287 Christopher Rowe ‘Moderation’ and Courage in the Statesman | 309 Bibliography | 327 List of Contributors | 341 Index Locorum | 345 Introduction This book consists of a selection of papers presented at the II International Spring Plato Seminar (25-26 April 2016, Facultad de Filosofía, Universidad Complutense de Madrid) on Plato’s Politicus1 and some papers by other authors who were in- vited to contribute to this volume (namely, A. Larivée, M. Migliori and D. White). Inspired by Melissa Lane’s conference on the same dialogue at Princeton Univer- sity during her stay for three months in 2015, B. Bossi thought that it was due time for a second conference on one of Plato’s dialogues in Spain, and that it would be a good follow up to organize it too on the Politicus. The aim of the conference was, like that of the first, held on Plato’s Sophist (Benasque, 2009), the promotion of Plato studies in Spain; it offered us the opportunity to look afresh at one of Plato’s most severely overlooked political dialogues, with discussions among a number of international scholars of distinction in the field taking place. This time, in the context of a bilingual seminar devoted to this topic at the Facultad de Filosofía of the UCM during the previous term, the conference included the participation of seven students whose papers were selected to take part in the conference. Readers will find in this volume papers by scholars from the Anglo-Saxon orbit (Rowe, Blyth, White, Robinson) as well as from Italy (Giorgini, Palumbo, Migliori, Casertano, Motta, Candiotto), Spain (Zamora, Monserrat, Sánchez, Bossi), the French orbit (Larivée, El Murr), and Brazil (Peixoto, Vale dos Santos). The papers included fall into seven categories that attempt to follow the order of the subjects as they are presented in the dialogue: 1.) two general papers dealing directly with the place of the Statesman in Plato’s philosophy; 2.) two papers dealing with the difficulties arising from consideration of the ostensible aim of the dialogue, the definition of the art/science of government; 3.) a number which tackle the question of the interpretation of the myth and its reception; 4.) some discussing specific issues such as the art of measuring, weaving the polis, and the status of women; 5.) two papers focused on the problematic comparison between the statesman and the sophist; 6.) one paper contrasting the statesman’s wisdom with the limits of the law; and finally 7.) three papers discussing the role which bonds and virtues play in several Platonic dialogues. || 1 As this volume is presented to the community of scholars in English, for practical purposes we have decided to entitle the volume ‘Plato’s Statesman Revisited’ (rather than Plato’s Politicus Revisited) but we have respected the authors’ choice of either title (and their interpretations of its meaning) in their respective papers. We are grateful to D. Blyth for his valuable help in the editing of this volume. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110605549-001 2 | Introduction The volume opens with a strong and significant paper by A. Larivée which argues that the frustration the dialogue has generated is due mainly to an ana- chronistic expectation. The main problem of the dialogue, she claims, is that the statesman is an intangible, absent figure whose elusive political science has an enigmatic relationship with dialectic. The need for this science, she argues, is the message of this protreptic dialogue addressed to philosophers. It aims at encour- aging them to pursue this political science passionately, badly needed as it is and still to be developed at the time Plato was writing. She concludes that Aristotle saw himself as a pioneer in that regard, and that his Politics could be considered as a sound proposal taking inspiration in Plato’s Politicus. M. Migliori reflects on the major triad comprising the Republic, Statesman and Laws, in order to call at- tention to some key progressive points in Plato’s politics. The contribution of the Statesman, he suggests, is to explain the significance of the ‘utopian’ model, the imitative nature of human polities, and the weight of the two pillars of human politics: the law and the statesman. The models of the Republic and the Laws are not to be implemented but constitute ‘regulating principles’. The more theoretical philosopher-king of the Republic becomes a sensible single man ruling according to the laws ‘by science or by opinion’ while still imitating ‘the divine’, in a more down to earth Statesman (301a10–b3). The second section deals with more specific problems. D. El Murr argues that, though it might seem that, by making political science theoretical and detached from a specific conception of ‘practice’ (equated with manual production) Plato runs the risk of purging political science of effectiveness, he manages to connect it to action through the notion of prescription, which El Murr regards as ‘a distinct- ive conceptual innovation that the dialogue must be credited for in the history of political thought’. In addition, he seems to suggest that only a political science ‘with such a high epistemic requirement’ can take action and transform the social fabric. G. Casertano examines 277e–279a to reflect on the problematic relation between ‘correct’ and ‘true’ on the one hand, and between δόξα and ἐπιστήμη on the other. He argues that in our dialogue ‘there is an identification, or at least a fluctuation’ in the use of these terms. Unlike other dialogues where these terms are clearly opposed, the ἐπιστήμη of the king/statesman is also called δόξα, though it is described as the ‘true opinion of a daemonic being’. Casertano finds the complete identification of ‘correctness’ and the ‘kingly science’ problematic arguing that, if the law is not set up by the true king (who does not need it) and every written law must be mere ‘imitation’ of the truth, it is unclear who else could produce it. The third section is devoted to the interpretation and reception of the myth. D. White claims that the myth does serious philosophical work in the context of