- About
-
The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers
to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is
provided by the
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
Search results
Showing 1 to 5 of 5 (0.027 seconds)Spelling suggestions: "subject:"peitho"" "subject:"nezitho""
| 1 |
Neoptólemo entre a cicatriz e a chaga : lógos sofistico, peithó e areté na tragédia Filoctetes de SófoclesDagios, Mateus January 2012 (has links)
A presente dissertação, intitulada “Neoptólemo entre a cicatriz e a chaga: lógos sofístico, peithó e areté na tragédia Filoctetes de Sófocles”, busca analisar como Sófocles problematiza para a pólis ateniense o lógos sofístico, a ambigüidade da figura do sofista e os efeitos de tal posição sobre os valores e os significados, em um conflito com os padrões éticos da areté. Examina-se como os personagens Odisseu, Filoctetes e Neoptólemo, na interação dos seus discursos, põem em discussão os poderes, as limitações e os usos dos discursos, em especial o persuasório, a peithó. Trabalha-se com a hipótese de que existe no texto trágico um conflito de visões de mundo e de significados e de que as diferentes posturas dos personagens frente ao lógos constituem representações de discursos antagônicos, pertencentes ao repertório cultural da cidade ateniense do último quarto do século V a.C. Parte-se do pressuposto teórico de que a tragédia grega é uma arte política, que trabalha o mito e a pólis e os seus vocabulários, de forma que o Filoctetes de Sófocles (409 a.C.) discutiria temas caros à pólis como a comunicação e a educação, relacionados então com a ascensão dos sofistas. / This work aims to analyze how Sophocles discusses before the Athenian polis’ citizens sophistic logos, the ambiguous position of sophists, and their impact as a debate about values and meanings and as a conflict with the ethical standards related to arete. It is examined how the characters Odysseus, Philoctetes, and Neoptolemus deal with the possibilities, limits, and uses of speech in their interactions, rendering persuasion, peitho, as especially problematic. Considering that tragic poetry examines conflicts in meanings and standpoints, the characters’ different stances about logos are regarded as representative of opposing views available in Athens’ cultural repertoire in the last quarter of the fifth century BC. Theoretically, Greek tragedy is taken as a political art that operates with both myth and polis, its issues and vocabularies, so that Sophocles’ Philoctetes (409 BC) could be interpreted as a discussion of issues of great concern for Athens such as communication and education, both then inseparable from the rise of the sophists.
|
| 2 |
Neoptólemo entre a cicatriz e a chaga : lógos sofistico, peithó e areté na tragédia Filoctetes de SófoclesDagios, Mateus January 2012 (has links)
A presente dissertação, intitulada “Neoptólemo entre a cicatriz e a chaga: lógos sofístico, peithó e areté na tragédia Filoctetes de Sófocles”, busca analisar como Sófocles problematiza para a pólis ateniense o lógos sofístico, a ambigüidade da figura do sofista e os efeitos de tal posição sobre os valores e os significados, em um conflito com os padrões éticos da areté. Examina-se como os personagens Odisseu, Filoctetes e Neoptólemo, na interação dos seus discursos, põem em discussão os poderes, as limitações e os usos dos discursos, em especial o persuasório, a peithó. Trabalha-se com a hipótese de que existe no texto trágico um conflito de visões de mundo e de significados e de que as diferentes posturas dos personagens frente ao lógos constituem representações de discursos antagônicos, pertencentes ao repertório cultural da cidade ateniense do último quarto do século V a.C. Parte-se do pressuposto teórico de que a tragédia grega é uma arte política, que trabalha o mito e a pólis e os seus vocabulários, de forma que o Filoctetes de Sófocles (409 a.C.) discutiria temas caros à pólis como a comunicação e a educação, relacionados então com a ascensão dos sofistas. / This work aims to analyze how Sophocles discusses before the Athenian polis’ citizens sophistic logos, the ambiguous position of sophists, and their impact as a debate about values and meanings and as a conflict with the ethical standards related to arete. It is examined how the characters Odysseus, Philoctetes, and Neoptolemus deal with the possibilities, limits, and uses of speech in their interactions, rendering persuasion, peitho, as especially problematic. Considering that tragic poetry examines conflicts in meanings and standpoints, the characters’ different stances about logos are regarded as representative of opposing views available in Athens’ cultural repertoire in the last quarter of the fifth century BC. Theoretically, Greek tragedy is taken as a political art that operates with both myth and polis, its issues and vocabularies, so that Sophocles’ Philoctetes (409 BC) could be interpreted as a discussion of issues of great concern for Athens such as communication and education, both then inseparable from the rise of the sophists.
|
| 3 |
Neoptólemo entre a cicatriz e a chaga : lógos sofistico, peithó e areté na tragédia Filoctetes de SófoclesDagios, Mateus January 2012 (has links)
A presente dissertação, intitulada “Neoptólemo entre a cicatriz e a chaga: lógos sofístico, peithó e areté na tragédia Filoctetes de Sófocles”, busca analisar como Sófocles problematiza para a pólis ateniense o lógos sofístico, a ambigüidade da figura do sofista e os efeitos de tal posição sobre os valores e os significados, em um conflito com os padrões éticos da areté. Examina-se como os personagens Odisseu, Filoctetes e Neoptólemo, na interação dos seus discursos, põem em discussão os poderes, as limitações e os usos dos discursos, em especial o persuasório, a peithó. Trabalha-se com a hipótese de que existe no texto trágico um conflito de visões de mundo e de significados e de que as diferentes posturas dos personagens frente ao lógos constituem representações de discursos antagônicos, pertencentes ao repertório cultural da cidade ateniense do último quarto do século V a.C. Parte-se do pressuposto teórico de que a tragédia grega é uma arte política, que trabalha o mito e a pólis e os seus vocabulários, de forma que o Filoctetes de Sófocles (409 a.C.) discutiria temas caros à pólis como a comunicação e a educação, relacionados então com a ascensão dos sofistas. / This work aims to analyze how Sophocles discusses before the Athenian polis’ citizens sophistic logos, the ambiguous position of sophists, and their impact as a debate about values and meanings and as a conflict with the ethical standards related to arete. It is examined how the characters Odysseus, Philoctetes, and Neoptolemus deal with the possibilities, limits, and uses of speech in their interactions, rendering persuasion, peitho, as especially problematic. Considering that tragic poetry examines conflicts in meanings and standpoints, the characters’ different stances about logos are regarded as representative of opposing views available in Athens’ cultural repertoire in the last quarter of the fifth century BC. Theoretically, Greek tragedy is taken as a political art that operates with both myth and polis, its issues and vocabularies, so that Sophocles’ Philoctetes (409 BC) could be interpreted as a discussion of issues of great concern for Athens such as communication and education, both then inseparable from the rise of the sophists.
|
| 4 |
Platonic Craft and Medical EthicsBader, Daniel 14 February 2011 (has links)
Platonic Craft and Medical Ethics examines the Platonic theory of craft and shows its application to different ethical problems in medicine, both ancient and modern. I begin by elucidating the Platonic use of the term “craft” or “technē”, using especially the paradigmatic craft of medicine, and explicate a number of important principles inherent in his use of the term. I then show how Plato’s framework of crafts can be applied to two ancient debates. First, I show how Plato’s understanding of crafts is used in discussing the definition of medicine, and how he deals with the issue of “bivalence”, that medicine seems to be capable of generating disease as well as curing it. I follow this discussion into Aristotle, who, though he has a different interpretation of bivalence, has a solution in many ways similar to Plato’s. Second, I discuss the relevance of knowledge to persuasion and freedom. Rhetors like Gorgias challenge the traditional connections of persuasion to freedom and force to slavery by characterizing persuasion as a type of force. Plato addresses this be dividing persuasion between sorcerous and didactic persuasion, and sets knowledge as the new criterion for freedom. Finally, I discuss three modern issues in medical ethics using a Platonic understanding of crafts: paternalism, conclusions in meta-analyses and therapeutic misconceptions in research ethics. In discussing paternalism, I argue that tools with multiple excellences, like the body, should not be evaluated independently of the uses to which the patient intends to put them. In discussing meta-analyses, I show how the division of crafts into goal-oriented and causal parts in the Phaedrus exposes the confusion inherent in saying that practical conclusions can follow directly from statistical results. Finally, I argue that authors like Franklin G. Miller and Howard Brody fail to recognize the hierarchical relationship between medical research and medicine when they argue that medical research ethics should be autonomous from medical ethics per se.
|
| 5 |
Platonic Craft and Medical EthicsBader, Daniel 14 February 2011 (has links)
Platonic Craft and Medical Ethics examines the Platonic theory of craft and shows its application to different ethical problems in medicine, both ancient and modern. I begin by elucidating the Platonic use of the term “craft” or “technē”, using especially the paradigmatic craft of medicine, and explicate a number of important principles inherent in his use of the term. I then show how Plato’s framework of crafts can be applied to two ancient debates. First, I show how Plato’s understanding of crafts is used in discussing the definition of medicine, and how he deals with the issue of “bivalence”, that medicine seems to be capable of generating disease as well as curing it. I follow this discussion into Aristotle, who, though he has a different interpretation of bivalence, has a solution in many ways similar to Plato’s. Second, I discuss the relevance of knowledge to persuasion and freedom. Rhetors like Gorgias challenge the traditional connections of persuasion to freedom and force to slavery by characterizing persuasion as a type of force. Plato addresses this be dividing persuasion between sorcerous and didactic persuasion, and sets knowledge as the new criterion for freedom. Finally, I discuss three modern issues in medical ethics using a Platonic understanding of crafts: paternalism, conclusions in meta-analyses and therapeutic misconceptions in research ethics. In discussing paternalism, I argue that tools with multiple excellences, like the body, should not be evaluated independently of the uses to which the patient intends to put them. In discussing meta-analyses, I show how the division of crafts into goal-oriented and causal parts in the Phaedrus exposes the confusion inherent in saying that practical conclusions can follow directly from statistical results. Finally, I argue that authors like Franklin G. Miller and Howard Brody fail to recognize the hierarchical relationship between medical research and medicine when they argue that medical research ethics should be autonomous from medical ethics per se.
|
Page generated in 0.0353 seconds