Abstract
Quand un interlocuteur platonicien mentionne une dunamis de dialectique, il affirme que les objets regardés par la dialectique sont réels et séparés de ses praticiens. Il n’y a aucune distinction entre puissance et activation. D’abord, nous tentons de montrer que les usages platoniciens du mot «dunamis» sont divers, «power» est une traduction trompeuse dans plusieurs passages, et République 477 ne doit pas déterminer notre interprétation des autres passages sur dunamis, même dans la République.
References in Plato to a dunamis of dialectic are repeated affirmations that dialectic ‘looks’ to real objects separate from its human practitioners. They are not distinguishing a power or disposition from its employment. I first aim to illustrate the Greek word’s wide range of uses in Plato’s dialogues and in particular to show that ‘power’ is sometimes a misleading translation, and argue that Republic 477 should not govern interpretation of other passages on dunameis, even within the Republic itself.
References in Plato to a dunamis of dialectic are repeated affirmations that dialectic ‘looks’ to real objects separate from its human practitioners. They are not distinguishing a power or disposition from its employment. I first aim to illustrate the Greek word’s wide range of uses in Plato’s dialogues and in particular to show that ‘power’ is sometimes a misleading translation, and argue that Republic 477 should not govern interpretation of other passages on dunameis, even within the Republic itself.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 211-231 |
| Journal | Philosophie Antique |
| Volume | 25 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Dec 2025 |