Whom did Plato Mean in the Parable of ‘Gigantomachia over Being’ (Sophist 246a4 ff.)?

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu20.2023.201

Abstract

The mythopoetic parable of ‘Gigantomachia over being’ in Plato’s Sophist 246a4 ff. is neither a theoretical construction ad hoc of some general trends, nor a reference to a single contemporary debate, e. g., between Plato’s Academy and atomists in 4th century BC. The controversy on the nature of being is described as a real battle on epic scale (ἄπλετος μάχη) between two camps, as a debate about fundamental problem of philosophy, that has always existed (ἀεὶ συνέστηκεν) and is still going on. In favor of the identification of the two camps primarily with the Ionian and Italian traditions in the pre-Platonic philosophy speaks the juxtaposition of the ‘Ionian and Italian Muses’ (Ἰάδες καὶ Σικελικαὶ Μοῦσαι) in the preceding context Soph.242de. The ‘unreformed giants’ are the Ionian physikoi from Anaximander to Democritus, while their ‘divine’ adversaries, who reduce being (ousia) to immaterial forms, are the Pythagoreans, Eleatics and Platonists, as well as Socrates, who dismisses the Ionian περὶ φύσεως ἱστορία in Plato’s Phaedo and who upholds the theory of ideas in the Republic and Phaedrus. The ‘improved’ giants of the second generation are metaphysical dualists like Anaxagoras and Empedocles who admit incorporeal causes like Mind and Love alongside with matter, as well as Heraclitus, the Ionian Sophists and Antisthenes who combined ontological naturalism with teaching arete. The general scheme of the development of theories of archai in Aristotle’s Metaphysics is very similar: from those who recognized only material causes to those who admitted incorporeal moving cause (Anaxagoras and Empedocles).

Keywords:

Plato, ‘Gigantomachia over being’, Sophist

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
 

References

Bluck R. S., Neal G. C. Plato’s Sophist. Manchester, 1975.

Bossi B., Robinson Th. M. (eds). Plato’s Sophist revisited. Berlin, Walter de Gruyter, 2013.

Brown L. Innovation and continuity. The battle of gods and giants. Sophist 245–249, in: J. Gentzler (ed.) Method in Ancient philosophy. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1998, 181–207.

Cornford F. M. Plato’s theory of knowledge. London, Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co., 1935.

Crivelli P. Plato’s account of falsehood. A study of the Sophist. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2012.

Fossheim H., Songe-Moeller V., Agontes K. (eds). Philosophy as drama. Plato’s thinking through dialogue. London — New York, Bloomsbury Academic, 2019.

Gill M. L. Philosophos. Plato’s missing dialogue. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012.

Guthrie W. K. C. A history of Greek philosophy. Vol. V. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1978.

Huffman C. A. The Philolaic Method: The Pythagoreanism behind the Philebus, in: A. Preus (ed.) Essays in Ancient Greek Philosophy VI: Before Plato. Albany, State University of New York Press, 67–85.

Hülsz E. Plato’s Ionian Muses: Sophist 242 d–e, in: B. Bossi, Th. M. Robinson (eds). Plato’s Sophist revisited. Berlin, Walter de Gruyter, 2013, 103–116.

Laks A. The concept of Presocratic philosophy. Princeton and Oxford, Princeton University Press, 2018.

Larsen J. K. Gods, giants and philosophers: on being, education and dialogue in Plato’s Sophist 245e6–249d5, in: H. Fossheim, V. Songe-Moeller, K. Agontes (eds). Philosophy as drama. Plato’s thinking through dialogue. London — New York, Bloomsbury Academic, 2019, 107–122.

Lebedev A. V. Xenophanes on the Immutability of God. A Neglected Fragment in Philo Alexandrinus. Hermes. Zeitschrift für Klassische Philologie 2000, 128, 385–391.

Lebedev A. V. The Logos of Heraclitus: A Reconstruction of his Word and Thought (With a New Critical Edition of the Fragments). St Petersburg, Nauka Publ., 2014 (in Russian).

Lebedev A. V. Parmenides. ΑΝΗΡ ΠΥΘΑΓΟΡΕΙΟΣ: Monistic Idealism (Mentalism) in Archaiс Greek Metaphysics. Indo-European linguistics and classical philology 2017, 20, 493–536.

Lebedev А. V. Epicharmus on god as mind (ΝΟΟΣ). A neglected fragment in Stobaeus. (With some remarks on early Pythagorean metaphysics and theology). Aristeas: philologia classica et historia antiqua 2017, 16, 13–27.

Lebedev A. V. Idealism (Mentalism) in Early Greek Metaphysics and philosophical theology. Indo-European linguistics and classical philology 2019, 23, 651–704.

Lebedev A. V. The Authorship of the Derveni Papyrus, A Sophistic Treatise on the Origin of Religion and Language: A Case for Prodicus of Ceos, in: Ch. Vassallo (ed.) Presocratics and Papyrological Tradition. Berlin — Boston, De Gruyter, 20192, 491–606.

Lebedev A. V. Democritus on Iranian magi and ancient religion: a quotation from Avesta (Yt I. 7) in Democritus’ fragment 580 Luria (= B30 DK). Indo-European linguistics and classical philology 2020, 24, 129–150.

Lebedev A. V. Anaximander and the scientific revolution in Miletus in sixth century B. C., in: Indo-European linguistics and classical philology 2022, 24, 688–769.

Lebedev A. V. The Aegean origin and early history of the Greek doctrines of reincarnation and immortality of the soul (Epimenides, Pherecydes, Pythagoras, and Onomacritus’ Orphica), in: N. Bogdanovich. Myth, ritual, literature. Festschrift for N. V. Braginskaia. Moscow, HSE University Publ., 2023, 238–299.

McCabe M. M. Plato and his predecessors. The dramatization of reason. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Notomi N. The unity of Plato’s Sophist. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Palmer J. Plato’s reception of Parmenides. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1999.

Politis V. The Argument for the Reality of Change and Changelessness in Plato’s Sophist, in: F.-G. Herrmann, S. Büttner (eds). New Essays on Plato. Swansea, Classical Press of Wales, 2006, 149–175.

Taylor A. E. Plato. The man and his work. London, Methuen and Co., 1955.

Vassallo Chr. The Presocratics at Heraculaneum. A study of early Greek philosophy in the Epicurean tradition. Berlin — Boston, De Gruyter, 2021.

Downloads

Published

2023-12-30

How to Cite

Lebedev, A. V. (2023). Whom did Plato Mean in the Parable of ‘Gigantomachia over Being’ (Sophist 246a4 ff.)?. Philologia Classica, 18(2), 154–169. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu20.2023.201

Issue

Vol. 18 No. 2 (2023)

Section

Graecia antiqua

License

Articles of "Philologia Classica" are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.