The Relationship Between Plato’s Letters and His Understanding of Philosophia

Baran Bingöl

Makale detayları

The Relationship Between Plato’s Letters and His Understanding of Philosophia

Yazarlar:

Baran Bingöl

Yayıncı:

Istanbul University

Ana Başlıklar:

Felsefe Tarihi (Diğer)

Dergi:

Felsefe Arkivi Issue 60, pp.42-57

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001323784

pISSN:

0378-2816

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 This paper aims to reveal the relationship between the 2nd, 7th, and 10th Letters, encompassing philosophical content among Platos letters, and the dialogues. There is a crucial research gap regarding coherence or incoherence between the letters and the dialogues. Therefore, at least the parts of these letters considered philosophical should be translated into Turkish and their consistency with the dialogues clarified. In this paper, I advocate a significant consistency between the dialogues and the letters that must be explored in-depth. The first part of the paper consists of translating the 2nd, 7th, and 10th Letters from Ancient Greek into Turkish and analyzing the relationship between these letters and the dialogues. Especially when the 2nd, 7th, and 10th Letters and dialogues are examined as a whole, it is clear that Plato tries to explain that which is truth-that which is pseudo distinction consistently. This is essential for his system, and on the basis of this distinction, he distinguishes what he means and does not mean by philosophia through his relationship with Dionûsios, the king of Surakousa of the period. Burnyeat ironically declares the 7th Letter pseudo by claiming that there is no coherence between it and the dialogues and that they even contradict each other, without considering this fundamental distinction between that which is truth-that which is pseudo. The second part of the article is a critique of Myles Burnyeats article The pseudophilosophical digression in Epistle VII, which posits that the 7th Letter is pseudo.

 This paper aims to reveal the relationship between the 2nd, 7th, and 10th Letters, encompassing philosophical content among Platos letters, and the dialogues. There is a crucial research gap regarding coherence or incoherence between the letters and the dialogues. Therefore, at least the parts of these letters considered philosophical should be translated into Turkish and their consistency with the dialogues clarified. In this paper, I advocate a significant consistency between the dialogues and the letters that must be explored in-depth. The first part of the paper consists of translating the 2nd, 7th, and 10th Letters from Ancient Greek into Turkish and analyzing the relationship between these letters and the dialogues. Especially when the 2nd, 7th, and 10th Letters and dialogues are examined as a whole, it is clear that Plato tries to explain that which is truth-that which is pseudo distinction consistently. This is essential for his system, and on the basis of this distinction, he distinguishes what he means and does not mean by philosophia through his relationship with Dionûsios, the king of Surakousa of the period. Burnyeat ironically declares the 7th Letter pseudo by claiming that there is no coherence between it and the dialogues and that they even contradict each other, without considering this fundamental distinction between that which is truth-that which is pseudo. The second part of the article is a critique of Myles Burnyeats article The pseudophilosophical digression in Epistle VII, which posits that the 7th Letter is pseudo.

 This paper aims to reveal the relationship between the 2nd, 7th, and 10th Letters, encompassing philosophical content among Platos letters, and the dialogues. There is a crucial research gap regarding coherence or incoherence between the letters and the dialogues. Therefore, at least the parts of these letters considered philosophical should be translated into Turkish and their consistency with the dialogues clarified. In this paper, I advocate a significant consistency between the dialogues and the letters that must be explored in-depth. The first part of the paper consists of translating the 2nd, 7th, and 10th Letters from Ancient Greek into Turkish and analyzing the relationship between these letters and the dialogues. Especially when the 2nd, 7th, and 10th Letters and dialogues are examined as a whole, it is clear that Plato tries to explain that which is truth-that which is pseudo distinction consistently. This is essential for his system, and on the basis of this distinction, he distinguishes what he means and does not mean by philosophia through his relationship with Dionûsios, the king of Surakousa of the period. Burnyeat ironically declares the 7th Letter pseudo by claiming that there is no coherence between it and the dialogues and that they even contradict each other, without considering this fundamental distinction between that which is truth-that which is pseudo. The second part of the article is a critique of Myles Burnyeats article The pseudophilosophical digression in Epistle VII, which posits that the 7th Letter is pseudo.

 Bu makale, Platonun mektupları arasında felsefî içeriği bulunan 2. 7. ve 10. Mektupun diyaloglar ile arasındaki ilişkiyi açığa çıkarma çabasıdır. Literatürde hem Platonun mektuplarının Türkçe çevirisi hem de mektuplar ile diyaloglar arasındaki tutarlılık veya tutarsızlık meselesi hakkında ciddi bir eksiklik mevcuttur. Dolayısıyla, bahsi geçen mektupların en azından felsefi olarak kabul edilen kısımlarının Türkçeye çevrilmesi ve diyaloglar ile tutarlı olup olmadığının açığa çıkarılması gerekmektedir. Makalenin ilk kısmında, diyaloglar ile mektuplar arasında ciddiye alınması gereken ölçüde tutarlılık olduğu savunulmaktadır. Özellikle 2. 7. 10. Mektuplara ve diyaloglara bir bütün olarak bakıldığında, Platonun sisteminde hayatî önem taşıyan hakiki-sahte ayrımının tutarlı bir şekilde anlatılmaya çalışıldığı, bu ayrım temelinde Platonun dönemin Surakousa kralı Dionûsios ile ilişkisi üzerinden philosophia derken ne kastettiğini ve ne kastetmediğini birbirinden ayırt etmeye çalıştığı görülmektedir. Myles Burnyeat, Platon sisteminde hayatî bir anlamı bulunan söz konusu hakiki-sahte aslî ayrımını dikkate almadan diyaloglar ile 7. Mektup arasında bir bütünlük bulunmadığını hatta çeliştiklerini iddia ederek ironik bir şekilde 7. Mektupu sahte ilân etmiştir. Makalenin ikinci kısmında, 7. Mektupun sahte olduğunu iddia eden Burnyeatin 7. Mektupun Sahte-Felsefi Ara-Sözü başlıklı makalesine bir eleştiri sunulmuştur.

Makale detayları

The Relationship Between Plato’s Letters and His Understanding of Philosophia

Yazarlar:

Baran Bingöl

Yayıncı:

Istanbul University

Ana Başlıklar:

Felsefe Tarihi (Diğer)

Dergi:

Felsefe Arkivi Issue 60, pp.42-57

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001323784

pISSN:

0378-2816

Plato

Myles Burnyeat

Letters

Dialogues

philosophiaPlaton

Myles Burnyeat

Mektuplar

Diyaloglar

philosophia

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Baran Bingöl

Yayıncı: Istanbul University

Ana Başlıklar: Felsefe Tarihi (Diğer)

Dergi: Felsefe Arkivi Issue 60, pp.42-57

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 6/2024

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001323784

pISSN: 0378-2816

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Baran Bingöl

Yayıncı:

Istanbul University

Ana Başlıklar:

Felsefe Tarihi (Diğer)

Dergi:

Felsefe Arkivi Issue 60, pp.42-57

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001323784

pISSN:

0378-2816