• Home
  • IDEAS
  • GROUPS
    • Classical German Philosophy and Phenomenology
    • The quarrel between the ancients and moderns
    • The quarrel between philosophy and poetry
    • Theories of Emotions
    • Philosophies of Image and Imagination
    • Utopia, the Political Myth, and Rebellion
    • The Philosophy of Nature
  • EVENTS
  • PEOPLE
  • ADMISSION
  • CONTACTS
  • CONFERENCES
    • 2016
      • Il tragico nella letteratura tedesca
      • Dialectic and the Ends of Reason
        • Schedule
    • 2015
      • CONVEGNO MELANCOLIA
        • Introduction
        • Schedule
      • CONFERENCE ON THE ANCIENTS
        • Introduction
        • Schedule
      • Immaginazione e Giudizio In Kant
        • Schedule
    • 2014
      • Hegel and the phenomenological movement
  • ODRADEK Journal

Tag Archives: politics

CFP: ODRADEK, vol. I, no. 2: The Quarrel between Poetry and Philosophy

13 Sunday Sep 2015

Posted by Danilo Manca in CFA-CFP

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Aristotle, Borges, Dante, dichtende Vernunft, imagination, intellectual poetry, Leo Strauss, Leopardi, logos, Metaphernbildung, myth, Nietzsche, Omero, philosophy of literature, philosophy of poetry, Plato, politics, prose, Quarrel between Poetry and Philosophy, Rancière, rhetoric, Schiller, Schlegel, sentimental poetry, Shakespeare, style of philosophy, thought, transcendental poetry, Valéry

Siamo lieti di annunciare l’uscita della call for paper per il secondo numero di Odradek, che sarà dedicato al tema “The Quarrel between Poetry and Philosophy” e curato da Danilo Manca e Alessandra Aloisi.

Submission open: 13th September 2015

Submission deadline: 15th December 2015

Call for papers

 The Quarrel between Poetry and Philosophy

Editors: Danilo Manca and Alessandra Aloisi

 

When in Book Ten of The Republic Plato proscribes poetry from the city and refers to a long-standing quarrel between poetry and philosophy, he raises an issue that has since made its mark in the history of Western thought. The aim of this call for papers is to delve deeper into the original meaning of this quarrel, to evaluate the implications it has had for the Western way of thinking and writing, and to explore the different forms the quarrel has assumed, between poetry and philosophy, between literature and philosophy.

Plato’s treatment of poetry looks as resolute as ambiguous. Plato claims that the mimetic art is essentially an imitation of imitation. Accordingly, the work of art is a mere copy of the ideal model that nature already reproduces. Art is therefore seen as twofold far from the truth, whereas philosophy is the love for truth. Nevertheless, this does not hinder Plato from expressing his philosophical arguments by means of dialogues and myths. Could this ambiguity be solved? Is poetry, in Plato’s view, just an extrinsic aspect that the philosopher has at disposal to have a talk with the ordinary people, namely with the men who are still in the cave? Or, rather, is poetry a fundamental dimension belonging to philosophy itself?

Throughout history of Western thought many thinkers took a position on the Quarrel. For instance, Hegel claimed that Plato’s mode of representation belongs to an earlier stage of the concept’s development. By contrast, by employing the notions of “dichtende Vernunft” and “dichtende Denken” respectively, Nietzsche and Heidegger endorsed the idea that philosophy is essentially connected with the poetic production, that is with Metaphernbildung. Another way of understanding the Quarrel is to consider philosophy one of the tools the poet and the writer employ in order to reflect upon their artistic activity. Philosophy plays an important role in the compositional activity of the poet: such role would consist in making possible a meta-literature, that is, a poetry whose point at issue is its own nature. Examples of this are Schiller’s “sentimental poetry”, Schlegel’s “transcendental poetry”, and Borges’s “intellectual poetry”.

Thus, what is at stake in the quarrel between poetry and philosophy is the distinction between myths and logos, thinking in images and thinking in concepts, between the picturing and the inferential arguing, between the imitation of and the reflection upon reality.

To what extent could the poet’s activity be distinguished from the philosopher’s one? To put it in Aristotle’s terms, what does it mean to say that poetry is more philosophical than history because it deals with the universals? And, consequently, what is the relationship between the universals used by philosophy and the ones used by poetry?

In Phaedo, Socrates admits to have often been suggested in dreams to cultivate the art of the Muses. Even though he had always taken it to be an exhortation to do philosophy, only at the end of his life he understands that he was required «to compose myths, not simply to elaborate arguments». On a similar note is Giacomo Leopardi who claims that the greatest poets are also philosophers (e.g. Omero, Dante and Shakespeare) and that the greatest philosophers are poets (e.g. Plato), since imagination is an essential component of poetry as well as of philosophy.

Thus, if poetry and philosophy are activities that stand on the same footing, one may argue that Plato’s thesis against art and poetry, far from dealing with the problem of truth and its representation, has nothing but a political meaning.

By banishing poetry from the polis that is ruled according to philosophical principles, Plato was trying to prevent a free circulation of words and discourses that may divert bodies from their social and intellectual destination. As Jacques Rancière would put it, the reason why Plato himself told stories and invented myths was to justify a hierarchical order and to provide a foundation for a distribution of knowledge and positions which has no foundation itself. From this point of view, the “ancient quarrel” between poetry and philosophy, between falsehood and truth, appears to be nothing but the expression of the never-ending quarrel between equality and inequality, between democracy and hierarchical order. Not differently from philosophy, poetry is a way of using language and of “making” the truth; in other words, a way of thinking and of organizing reality that can rival the one that philosophy promotes.

Consider otherwise the political issue in Strauss’s terms: the genuine quarrel between philosophy and poetry is not concerned with “the worth of poetry” as such, but with the order in which philosophy and poetry should be ranked. According to Socrates, poetry is legitimate only as ministerial to the user par excellence, namely to the king who is a philosopher, and not as an autonomous enterprise. In this sense, the greatest example of ministerial poetry would be the Platonic dialogue because of its capacity to present the non-philosophical life as ministerial to the philosophical one.

The topic of the proposals might include, but need not to be restricted to:

  1. Any philosophical and/or poetic experience which has nourished and/or questioned the distinction between imagination and thought, myths and logos, and so on.
  2. The problem of the style of philosophy and the role of rhetoric in philosophy
  3. Limits and potentialities of a philosophy of poetry
  4. Features of a literature aiming to be philosophical
  5. Any political aspects entailed in the Quarrel.
  6. The distinction between verse and prose as decisive or not to distinguish poetry from philosophy.

Languages: English, French, German, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish.

The paper can be submitted online via OJS – Open Journal System:

http://zetesis.cfs.unipi.it/Rivista/index.php/odradek/index

Authors can find submission guidelines at the following link:

http://zetesis.cfs.unipi.it/Rivista/index.php/odradek/about/submissions#onlineSubmissions

All papers will be reviewed according to our peer review process policy:

http://zetesis.cfs.unipi.it/Rivista/index.php/odradek/about/editorialPolicies#peerReviewProcess

 

Share this:

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Print
  • Twitter

Like this:

Like Loading...

The Wisdom of the Ancients 1 – 2

24 Wednesday Jun 2015

Posted by Danilo Manca in convegni

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Alessandra Fussi, Alfredo Ferrarin, ancient wisdom, antropologia, Aristofane, Aristophanes, Consiglio degli studenti Università di Pisa, Dio dopo Auschwitz, educazione, Elad Lapidot, Emidio Spinelli, Fabio Fossa, Ferdinand Deanini, Filosofia e politica, Gnosis, gnosticismo, Hans Jonas, Heidegger, Jonas antropology, Leo Strauss, Marco Menon, modern temper, natural theology, paideia, Philipp von Wussow, Plato, platone, Political Philosophy, politics, problema teologico-politico, Quarrel between Athens and Jerusalem, Quarrel between the Ancients and the Moderns, Raimondo Cubeddu, recupero pensiero antico, retrieving classical thought, scetticismo, Seinsgeschichte, socrate, Socrates, teologia naturale, the Jews, The Law of Reason in the Kuzari, theologico-political problem, Zetesis

Fra qualche ora comincia il secondo convegno del giugno filosofico pisano a cura di Zetesis. Il tema è la saggezza degli antichi. Il convegno è realizzato con il fondamentale contributo del Consiglio degli studenti dell’Università di Pisa. 

L’appuntamento è nell’Aula Savi dell’Orto Botanico alle ore 9. Vi saranno i saluti da parte del Vice-coordinatore del Dottorato Prof. Raimondo Cubeddu e del Prof. Alfredo Ferrarin che ha curato con la Prof.ssa Alessandra Fussi la supervisione scientifica del progetto.

La prima sessione del convegno sarà dedicata a Leo Strauss e al tema del recupero del pensiero classico in generale. 

Il primo relatore sarà il Dr. Philipp von Wussow, assistente alla cattedra Martin Buber di Filosofia della religione della Goethe Universität di Francoforte. Von Wussow, che ha pubblicato diversi scritti su Adorno, si sta dedicando ora a un progetto di ricerca su cultura, religione e politica in Leo Strauss. Titolo del suo intervento è “Leo Strauss’s Methodology of Returnistrauss_cigaretteng to the Ancients“.

Secondo relatore sarà Ferdinand Deanini, studente del corso di laurea magistrale in Filosofia dell’Università di Monaco, allievo di Heinrich Meier. Tra i suoi interessi vi sono la filosofia politica, in particolare di Hobbes e Strauss, la prima filosofia moderna (Marsilio da Padova) e il pensiero di Nietzsche. Al convegno proporrà un contributo dal titolo “The Law and the Philosopher. On Leo Strauss’s Essay ‘The Law of Reason in the Kuzari’”. 

Ultimo relatore della prima sessione sarà Marco Menon, che ha conseguito lo scorso febbraio il dottorato all’Università Ca’ Foscari di Venezia sotto la supervisione del Prof. Gian Luigi Paltrinieri, lavorando sul testo di Strauss “Socrates and Aristophanes”. Ora studia con il Prof. Heinrich Meier a Monaco con un progetto sul problema della teologia politica e della teologia naturale. Il titolo del suo intervento è: A Lesson in Politics. Some Remarks on Strauss’s Socrates and Aristophanes. 

 

Nel pomeriggio a partire dalle ore 15 circa inizierà la sessione dedicata invece a Hans Jonas e alla sua posizione posizione nei confronti della Quarrel between Athens and Jerusalem. 

Il primo a intervenire sarà il dr. Elad Lapidot, che insegna filosofia e letteratura rabbinica alla Freie Universität e alla Humboldt Universität di Berlino, nonché all’Università di Potsdam e al Zentrum Jüdische Studien Berlin Brandenburg. Ha tradotto in ebraico diverse opere di filosofi francesi e tedeschi del Novecento (come Levinas, Sartre, Weber e Husserl). Sta lavorando attualmente alla traduzione in ebraico della Fenomenologia dello spirito di Hegel e di Essere e tempo di Heidegger. Tra le sue pubblicazioni ricordiamo: Etre sans mot dire. La logique de Sein und Zeit (2010), Translating Philosophy (2012), Fragwürdige Sprache. Zur modernen Phänomenologie der Heiligen Zunge (2013), „Du, der mit Buchstaben und Beschneidung ein Gesetzesübertreter bist“: Paulus und die Grundlegung des Judentums (2014).

Al convegno Elad Lapidot propone un contributo su “Counter-histories: Gnosis, Seinsgeschichte – and the Jews”.

jonas

 

Secondo relatore della sessione sarà Fabio Fossa, dottorando all’Università di Pisa nonché membro del Direttivo di Zetesis e co-organizzatore del convegno. Fabio Fossa ha pubblicato nel 2014 con ETS una monografia su Hans Jonas e lo gnosticismo intitolata “Il concetto di Dio dopo Auschwitz. Hans Jonas e la gnosi”. Al convegno propone un contributo dal titolo “Ancient Wisdom and the Modern Temper. On the Role of Greek and Jewish Tradition in Hans Jonas’s Anthropology”. 

A chiudere la sessione su Jonas sarà il Prof. Emidio Spinelli con l’intervento dal titolo “Hans Jonas and the ‘Multi-disciplinary’ Platonic Model of Paideia“. Spinelli professore associato di Storia della filosofia antica all’Università La Sapienza di Roma. Spinelli è professore associato anche Istituto per il lessico intellettuale europeo, dove è responsabile delle voci dell’edizione on line dedicate ai Presocratici, ai filosofi socratici, a Diogene Laerzio e a Sesto Empirico. E’ autore di numerosi studi che indagano le esperienze filosofiche in epoca antica e tardo-antica. Dal 1998 si occupa di Hans Jonas, del quale ha curato la traduzione italiana di diversi testi (La domanda senza risposta. Alcune riflessioni su scienza, ateismo e la nozione di Dio Melangolo, Genova 2001; Problemi di libertà, Nino Aragno Editore, Torino 2010).

 

Share this:

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Print
  • Twitter

Like this:

Like Loading...

Archivio notizie

Menu

  • ADMISSION
  • Una testimonianza per il futuro dopo la tragedia del coronavirus
  • GROUPS
    • Classical German Philosophy and Phenomenology
    • Philosophies of Image and Imagination
    • The Philosophy of Nature
    • The quarrel between philosophy and poetry
    • The quarrel between the ancients and moderns
    • Theories of Emotions
    • Utopia, the Political Myth, and Rebellion
  • CONFERENCES
    • 2019
      • Gli spazi e i tempi della forma: storia naturale delle rovine
    • 2018
      • Sellars e la filosofia post-kantiana
    • 2017
      • Dialettica della ragione, teleologia e idea di mondo in Kant.
      • La filosofia e il tragico
      • La leggibilità della natura
    • 2016
      • Dialectic and the Ends of Reason
        • Schedule
      • Il tragico nella letteratura tedesca
    • 2015
      • Immaginazione e Giudizio In Kant
        • Schedule
      • MELANCOLIA. Metamorfosi dell’umor nero
        • Introduction
        • Schedule
      • THE WISDOM OF THE ANCIENTS. The German-Jewish Revaluation of Ancient Philosophy
        • Introduction
        • Schedule
    • 2014
      • Hegel and the phenomenological movement
  • CONTACTS
  • EVENTS
  • IDEAS
  • ODRADEK Journal
  • PEOPLE
  • PRESS REVIEW
  • RICORDANDO BARALE

Zetesis FanPage

Zetesis FanPage

Seguiteci su Twitter

My Tweets

I nostri eventi

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • zetesisproject.com
    • Join 26 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • zetesisproject.com
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: