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 19/2018:4-29 | DOI: 10.5507/aither.2018.001

Popper's Interpretation of Antisthenes - A Revision

Jan Buráň
Katedra filozofie, Filozofická fakulta, Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci

Unlike his portrayal of Plato, Karl Popper's interpretation of Antisthenes has been given surprisingly little attention. For Popper, Antisthenes was "the last of the Great Generation", which laid the foundation for the open society in Athens: the last one left to defend it against one of its gravest enemies - Plato. Allegedly, he was also an egalitarian, democrat, humanist, liberal, and severe nominalist critic of Plato's essentialism. Examining one by one the validity of attributing each of these traits to Antisthenes, the current study shows that even though The Open Society and Its Enemies is still a remarkable contribution to political theory, its depiction of Antisthenes is quite wrong.

Published: March 30, 2018  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Buráň, J. (2018). Popper's Interpretation of Antisthenes - A Revision. Aither, 10(19), 4-29. doi: 10.5507/aither.2018.001
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. Bambrough, R. (1967). "Plato's Political Analogies". In: R. Bambrough (ed.), Plato, Popper, and Politics: Some Contributions to a Modern Controversy. Cambridge: Heffer & Sons, s. 152-170.
    2. Berlin, I. (1999). "Dva pojmy svobody". In: I. Berlin, Čtyři eseje o svobodě. Praha: Prostor, s. 213-279.
    3. Bosman, P. (2015). "Ancient Debates on Autarkeia and Our Global Impasse". Phronimon 16, s. 1-16. Dostupné [online] z: Go to original source...
    4. Cepko, J. (2011). "Antisthenés a paideia: K sókratovskému modelu výchovy". Filozofia 66, s. 535-544.
    5. Cepko, J. (2016). "'Všetko patrí múdrym': blasfémia, alebo utópia?". Filozofia 71, s. 131-140.
    6. Cordero, N. L. (2008). "Antístenes: un testigo directo de la teoría platónica de las Formas". Revista de Filosofía de la Universidad de Costa Rica 46, s. 119-128.
    7. Crockett, C. (1950). "The Confusion over Nominalism". The Journal of Philosophy 47, s. 752-758. Go to original source...
    8. Graeser, A. (2000). Řecká filosofie klasického období: Sofisté, Sókratés a sokratikové, Platón a Aristotelés. Praha: OIKOYMENH.
    9. Kalaš, A., Suvák, V. (2010a). "Antisthenés: Zlomky ". Filozofia 65, s. 257-268.
    10. Kalaš, A., Suvák, V. (2010b). Antisthenés. Bratislava: Kalligram.
    11. Kalaš, A., Suvák, V. (2013). Antisthenis fragmenta: Antisthenove zlomky. Univerzita Komenského v Bratislave.
    12. Kramoliš, O. (2017). "Antisthenova 'naturální ekonomie': Enkrateia a hédoné optikou racionální volby". Filozofia 72, s. 537-547.
    13. Lorch, B. (2010). "Xenophon's Socrates on Political Ambition and Political Philosohpy". The Review of Politics 72, s. 189-211. Go to original source...
    14. Luz, M. (1996). "Antisthenes' Prometheus Myth". In: J. Glucker, J. Laks (eds.), Jacob Bernays: Un philologue juif. Presses Universitaires du Septentrion, s. 89-103. Go to original source...
    15. Luz, M. (2000). "'Disgracefulness Is Disgraceful': Antisthenes' Logic, Ethic and Sources". In: K. Boudouris (ed.), Greek Philosophy and the Fine Arts I. Athens: International Center for Greek Philosophy and Culture, s. 88-95.
    16. Malherbe, A. J. (1983). "Antisthenes and Odysseus, and Paul at War". The Harvard Theological Review 76, s. 143-173. Go to original source...
    17. Mársico, C. T. (2005). "Antístenes y la prehistoria de la noción de campo semántico". Nova Tellus 23, s. 69-99. Go to original source...
    18. Mársico, C. T. (2014). "The Methodological Dimension of Antisthenic Philosophy and Some Platonic Reactions against Homeric Criticism". In: V. Suvák (ed.), Antisthenica Cynica Socratica. Praha: OIKOYMENH, s. 226-245.
    19. Perrone, D. (2012). "El análisis antisténico de los nombres. Un modelo nominalista". Circe de clásicos y modernos 16, s. 31-43.
    20. Popper, K. R. (2011). Otevřená společnost a její nepřátelé I: Platónovo zaříkávání. Praha: OIKOYMENH.
    21. Popper, K. R. (2015) Otevřená společnost a její nepřátelé II: Vzedmutí proroctví: Hegel, Marx a co následovalo. Praha: OIKOYMENH.
    22. Prince, S. (2014). "Words of Representation and Words of Action in the Speech of Antisthenes' Ajax". In: V. Suvák (ed.), Antisthenica Cynica Socratica. Praha: OIKOYMENH, s. 168-192.
    23. Ryle, G. (1967). "Review of K. R. Popper, The Open Society and its Enemies". In: R. Bambrough (ed.), Plato, Popper, and Politics: Some Contributions to a Modern Controversy. Cambridge: Heffer & Sons, s. 85-90.
    24. Simon, M. R. (2016). "Las interpretaciones homéricas en los discursos de Ayante y Odiseo de Antístenes". Circe de clásicos y modernos 20, s. 49-65. Go to original source...
    25. Simpson, T. L. (2006). "Is Socrates the Ideal Democratic Citizen?". Journal of Thought 41, s. 137-156.
    26. Skinner, Q. (1978). The Foundations of Modern Political Thought II: The Age of Reformation. Cambridge University Press. Go to original source...
    27. Suvák, V. (2007). Sokratika: Štyri štúdie k sókratovskej tradícii myslenia. Filozofická fakulta Prešovskej univerzity.
    28. Suvák, V. (2010). "Antisthenés: Praktický charakter sókratovskej etiky". Filozofia 65, s. 239-248.
    29. Suvák, V. (2011a). "Pokus o rekonštrukciu Antisthenovho poňatia epistémé ". In: M. Taliga, U. Wollner (eds.), Poznanie a demarkácia. Brno: Tribun EU, s. 3-24.
    30. Suvák, V. (2011b). "Antisthenés: logos ako éthos". In: D. Kubok, D. Olesišski (eds.), Postacie I funkcje logosu w filozofii greckiej. Bielsko-Biała: STO, s. 45-58.
    31. Suvák, V. (2013a). "O dialektickom charaktere Antisthenovho 'Aianta' a 'Odyssea'". Filosofický časopis 61, s. 33-50.
    32. Suvák, V. (2013b). "Antisthenovo chápanie boha v kontexte sokratiky". In: E. Brodňanská, E. Juríková, F. Šimon (eds.), Hortus Graeco-Latinus Cassoviensis I: zborník príspevkov z klasickej filológie, latinskej medievalistiky a neolatinistiky. Univerzita Pavla Jozefa Šafárika v Košiciach, s. 131-141.
    33. Suvák, V. (2014). "Antisthenes between Diogenes and Socrates". In: V. Suvák (ed.), Antisthenica Cynica Socratica. Praha: OIKOYMENH, s. 72-120.
    34. Suvák, V. (2016). "Sókratovská therapeia: Antisthenés o rozumnosti". Filozofia 71, s. 85-95.
    35. Vries, G. J. de (1952). Antisthenes redivivus; Popper's attack on Plato. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company. Go to original source...
    36. Wild, J. (1974). "Popper's Interpretation of Plato". In: P. A. Schilpp (ed.), The Philosophy of Karl Popper. La Salle: The Open Court Publishing, s. 859-875.
    37. Zelinová, Z. (2016). "Kynická paideia alebo Antisthenés medzi Odysseom a Sókratom". Filozofia 71, s. 107-118.

    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