Se justifican tres tesis. Primera, el sentido mítico-religioso tradicional de la justicia como castigo de la [palabra en griego] quedó desacreditado durante la Guerra del Peloponeso, como bien lo muestra Tucídides. Segunda, en tiempos de Aristóteles, tal sentido ya habría desaparecido en favor de un nuevo paradigma basado en el concepto de [palabra en griego]. Tercera, la obra de Platón constituye uno de los últimos intentosde recuperar ese sentido mítico-religioso tradicional tratando de interpretar la Guerra del Peloponeso a través del mecanismo del castigo de la [palabra en griego] .---The notion of ‘hybris’ in Plato’s Critias”. The following theses are basically justified: (1) the traditional mythical-religious sense of justice as punishment of the [greek word] was discredited during the Peloponnesian War, as Thucydide shows. (2) In times of Aristotle such a sense had already disappeared in favour of a new paradigm based on the concept of [greek word]. (3) Plato’s work constitutes one of the last attempts to recover the traditional mythical-religious sense trying to interpret the Peloponnesian War through the mechanism of punishment of the [greek word].

Ce mémoire cherche à évaluer la culpabilité de Socrate face à l’échec et à la corruption d’Alcibiade, telle que la question se pose dans le Banquet de Platon. Il comprend quatre chapitres. Le premier démontre que le cadre dramatique lui-même fait occuper une place centrale à la vie et au déclin d’Alcibiade et au problème de la responsabilité de Socrate face aux accusations de corruption de la jeunesse qui ont pesé sur lui. Le deuxième chapitre interprète le discours d’Alcibiade comme une tentative de disculpation qui repose sur une critique acerbe du comportement de Socrate. Il se serait détourné de Socrate et de ses enseignements en raison de son ironie, de son arrogance et de son indifférence – de son hybris. Le troisième chapitre étudie le discours de Socrate sur l’accession à la beauté intelligible. Il expose la nature particulière de son éros, qui repose sur l’ironie et l’inversion des rôles comme moyens d’exhorter à la philosophie. Le quatrième chapitre pose la question de l’efficacité de ce type de pédagogie et de la responsabilité du philosophe vis-à-vis de ses disciples. L’étude conclut que l’amour et l’ironie de Socrate sont essentiellement des moyens d’inviter l’autre à se remettre lui-même en question et à prendre soin de son âme. Socrate n’est donc pas coupable d’avoir corrompu Alcibiade. La faute est entièrement celle du jeune homme. Il s’est montré incapable, par égocentrisme et fierté excessive, de réagir correctement à l’énigme posée par le comportement érotique de Socrate. / This essay on Plato’s Symposium assesses to what extent Socrates could be held guilty for Alcibiades’ failure and corruption. The first of the four chapters shows that Alcibiades’ life and decline and the accusation against Socrates of youth corruption are central to the dramatic structure. The second chapter interprets Alcibiades’ speech as a sharp criticism of Socrates’ behaviour meant to exculpate himself. Alcibiades justifies his walking away from Socrates and his teachings on the basis of the philosopher’s irony, arrogance and indifference – his hybris. The third chapter looks at Socrates’ speech, which sets out the path to the highest form of Beauty. It explores the particular nature of his eros, which relies especially on irony and role inversion to induce philosophical thinking. The fourth chapter asks how effective this kind of pedagogy is, and what is the responsibility of the philosopher to his students. It is concluded that Socratic love and irony are essentially to be conceived of as means of inciting followers to put themselves into question and take greater care of their souls. Socrates is thus not guilty of corrupting the young man. The fault is entirely Alcibiades’. His pride and selfishness are what prevented him from meeting the challenge that Socrates’ erotic behavior put before him.

Ce mémoire cherche à évaluer la culpabilité de Socrate face à l’échec et à la corruption d’Alcibiade, telle que la question se pose dans le Banquet de Platon. Il comprend quatre chapitres. Le premier démontre que le cadre dramatique lui-même fait occuper une place centrale à la vie et au déclin d’Alcibiade et au problème de la responsabilité de Socrate face aux accusations de corruption de la jeunesse qui ont pesé sur lui. Le deuxième chapitre interprète le discours d’Alcibiade comme une tentative de disculpation qui repose sur une critique acerbe du comportement de Socrate. Il se serait détourné de Socrate et de ses enseignements en raison de son ironie, de son arrogance et de son indifférence – de son hybris. Le troisième chapitre étudie le discours de Socrate sur l’accession à la beauté intelligible. Il expose la nature particulière de son éros, qui repose sur l’ironie et l’inversion des rôles comme moyens d’exhorter à la philosophie. Le quatrième chapitre pose la question de l’efficacité de ce type de pédagogie et de la responsabilité du philosophe vis-à-vis de ses disciples. L’étude conclut que l’amour et l’ironie de Socrate sont essentiellement des moyens d’inviter l’autre à se remettre lui-même en question et à prendre soin de son âme. Socrate n’est donc pas coupable d’avoir corrompu Alcibiade. La faute est entièrement celle du jeune homme. Il s’est montré incapable, par égocentrisme et fierté excessive, de réagir correctement à l’énigme posée par le comportement érotique de Socrate. / This essay on Plato’s Symposium assesses to what extent Socrates could be held guilty for Alcibiades’ failure and corruption. The first of the four chapters shows that Alcibiades’ life and decline and the accusation against Socrates of youth corruption are central to the dramatic structure. The second chapter interprets Alcibiades’ speech as a sharp criticism of Socrates’ behaviour meant to exculpate himself. Alcibiades justifies his walking away from Socrates and his teachings on the basis of the philosopher’s irony, arrogance and indifference – his hybris. The third chapter looks at Socrates’ speech, which sets out the path to the highest form of Beauty. It explores the particular nature of his eros, which relies especially on irony and role inversion to induce philosophical thinking. The fourth chapter asks how effective this kind of pedagogy is, and what is the responsibility of the philosopher to his students. It is concluded that Socratic love and irony are essentially to be conceived of as means of inciting followers to put themselves into question and take greater care of their souls. Socrates is thus not guilty of corrupting the young man. The fault is entirely Alcibiades’. His pride and selfishness are what prevented him from meeting the challenge that Socrates’ erotic behavior put before him.

La figure du monstre, au centre de notre thèse, participe d'une catégorie de personnages déterminés par leur situation hors de la norme. Nous nous intéressons tout particulièrement au monstre en tant que construction symbolique, et l'analyse de ce personnage littéraire hors du commun nous donnera la possibilité d'étudier les rouages textuels qui sont à l'origine de sa création. Nos travaux se portent sur le monstre re-présenté dans et par un texte fictionnel, permettant à ce texte une réflexion métatextuelle sur l'univers de la représentation. La créature monstrueuse est par essence une transgression absolue et c'est cela qui fascine le lecteur. Nous nous emploierons à analyser le monstre en tant que signe avertisseur, ce que d'ailleurs semble indiquer son étymologie, en effet, le terme "monstre" dérive étymologiquement du verbe latin "monstrare" dont le sens est "montrer", qui lui-même est issu du verbe "monere", signifiant "avertir". La créature monstrueuse serait donc un signe dont le sens resterait à déchiffrer pour celui qui le regarde. Notre intérêt se porte tout particulièrement sur la période de la fin du XIXème et le début du XXème siècle, cette époque charnière marque un tournant majeur où les angoisses fin-de-siècle vont être le ferment d'un renouveau de la littérature fantastique. Nos lectures interprétatives de notre corpus seront attentives à la circulation du désir dans les textes, aux formations textuelles inconscientes, ainsi qu'aux réécritures d'un substrat mythologique. Notre étude alliant une mythocritique et une textanalyse n'aura pas pour objectif de dresser un portrait-type du personnage du monstre fabriqué mais d'étudier sa complexité, sa composition littéraire, pour démontrer que le monstre avertit du pire tout en le faisant être là. La mythocritique nous offre la possibilité de mettre au jour les liens tissés entre l'imaginaire individuel de nos auteurs et un fonds anthropologique primordial. La lecture comparative nous permet l'exploration de l'intertextualité qui met tout texte en relation avec des mythes de manière patente ou latente. Enfin, à la lumière des théories freudiennes, nous tâcherons de pénétrer au cœur même de nos textes, il s'agira d'étudier le travail de l'inconscient de l'auteur, ce qui échappe à l'artiste par le mouvement même de l'écriture créatrice. / The abstract is available in French only

Tucídides, ateniense, pensador político do quinto século antes de Cristo, narrou, em sua única obra, grande parte da história da Guerra do Peloponeso. Convicto de que ela seria grande e mais importante que todas as anteriores (TUCÍDIDES, I.1), o historiador antigo, seguindo o critério da própria razão, reuniu relatos, dados e informações gerais sobre a contenda e as nações envolvidas, selecionou personagens, acontecimentos e discursos para compor sua obra de criação (ROMILLY, 1998). O resultado disso é a impressão, por parte dos leitores, de que acompanharam a guerra, compreenderam suas motivações e entenderam o impacto das ações de seus personagens no desenrolar da contenda. Tal papel foi criteriosamente analisado por Tucídides, que buscou indicar ao longo de sua narrativa histórica a força da physis anthropon na condução da polis. Explorar a natureza humana como causadora da crise e da derrota de Atenas é a resposta de Tucídides para compreender o fim do Império Ateniense e marca o rompimento com a justificativa fantasiosa ou divina que constava, até então, nos registros do passado. Para mostrar isso, fizemos uso do personagem Alcibíades no contexto do debate siciliano (TUCÍDIDES, VI.9-23). Ambientado na assembleia que buscava definir os passos seguintes da Expedição à Sicília, esse debate se originou da negativa de Nícias, um dos comandantes da expedição, de os atenienses partirem em auxílio aos aliados, empregando as forças atenienses contra a Sicília; e se consumou com a resposta de Alcibíades, que ao subir à tribuna, fez a sua grande defesa diante da ekklesia. Deste debate depreende-se a figura de Alcibíades: a do orador que reúne as habilidades para conquistar a confiança de seus ouvintes e para convencê-los sobre o que é benéfico ou não à polis, incitando o medo e inflamando os ânimos dentro de uma lógica argumentativa que atravessou os impulsos e os desejos dos atenienses. As palavras que Tucídides selecionou para o discurso de Alcibíades formam a imagem de um homem intemperante, dominado pela hybris, que se propôs a governar os outros sem antes ter governado a si mesmo. Aliado a esta reflexão, tornou-se possível alargar o quadro proporcionado pelo historiador antigo, tendo em vista as conexões observadas ao longo da pesquisa entre a narrativa histórica tucidideana e as leis de Sólon e a formação do cidadão, proposta pelo Sócrates platônico. A preocupação de Sócrates é a mesma que Sólon explorou em seus versos e na elaboração das leis e é a mesma que Tucídides retratou em sua obra. Enquanto Sólon versou sobre as leis da comunidade social e política (JAEGER, 2010), Sócrates empreendeu uma missão de formar o verdadeiro cidadão para evitar que a mais justa forma de governo se degenerasse. / Thucydides, an Athenian, political thinker of the fifth century before Christ, narrated, in his only work, much of The Peloponnesian War history. Convinced that it would be great and more important than all the previous ones (THUCYDIDES, I. 1), the ancient historian, according to the criteria of his own reason, collected reports, data and general information about the strife and the nations involved, selected characters, events and speeches to compose his work of creation (ROMILLY, 1998). The result of this is the impression on the part of the readers, who accompanied the war, understood its motivations and perceived the impact of the actions of his characters in the unfolding of the strife. This role has been carefully analyzed by Thucydides, who sought to demonstrate over the course of its historical narrative the strength of the physis anthropon leading the polis. Exploring the human nature as the cause of the crisis and Athenss defeat is the response from Thucydides to understand the end of the Athenian Empire, and marks a break with the unrealistic or divine justification that was, until then, in records of the past. To demonstrate this, we have made use of the character Alcibíades in the context of the Sicilian debate (THUCYDIDES, VI.9 -23). Set up in the assembly that sought setting the following steps to the Sicilian Expedition, this debate is originated from the negative of Nícias, a commander of the expedition, from the Athenians breaking in aid to allies, undertaking the Athenian forces against the Sicily; and was consummated with Alcibíadess answer, who climbing up the tribune, made his great defense before the ekklesia. This debate makes it clear that the figure of Alcibíades: the speaker that brings together the skills to win the trust and confidence of his listeners and to convince them of what is beneficial or not to the polis, inciting fear and by exaggerating within a logical argument that crossed the impulses and the desires of the Athenians. The words that Thucydides selected for the Alcibíadess speech constituted the image of an intemperate man, dominated by hybris, who proposed governing others without having governed himself first. Allied to this reflection, it has become possible to extend the framework provided by the ancient historian, having in mind the connections observed along the research between the Thucydidess historical narrative and the Solons laws and the formation of the citizen, proposed by the platonic Socrates. Socratess concern is the same that Solon explored in his lyrics and in the drafting of laws and it is the same as Thucydides portrayed in his work. While Solon focused on the community\'s laws and social policy (JAEGER, 2010), Socrates embarked on a mission to form the true citizen to prevent the most fair form of government of degenerating.

Tucídides, ateniense, pensador político do quinto século antes de Cristo, narrou, em sua única obra, grande parte da história da Guerra do Peloponeso. Convicto de que ela seria grande e mais importante que todas as anteriores (TUCÍDIDES, I.1), o historiador antigo, seguindo o critério da própria razão, reuniu relatos, dados e informações gerais sobre a contenda e as nações envolvidas, selecionou personagens, acontecimentos e discursos para compor sua obra de criação (ROMILLY, 1998). O resultado disso é a impressão, por parte dos leitores, de que acompanharam a guerra, compreenderam suas motivações e entenderam o impacto das ações de seus personagens no desenrolar da contenda. Tal papel foi criteriosamente analisado por Tucídides, que buscou indicar ao longo de sua narrativa histórica a força da physis anthropon na condução da polis. Explorar a natureza humana como causadora da crise e da derrota de Atenas é a resposta de Tucídides para compreender o fim do Império Ateniense e marca o rompimento com a justificativa fantasiosa ou divina que constava, até então, nos registros do passado. Para mostrar isso, fizemos uso do personagem Alcibíades no contexto do debate siciliano (TUCÍDIDES, VI.9-23). Ambientado na assembleia que buscava definir os passos seguintes da Expedição à Sicília, esse debate se originou da negativa de Nícias, um dos comandantes da expedição, de os atenienses partirem em auxílio aos aliados, empregando as forças atenienses contra a Sicília; e se consumou com a resposta de Alcibíades, que ao subir à tribuna, fez a sua grande defesa diante da ekklesia. Deste debate depreende-se a figura de Alcibíades: a do orador que reúne as habilidades para conquistar a confiança de seus ouvintes e para convencê-los sobre o que é benéfico ou não à polis, incitando o medo e inflamando os ânimos dentro de uma lógica argumentativa que atravessou os impulsos e os desejos dos atenienses. As palavras que Tucídides selecionou para o discurso de Alcibíades formam a imagem de um homem intemperante, dominado pela hybris, que se propôs a governar os outros sem antes ter governado a si mesmo. Aliado a esta reflexão, tornou-se possível alargar o quadro proporcionado pelo historiador antigo, tendo em vista as conexões observadas ao longo da pesquisa entre a narrativa histórica tucidideana e as leis de Sólon e a formação do cidadão, proposta pelo Sócrates platônico. A preocupação de Sócrates é a mesma que Sólon explorou em seus versos e na elaboração das leis e é a mesma que Tucídides retratou em sua obra. Enquanto Sólon versou sobre as leis da comunidade social e política (JAEGER, 2010), Sócrates empreendeu uma missão de formar o verdadeiro cidadão para evitar que a mais justa forma de governo se degenerasse. / Thucydides, an Athenian, political thinker of the fifth century before Christ, narrated, in his only work, much of The Peloponnesian War history. Convinced that it would be great and more important than all the previous ones (THUCYDIDES, I. 1), the ancient historian, according to the criteria of his own reason, collected reports, data and general information about the strife and the nations involved, selected characters, events and speeches to compose his work of creation (ROMILLY, 1998). The result of this is the impression on the part of the readers, who accompanied the war, understood its motivations and perceived the impact of the actions of his characters in the unfolding of the strife. This role has been carefully analyzed by Thucydides, who sought to demonstrate over the course of its historical narrative the strength of the physis anthropon leading the polis. Exploring the human nature as the cause of the crisis and Athenss defeat is the response from Thucydides to understand the end of the Athenian Empire, and marks a break with the unrealistic or divine justification that was, until then, in records of the past. To demonstrate this, we have made use of the character Alcibíades in the context of the Sicilian debate (THUCYDIDES, VI.9 -23). Set up in the assembly that sought setting the following steps to the Sicilian Expedition, this debate is originated from the negative of Nícias, a commander of the expedition, from the Athenians breaking in aid to allies, undertaking the Athenian forces against the Sicily; and was consummated with Alcibíadess answer, who climbing up the tribune, made his great defense before the ekklesia. This debate makes it clear that the figure of Alcibíades: the speaker that brings together the skills to win the trust and confidence of his listeners and to convince them of what is beneficial or not to the polis, inciting fear and by exaggerating within a logical argument that crossed the impulses and the desires of the Athenians. The words that Thucydides selected for the Alcibíadess speech constituted the image of an intemperate man, dominated by hybris, who proposed governing others without having governed himself first. Allied to this reflection, it has become possible to extend the framework provided by the ancient historian, having in mind the connections observed along the research between the Thucydidess historical narrative and the Solons laws and the formation of the citizen, proposed by the platonic Socrates. Socratess concern is the same that Solon explored in his lyrics and in the drafting of laws and it is the same as Thucydides portrayed in his work. While Solon focused on the community\'s laws and social policy (JAEGER, 2010), Socrates embarked on a mission to form the true citizen to prevent the most fair form of government of degenerating.

Thesis (MA) -- Stellenbosch University, 1977.

Proefschrift - Utrecht. / "Stellingen": [2] leaves inserted. Includes bibliographical references.

Made available in DSpace on 2014-06-11T19:25:23Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2011-03-04Bitstream added on 2014-06-13T19:53:04Z : No. of bitstreams: 1 rodrigues_ma_me_arafcl.pdf: 571739 bytes, checksum: 5eaf122d53bb9df3d22f6140a3da35a3 (MD5) / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) / Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) / Quando a rainha Atossa inicia sua explanação sobre um presságio concebido em sonho, o público helênico sentia o alívio de não ser ele a passar por aqueles momentos de angústia, mas também, através das palavras de Ésquilo, se impressionou com o relato e desespero que davam o mote inicial à única tragédia baseada em fatos históricos a chegar até nós: Os Persas (472 a.C.). A mais antiga tragédia grega de que se tem notícia é, também, o relato de um momento único e crucial na história do povo grego, que garantia a continuidade de sua tão valorosa liberdade e o início de uma nova forma de pensar e agir. Na tragédia Os Persas, ao introduzir alguns dos valores de sua época, Ésquilo demonstra os motivos pelos quais os gregos merecem a vitória e quais são as falhas cometidas pelos persas. Sendo assim, a noção de hybris (a soberbia), um desvio na conduta do homem em relação ao seu equilíbrio com as divindades, é tida como justificativa para os atos de Xerxes que, segundo o tragediógrafo, tornavam-se cada vez mais envoltos nas redes que a Áte (a divindade Erronia) cria aos propensos à ruína. Dessa forma, a dissertação se propõe a analisar a tragédia Os Persas verificando os aspectos que justificam a presença da hybris em Xerxes e, por consequência, a derrota nas Guerras Médicas / When Queen Atossa begins her explanation of an omen conceived in a dream, hellenistic audience felt relief of not it is going through those moments of anguish, but also through the words of Aeschylus, was impressed with the report and despair that gave the tone to the original single tragedy based on historical facts reach us: Persians (472 BC). The earliest of Greek tragedy that notice is also the story of a unique and crucial moment in history of the Greek people, which guarantee the continuity of your so valuable freedom and the beginning of a new way of thinking and acting. In Persians, by introducing some of the values of his era, Aeschylus demonstrates the reasons why the Greeks deserve to win and which are the faults committed by the Persians. Thus, the notion of hybris, (the arrogance) a shift in the man's conduct in relation to their balance with the gods, is taken as justification for acts of Xerxes, according to the tragedian, became increasingly enveloped networks that Áte (the divinity Erroneous) to create likely to ruin. Thus, the work aims to analyze the tragedy Persians checking the features that justify the presence of hybris in Xerxes and therefore, losing the Persian Wars

La punition divine est un phénomène récurrent dans la mythologie grecque. L’hybris, commise par des individus vaniteux et orgueilleux aspirant à se comparer aux dieux ou même à se succéder à eux à la domination du Cosmos, provoque une série de châtiments atroces, imposés par les Olympiens à des hommes et à des femmes, à des humains et à des êtres mythiques, à des héros, à des rois et même à d’autres dieux sans discrimination. L’étude actuelle examine l’iconographie de divers types de châtiment divin dans l’art gréco-romain et la peinture occidentale (XVe-XIXe siècles). Elle analyse l’interaction entre les œuvres d’art et les sources littéraires antiques, médiévales et modernes, ainsi que les points communs remarqués entre les thèmes antiques du châtiment divin et certains épisodes bibliques ou chevaleresques. Elle se focalise enfin sur l’influence que l’iconographie de la punition divine antique a exercée sur la politique, la société et la religion aussi bien dans l’Antiquité qu’à l’époque moderne. / Divine punishment constitutes a recurrent phenomenon in Greek mythology. The hubristic behaviour of vain and selfish individuals, who aspire either to compare themselves to the gods or to succeed them to the domination of the Cosmos, provokes a series of atrocious tortures inflicted by the Olympians to men and women, to humans and mythical creatures, to heroes, kings and even to other gods equally.The present PhD study examines the iconography of a variety of types of Divine Punishment in the Greek and Roman art and the occidental painting (15th-19th centuries). It analyses the interaction between the various works of art and the ancient, mediaeval and modern literary sources. It pinpoints the resemblances between the ancient themes and certain biblical or chivalrous episodes. It focuses finally on the influence wielded by the iconography of divine punishment in politics, society and religion, both in Antiquity and in modern times.