La theía moîra dans la philosophie de Platon demeure étonnamment peu étudiée au point même de souffrir d’un silence exégétique préjudiciable malgré des tentatives chez les commentateurs germaniques (Zeller), français (Souilhé, Des Places) ou encore anglo-saxons (Berry, Greene). S’illustrant tout au long de son œuvre, la theía moîra n’est ni assignable à une signification définitive, ni réductible à une traduction unique, ni associable à un champ thématique déterminé. Cette disparité s’avérant problématique et propre à susciter l’étonnement, notre travail propose un modèle interprétatif pour la theía moîra articulé autour d’une double exigence. En premier lieu, notre travail montre les insuffisances des analyses existantes de la theía moîra en insistant particulièrement sur les tendances réductrices inhérentes à ces études (approche sceptique, ironique, taxinomique, génétique ou encore anachronique). En second lieu, notre travail établit une méthode d’étude de la theía moîra centrée autour de pôles de significations (sophistiques, socratiques, extatiques, techniques, épistémologiques et politiques) dans le but de comprendre la complexité de la theía moîra. Plus précisément, notre travail montre que ces pôles de significations suivent le plus souvent un triple mouvement de formulation, de mise à l’écart et de réactivation au sein du corpus platonicien et que ce triple mouvement entend répondre à la variété des problèmes et des difficultés qui parcourent l’œuvre de Platon. / Surprisingly, scholars have always paid a relatively limited attention to Plato’s theía moîra - an academic silence which proved damaging to its exegetical analysis. Notwithstanding the contributions of German (Zeller), French (Souihlé, Des Places) or British and American (Berry, Greene) specialists, who all tried to interpret the theía moîra, these attempts failed to offer a satisfactory analysis of Plato’s θεία μοῖρα. Though Plato refers to the theía moîra many times in his work, it is extremely difficult to either precisely define or to supply a definitive translation of the theía moîra. Nor can one easily make it fit into any preconceived thematic field.This disparity, as surprising as it may seem, nevertheless poses a certain number of problems. Our work aims to provide an interpretative framework for the theía moîra revolving around two main axes. First, we will demonstrate the limits of the existing body of scholarly work by pointing out the over-simplification of the theía moîra inherent to those studies (particularly the skeptical, ironic, taxonomic, genetic and anachronistic approaches). Second, so as to understand the complexity of the meaning of the theía moîra, our work intends to establish a methodology built upon pivotal aspects and meanings (sophistic, Socratic, ecstatic, technical, epistemological and political). More precisely, the ambition of this work is to show that these pivotal aspects and meanings are very often guided by a triple principle of formulation, neglect and rediscovery and that this triple principle serves to provide an answer to the multiplicity of questions and difficulties which readers are accustomed to meet in Plato’s work.

Dans notre travail de recherche nous voulons, d’un côté, valoriser l’actualité éthique et politique de la pensée sophistique et, de l’autre, réhabiliter la pensée de Protagoras et d’Antiphon sur un plan purement philosophique. Nous considérons les sophistes, en général, et Protagoras et Antiphon, en particulier, comme étant les « ancêtres » de l’antidogmatique et du relativisme dans le domaine de la philosophie, de l’anthropologie ou encore dans le domaine historico-politique. Par conséquent, ils étaient aussi les ancêtres du courant laïc, critique et démocratique de la pensée occidentale qui, malgré avoir toujours été « minoritaire », représente l’un des fondements de l’identité culturelle européenne. Cette dernière a une grande « dette » envers eux, desquels elle a repris et réutilisé de nombreux concepts et de multiples inventions philosophiques sans presque jamais leur en attribuer le mérite.Pour reconstruir les philosophies des deux sophistes, nous avons démarré notre recherche par une traduction et une étude des sources à notre disposition, ainsi que par une analyse approfondie des contextes historiques, sociaux, économique, politiques et culturels.Nous avons présenté les discours des deux philosophes comme une sorte d’antilogie : nous apprendons de PRO-tagoras qu’il est possible de créer une société qui correspond à nos valeurs ; et d’ANTI-phon que le sens critique, la remise en question et la lutte politique sont nécessaires afin que le nomos soit toujours respectueux de l’évolution et des changements de notre société. Nous avons enfin opéré une confrontation critique entre les deux philosophies afin d’en ressortir trois perspectives utiles pour notre présent et notre futur : l’antidogmatisme, le relativisme constructiviste et le minoritarisme. / In our research work we want, on the one hand, to enhance the ethical and political relevance of sophistic taught and, on the other, to rehabilitate the thinking of Protagoras and Antiphon on a purely philosophical level.In general, we consider the sophists, and particularly Protagoras and Anthiphon, as the “ancestors” of the antidogmatic and relativism in the philosophic, anthropologic or historical-political fields. Consequently, they were also the ancestors of the secular, critical and democratic current of Western thought which, despite having always been a "minority", is one of the foundations of European cultural identity.The latter has a great "debt" towards them, from which it has taken and reused many concepts and numerous philosophical inventions without almost ever granting them the merit.To reconstruct the philosophies of the two sophists, we began our research with a translation and a study of the sources available to us, as well as an in-depth analysis of the historical, social, economic, political and cultural contexts.We have presented the speeches of the two philosophers as a kind of antilogy: we learn from PRO-tagoras that it is possible to create a society that corresponds to our values; and from ANTI-phon that the critical sense, the questioning and the political struggle are necessary so that the nomos is always respectful of the evolution and the changes of our society.We have finally made a critical confrontation between the two philosophies in order to reveal three useful perspectives for our present and our future: antidogmatism, constructivist relativism and minoritarism.

While proponents of process saw a contradiction in the current-traditional pedagogy--teaching toward product marginalized valuable practices embedded in the processes of writing--post-process scholars sought to move beyond attempts to codify writing processes for easy instruction. Because it avoids resting upon foundations, the critical focus of post-process does not allow for easy pedagogical application. In order to navigate the post-process theoretical impasse, I argue for an approach to composition pedagogy that emphasizes a performative and sophistic aspect of topical reasoning that when practiced challenges Cartesian self-certainty and works to transform subjectivity. Through communicating judgments of similarity and difference within any given situation, the performance of topical reasoning serves to either reproduce or transform the customary understanding of the rhetor's community; the latter is the exception, the former the rule within our inherited rhetorical traditions. Derivative of the efforts of Plato and Aristotle to discipline rhetoric, and especially following the emergence of the Enlightenment project, rhetorical traditions that exclude sophistic perspectives have continued to understand topics as codified sets of rules a rhetor simply follows to invent discourse, making the topics easily dismissible because invention had become a matter of reporting on reality or of following inner inspiration. While several projects to employ topics in composition pedagogy have emerged during the late 20th century--spanning process, post-process, and new rhetorical pedagogies--the performative dimension of topical reasoning has been overlooked, or left to the realm of theory because of its radical nature vis-a-vis university composition courses. Building from a Heideggerian reading of the topics, and through an extensive analysis of the sophistic pedagogic practices employed in a weekend seminar called the Landmark Forum, I work to develop a full understanding of topical reasoning as primarily performative, where only in risky moments of performance can one undergo an experience with language and so develop a rhetorical subjectivity receptive to recalcitrance while maintaining integrity to one's commitments. I claim that to "learn" topical reasoning requires a program of rigorous dialogic exercise, an ontological paideia, which calls for performances that revise identity and the networks of rhetorical relationships that reinforce identity.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Catholic University of America. / Vita. "Select bibliography": p. [v]-vii.

Submitted by Andrea Hayashi (deachan@gmail.com) on 2016-06-24T18:08:46Z No. of bitstreams: 1 dissertacao-rineu-quinalia-filho.pdf: 1281232 bytes, checksum: 567502ac00788106db2f061afa627942 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Andrea Hayashi (deachan@gmail.com) on 2016-06-24T18:09:36Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 dissertacao-rineu-quinalia-filho.pdf: 1281232 bytes, checksum: 567502ac00788106db2f061afa627942 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-06-24T18:09:36Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 dissertacao-rineu-quinalia-filho.pdf: 1281232 bytes, checksum: 567502ac00788106db2f061afa627942 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2013-11 / O presente trabalho tem como objetivo oferecer uma leitura do Hípias Maior de Platão pretendendo discutir a respeito da possibilidade de o diálogo apresentar as primeiras discussões sobre o conceito inteligível do Belo. / This paper aims to offer a reading of Plato's Greater Hippias intending to discuss about the possibility of dialogue present the first discussions on the concept of Fine intelligible.

Orientador: Trajano Augusto Ricca Vieira / Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Estudos da Linguagem / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-17T19:29:04Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Mishima_Monica_M.pdf: 782171 bytes, checksum: bb2993137c39da78a010d4647e1830a0 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011 / Resumo: Ao percorrer as obras satíricas de Luciano de Samósata, notamos a incongruência entre as falas e as ações de algum personagem (ou de muitos) como motivo de riso. De acordo com Quentin Skinner e Verona Alberti, diversos pensadores da Antiguidade Clássica estabelecem tal contraste entre o que se é e o que se aparenta ser como única causa do humor. Pretendemos, com o presente estudo, esboçar como essa teoria clássica do riso se apresenta na obra O Banquete ou os Lápitas, sátira aos filósofos do autor supracitado / Abstract: Going through the satirical works of Lucian of Samosate, we may notice the incongruence between the speech and the actions of one or many characters as the reason for laughter. According to Quentin Skinner and Verona Alberti, some thinkers from the Classical Antiquity stablished the contrast of what one is and what one appears to be as the sole motive for laughing. Through this research, we intend to sketch how the classical theory of laughter is presented in Symposium or the Lapiths, a satire on philosophers by the aforementioned author / Mestrado / Linguistica / Mestre em Linguística

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Diferentemente das recorrentes assertivas sobre o comprometimento político dos intelectuais gregos no Império, a nosso ver, a partir do século II d.C., a chamada Segunda Sofística é um indicativo do movimento cultural grego iniciado no século I d.C. Embora seus integrantes apresentem intenções distintas em seus escritos, os intelectuais gregos do Império participam de estilos e temáticas narrativas semelhantes. No caso de Plutarco, e essa é a nossa tese central, demonstramos que nosso autor não compôs sua obra para exaltar ou glorificar o Império romano ou ainda a cultura grega. Sendo assim, seus escritos representam a expressão da singularidade e da utilidade da tradição cultural grega para o fortalecimento político do Império. O objetivo principal de Plutarco está, pois, em construir uma identidade grega no Império, pautada na história de seu povo e em sua tradição cultural, para exibir ao mundo romano a contribuição dos gregos para a formação do Império. / Differently from the usual assertions about the Greek intellectuals\' political compromise with the Empire, in our perspective, as from the second century A.D., the so called Second Sophistic is an indicative of the Greek cultural movement started in the first century A.D. Although its members present distinct intentions of their writings, the Greek intellectuals of the Empire develop similar styles and themes through their narratives. Considering Plutarch\'s case, and this is the core of our thesis, we demonstrate that our author did not write his work to exalt nor to glorify the Roman Empire nor the Greek culture. His writings represent the expression of the singularity and the usefulness of the Greek cultural tradition for the political strength of the Empire. Plutarch\'s main objective is to build a Greek identity in the Empire, based on the history of the people and their cultural tradition to exhibit the Greeks\' contribution to the formation of the Roman Empire.