Aither is a double-blind peer review, Open Access online academic journal. It is indexed at ERIH+ and Scopus. It is published by the Faculty of Arts of the Palacký University in Olomouc in cooperation with the Philosophical Institute of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic. It comes out twice a year. Every second issue is international and contains foreign-language articles (mainly in English, but also in German and French). The journal is registered under the number ISSN 1803-7860.

Aither 14/2015:34-55 | DOI: 10.5507/aither.2015.013

The Tragicomical Euthyphro: Frustration, Vertical Reading, Homer

Kryštof Boháček
Filosofický ústav AV ČR

The article deals with interpretative possibilities of the dialogue Euthyphro. First, the author introduces the dialogue briefly and then proves the problematic moments that have led to very different approaches in literature. Then he explains that representatives of the Czech research of the dialogue Euthyphro also represent these different approaches. Third, the author discusses Patočka's strindent but highly subjective interpretation. Thereafter the author approaches the, however erudite and balanced, too cautious interpretation of Novotný. Finally, the interpretation of Aleš Havlíček is analyzed. The author claims Havlíček's "Vertical Reading" to represent the top of the Czech research and its intepretation to be extremely well done also internationally. However, Havlíček focuses on the issues of ideas, leaving a number of open questions, which the author deals with at the end of the article. Chief among these is criticism of Homer.

Published: September 30, 2015  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Boháček, K. (2015). The Tragicomical Euthyphro: Frustration, Vertical Reading, Homer. Aither, 7(14), 34-55. doi: 10.5507/aither.2015.013
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Boháček, K. (2007). "Proč barbary hlava nebolí. Ke struktuře raných dialogů a smyslu aporií v dialogu Charmidés". In: A. Havlíček (ed.), Platónův dialog Charmidés, sborník příspěvků z platónského symposia, Praha: OIKOYMENH, s. 7-34.
    2. Boháček, K. (2010). "Záhadná filopoesie". In: Vrabec et al. (eds.), Filosofické reflexe umění, Praha: Togga, s. 23-40.
    3. Boháček, K. (2012). "Metoda formální analýzy a její využití při řešení otázek pravosti a hlavního tématu dialogu". In: A. Havlíček, J. Jinek (eds.), Platónův dialog Hippias Větší, Praha: OIKOYMENH, s. 11-26.
    4. Boháček, K. (2014). "Platónovy homérovské dialogy". In: U. Wollner, J. Cepko (eds.), Reflexia Homéra v antickej filozofii, Banská Bystrica: UMB - Belianum, s. 36-67.
    5. Böhme, G. (2000). Platons theoretische Philosophie. Stuttgart, Weimar: J. B. Metzler. Go to original source...
    6. Brickhouse, T. C., Smith, N. D. (2004). Plato and The Trial of Sokrates. New York, London: Routledge.
    7. Combs, B. E. (2011). Plato's Euthyphro: An Examination of the Socratic Method in the Definitional Dialogues. Austin: UMI Dissertation Publishing, Univ. of Texas.
    8. Dodds, E. R. (2000). Řekové a iracionálno. Praha. OIKOYMENH.
    9. Erler, M. (2006). Platon. München: C. H. Beck.
    10. Fischer, J. L. (1994). Případ Sokrates. Praha: Lidové noviny.
    11. Goldschmidt, V. (1992). "Hon na pseudohodnoty". In: P. Rezek (ed.), Dialog, vědění, orientace, PomFil 3, Praha: OIKOYMENH, s. 26-48.
    12. Guthrie, W. K. C. (1975). A History of Greek Philosophy, Vol. IV., Plato. The Earlier Period. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    13. Havlíček, A. (2012). Ideje a zbožnost v Platónově dialogu Euthyfrón, Acta Universitatis Purkynianae, Studia Philosophica 7. Ústí nad Labem: Filozofická fakulta Univerzity J. E. Turkyně v Ústí nad Labem.
    14. Hobza, P. (2014). "Aleš Havlíček: Ideje a zbožnost v Platónově dialogu Euthyfrón". Reflexe 46, s. 159-170.
    15. Horn, Ch., Müller, J., Söder, J. (2009). Platon-Handbuch. Stuttgart, Weimar: J. B. Metzler. Go to original source...
    16. Kahn, CH. H. (1996). Plato and the Socratic Dialogue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Go to original source...
    17. Karfík, F. (2007). "Co dělá a kdo je demiurg v Timaiu" In: F. Karfík (ed.), Duše a svět, Praha: OIKOYMENH, s. 77-106.
    18. Labuda, P. (2007). "Sokratovská definícia zbožnosti - analýza dialógu Euthyfrón". In: V. Suvák (ed.), Sokratika II., AFPh UP 200/282, Prešov: Filozofická fakulta Prešovskej univerzity.
    19. Nails, D. (2002). The people of Plato. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Copany.
    20. Novotný, F. (1947). "Platon". In: F. Novotný, K. Svoboda (eds.), Řečtí filosofové a mystici, Praha: Společnost přátel antické kultury, s. 53-82.
    21. Novotný, F. (1948a). O Platonovi I. Život. Praha: Jan Laichter.
    22. Novotný, F. (1948b). O Platonovi II. Dílo. Praha: Jan Laichter.
    23. Novotný, F. (1949). O Platonovi III. Filosofie. Praha: Jan Laichter.
    24. Novotný, F. (1994). "Úvod". In: Platón, Euthyfrón, Obrana Sókrata, Kritón, Praha: OIKOYMENH, s. 1-6.
    25. Patočka, J. (1990). Sókratés. Praha: SPN.
    26. Patočka, J. (1991). Platón. Praha: SPN.
    27. Patočka, J. (1992). "Osnova dějin". In: J. Patočka, Evropa a doba poevropská, Praha: Lidové noviny, s. 95-116.
    28. Patočka, J. (2004). "Ještě jedna Antigona a Antigoné ještě jednou". In: J. Patočka, Umění a čas I., Praha: OIKOYMENH, s. 389-400.
    29. Reale, G. (2005). Platón. Praha: OIKOYMENH.
    30. Scholten, H. (2003). Die Sophistik. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. Go to original source...
    31. Špinka, Š. (2005). Dialog a analogie. Praha: Karolinum.
    32. Thein, K. (2008). Vynález věcí. Praha: Filosofia.
    33. Vlastos, G. (1991). Socrates: Ironist and Moral Philosopher. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content