DDeePPaauull UUnniivveerrssiittyy DDiiggiittaall CCoommmmoonnss@@DDeePPaauull College of Liberal Arts & Social Sciences College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences Theses and Dissertations 12-2009 PPllaattoo''ss aannaallooggiiccaall tthhoouugghhtt Holly G. Moore DePaul University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/etd RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn Moore, Holly G., "Plato's analogical thought" (2009). College of Liberal Arts & Social Sciences Theses and Dissertations. 7. https://via.library.depaul.edu/etd/7 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences at Digital Commons@DePaul. It has been accepted for inclusion in College of Liberal Arts & Social Sciences Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@DePaul. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PLATO’S ANALOGICAL THOUGHT A Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy August, 2009 BY Holly G. Moore Department of Philosophy College of Liberal Arts and Sciences DePaul University Chicago, Illinois Copyright © 2009 by Holly G. Moore All rights reserved To my parents But only to decorate, nothing more. Michèle Le Doeuff, The Philosophical Imaginary ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The seed of this project took root in the spring of 2003, during the course, “The History of the Idea of Nature,” taught by Dennis Schmidt at Villanova University during my M.A. course work there. My indebtedness to the faculty and students at Villanova is therefore great. In particular, I would like to thank Walter Brogan for being a very generous mentor and supporter of my work, as well as Julie Klein and Kevin Miles. The members of my Villanova cohort are thinkers I deeply admire and thank them for their thoughtfulness: Katie Herzog Grosch, Jeff Gower, Leigh Johnson, and Adam Miller. While the idea for this work began at Villanova, I would also like to thank those at Penn State University, who introduced me to an abiding love for ancient philosophy while I completed my B. A.: Susan Bredlau, Veronique Foti, Benjamin Grazzini, Mark Munn, John Russon, and John Sallis, who taught me how to read Plato. I am also indebted to the boundless support I received from other mentors and colleagues at Penn State: Sara Brill, Vincent Colapietro, Ryan Drake, Emily Grosholz, John Stuhr, Amy Wendling, and Charles Scott, a man whose intellect is rivaled only by his heart. The support I have received from DePaul University is immeasurable, but I owe the most to my committee, who nurtured the work I present here in many ways. I feel very lucky to have had Rick Lee as a mentor for many years. His capacity to reflect his students’ thinking back to them is a sign of the deep generosity of his own thought, something I have depended on often as I worked to make my ideas more explicit. Rick’s courses were some of the best I have taken, and the conversations that developed there are ones I continue to share with those who were fortunate enough to have had him as a teacher. Sean Kirkland too has been a generous mentor both with his attention and with v his thought. Sean’s uncompromising expectations have made me a better scholar and a better thinker, and for that I am extremely grateful. A more careful and patient reader one can hardly imagine. Finally, Michael Naas has been the kind of director I had always hoped I would have. A true kindred in thought, I have never felt that Michael did not understand what I was trying to say or think. Many times I felt that he knew my thought better than I did, and that made me all the more sanguine for the tasks of expressing that thought. The attention Michael gave to my writing and the care with which he tended my development as a scholar and thinker, these traits are a truly humbling example for mentorship to which I can only hope to aspire. In addition to my committee, I would also like to thank a few other faculty members at DePaul who have contributed a great deal to my success: Tina Chanter, Avery Goldman, Namita Goswami, Jason Hill, Bill Martin, Darrell Moore, David Pellauer, Franklin Perkins, and Kevin Thompson. The consistency of faculty support I have received is really remarkable and an asset that few have the fortune to rely on. I would also like to thank two more faculty at DePaul University, who were instrumental in helping me maintain my Greek and Latin language facility: Kirk Shellko and Peter DeRousse. Finally, without the support of the staff of the philosophy department at DePaul, Mary Amico, Jennifer Burke, Stephanie Hidalgo, and Jacob Adams, this work would have been much harder to complete. I would also like to express my gratitude to those organizations who allowed me to present early versions of some of the work presented here: The Ancient Philosophy Society, the Collegium Phaenomenologicum, the International Society for Neo-Platonic Studies, and the Society for Ancient Greek Philosophy. And because their work vi facilitated a great part of my own, I would like to thank Branko’s, Charmers Café, The Grind, Hot Doug’s, Kuma’s, The Local Option, Metropolis, Noodles in the Pot, The Red Lion, Sweet Mandy B’s, Three Floyds Brewing, and Ventrella’s. After all, the leisure required for my thought has been purchased by the labor of others. It is difficult to decide where to place the next group. Are they colleagues or are they friends? It has been my great fortune never to have had to choose. To those inimitable, inspiring people with whom I have had the honor to think with, live alongside, and love, thank you for always being there: Jeremy Bell, Andrew Dilts, Dilek Huseinzadegen, Sina Kramer, Andrew LaZella, Jana McAuliffe, Kristin McCartney, Jeff Pardikes, Amanda Parris, Heather Rakes, and Molly Sturdevant. My very deep thanks also goes to my writing partner and dear friend, Hernando Arturo Estévez, whose spirit has been an enormous blessing to my work and my life. Finally, thanks to Michael Anderson for not being a philosopher (and yet having the patience to love one). His kindness and loving companionship made a challenging year a joy in its rewards. The greatest gratitude I reserve for my family, who never questioned whether I could accomplish this goal and loved me through quite a lot of struggle to get there. Finally, though we are no longer family, I would also like to thank Russell Ford, whose support and love made a great part of this work possible. vii ABSTRACT In “Plato’s Analogical Thought,” I argue that although there is no explicit discussion of analogy as a philosophical concept in the dialogues, Plato’s thought operates according to a logic of analogy. The thesis that Plato’s thought is analogical is demonstrated by means of several analyses of the way that analogical structure takes root in some of Plato’s most important concepts and discussions. Through careful readings of the Platonic dialogues, it becomes clear that analogy plays a key role in Plato’s articulation of the structure of being, the cosmos, and logos. I begin with an exploration of the meaning attached to analogy and an explanation of its relation to imaging. From there, I turn to the Republic to demonstrate that the divided line of Book VI reflects in its own form the analogical structure of Platonic metaphysics. Next, I turn to Socrates’ discourse on the hypothesis of the forms, discovering that, by means of the analogy of the eclipsed sun, hypothesis becomes the logos that mediates truth and ignorance. In the Timaeus, a Pythagorean mathematician and astronomer (Timaeus) provides an uncharacteristically direct account of the relation between the way thought is expressed and what is thought in that expression. His account amounts to claiming that there is an analogy between thought and its expression, which is implicitly demonstrated by his account of the cosmological principle that mediates being and becoming: chōra. Finally, I consider the Statesman dialogue, where the Eleatic Stranger seeks to provide a detailed account of the manner by which a statesman rules. This account, I show, is premised on an analogy with the art of weaving, viii which is itself an image of the Stranger’s own method. Hence, Platonic methodology is itself also tied to the structure of analogy. These analyses support the conclusion that Plato’s thought is thoroughly analogical, thereby anticipating and influencing the philosophical role of the concept of analogy in later traditions. As a result, however, analogy appears as a sign of the necessarily incomplete nature of pure thought. In the end, this claim enables us to reflect upon the predicament of philosophical reflection: that the very structure of a thought foundational to Western philosophy relies on a concept antithetical to its own prescribed hierarchy. This reveals not a flaw in Plato’s thinking but a feature endemic to totalizing, rational accounts. In addition, it is further argued that the analysis of analogy in Plato’s work reveals the significance of discursive thought to philosophical practice. By revealing the limits of rational accounts, such considerations of the role of analogy turn us toward a reassessment of the value of non-thetic expressions of thought. ix