TY - JOUR
T1 - La ciencia en sí misma y la ciencia en nosotros
T2 - en torno al rol de la epistemē en el Fedro
AU - García, Gabriel
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Pontifica Universidad Catolica del Peru. All rights reserved.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - The view of the (Greek Passage) in the Phaedrus is described according to three contents: justice (Greek Passage), soundness (Greek Passage) and science (Greek Passage). Only the latter is specified (247d6-e2). In „‘Der Geistcharakter des Überhimmlischen Raumes‘. Zur Korrektur der herrschenden Auffassung von Phaidros 247c-e”, W. Schwabe argued that this passage necessarily distinguishes the science “in what is” from the science “in what we now call beings”, and that the latter refers to science as a human practice of acquiring and transmitting knowledge. After reviewing his main arguments, I will examine this distinction in the whole dialogue, especially regarding the science “in what we now call beings”, in two moments: 1) the accurate description of the vision of science as memory, μνήμη, when the soul returns to the sensible realm, as well as its recovery in the erotic relation (both themes of the palinode) and 2) the relation between memory and science in the transmission of knowledge, in the critique of writing. The identification of science with the “immortal seed” contained in the dialectician’s speeches (276 e5-277 a4) will be linked to the analysis of procreation in beauty in the Symposion, showing that the (Greek Passage) as content of the λόγοι expresses the dynamic relation between ideas. Therefore, the difference between “science in itself” and “science in us” must be conceived as a “structural feature” of the eidetic realm, in the same way as justice in the Republic (500c3-4) and, presumably, soundness.
AB - The view of the (Greek Passage) in the Phaedrus is described according to three contents: justice (Greek Passage), soundness (Greek Passage) and science (Greek Passage). Only the latter is specified (247d6-e2). In „‘Der Geistcharakter des Überhimmlischen Raumes‘. Zur Korrektur der herrschenden Auffassung von Phaidros 247c-e”, W. Schwabe argued that this passage necessarily distinguishes the science “in what is” from the science “in what we now call beings”, and that the latter refers to science as a human practice of acquiring and transmitting knowledge. After reviewing his main arguments, I will examine this distinction in the whole dialogue, especially regarding the science “in what we now call beings”, in two moments: 1) the accurate description of the vision of science as memory, μνήμη, when the soul returns to the sensible realm, as well as its recovery in the erotic relation (both themes of the palinode) and 2) the relation between memory and science in the transmission of knowledge, in the critique of writing. The identification of science with the “immortal seed” contained in the dialectician’s speeches (276 e5-277 a4) will be linked to the analysis of procreation in beauty in the Symposion, showing that the (Greek Passage) as content of the λόγοι expresses the dynamic relation between ideas. Therefore, the difference between “science in itself” and “science in us” must be conceived as a “structural feature” of the eidetic realm, in the same way as justice in the Republic (500c3-4) and, presumably, soundness.
KW - Phaedrus
KW - Republic
KW - Symposium
KW - epistēmē
KW - memory
KW - science
KW - soundness
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85128327654&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.18800/arete.2022ext.010
DO - 10.18800/arete.2022ext.010
M3 - Artículo
AN - SCOPUS:85128327654
SN - 1016-913X
VL - 34
SP - 179
EP - 200
JO - Arete
JF - Arete
ER -