Phronimon (2008) Vol. 9 No. 2
https://hdl.handle.net/10500/5423
2024-03-29T08:31:30ZReceiving the ethics of power : Ficino, Plato and the education of the prince
https://hdl.handle.net/10500/5521
Receiving the ethics of power : Ficino, Plato and the education of the prince
Dambe, Sira
In this paper I offer a preliminary investigation of the modalities
of Plato’s reception as evidenced in Marsilio Ficino’s Letters to
Lorenzo De’ Medici. I examine some features of the genre
speculum principis, which emerge from a study of this
correspondence, in the light of Renaissance modes of reception,
not only in relation to considerations of ethical principles, but
also of specific vocabulary. In this instance, a vocabulary
evocative of subjection and subservience. I hope to show how
fruitful a detailed study of Ficino’s correspondence might be to
understand better both the significance of Plato’s reception in the
Renaissance and the influence that Ficino exerted on literature
and the figurative arts in the 16th century and beyond.
2008-01-01T00:00:00ZOne more time : Plato's conception of the immortality of the soul
https://hdl.handle.net/10500/5520
One more time : Plato's conception of the immortality of the soul
Ladikos, Anatasios
This article discusses the immortality of the soul as Plato
demonstrates it mainly in the final argument of his dialogue
“Phaedo”. Plato raises four different arguments for the
immortality of the soul: The Argument from Opposites, the
Theory of Recollection, the Argument from Affinity, and the Final
Argument, given as a response to Cebes’ objection. He does not
seem to place equal weight on all four of these arguments. For
instance, it is suggested that the Argument from Affinity by no
means proves the immortality of the soul, but only shows that it
is quite likely. The Theory of Recollection and the Final Argument
seem to be given the greatest importance, as both of them
follow directly from the Theory of Forms. But while the Theory of
Recollection can only show that the soul existed before birth, and
not that it will also exist after death, the Final Argument purports
to fully establish the immortality of the soul, and is considered by
Plato to be unobjectionable and certain. Like his third argument
Plato’s Final Argument addresses the question of what the
relation is between the seemingly divine and immortal ideas and
the soul. With reference to the Final argument’s successful
conclusion the soul must be shown to be immortal and
indestructible as highlighted by the discussion of certain
elements such a the distinction between partial immortality and
full immortality, the redefinition of death, the promise to
consider “coming-into-being and passing-away” and the
alternative “withdraw or perish”. The argument from opposite
forms succeeds only in showing that the soul is immortal. The
soul is characterized by life and the opposite of life is death. The
soul therefore is immortal, in just the way in which fire is notcold
and three is not-even. Plato supposes that the only time
when the soul could perish would be at the time of separation
from the body. The argument from opposite forms and the
distinction of accidental and essential predication shows that the
soul always survives separation from the body. The soul therefore is being always immortal and indestructible. Socrates
argues that the soul is not merely similar to the immortal ideas
but that the soul always possesses within itself the immortal idea
of life. Consequently, he concludes that the soul is not merely
“completely” or “almost so” but that “the soul is immortal”.
2008-01-01T00:00:00Z