ÿþ<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><!-- InstanceBegin template="/Templates/Base.dwt" codeOutsideHTMLIsLocked="false" --> <head> <!-- InstanceBeginEditable name="head" --> <link href="../../SpryAssets/SpryCollapsiblePanel.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" /> <link href="tabs.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" /> <link href="cpstyl.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" /> <script src="../../SpryAssets/SpryCollapsiblePanel.js" type="text/javascript"></script> <link href="base.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" /> <link href="ovr.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" /> <!-- InstanceEndEditable --> <!-- InstanceBeginEditable name="doctitle" --> <title>PLATO HODIE - " !/</title> <!-- InstanceEndEditable --> <style type="text/css"> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} @font-face {font-family:Tahoma; panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;} @font-face {font-family:"Arial Black"; panose-1:2 11 10 4 2 1 2 2 2 4;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {margin:0mm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#1A1A1A;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {color:saddlebrown; text-decoration:underline;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:saddlebrown; text-decoration:underline;} table.MsoNormalTable td p a { text-decoration:underline !important; } table.MsoNormalTable td p a { ; } p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate {mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char"; margin:0mm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:8.0pt; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"; color:#1A1A1A;} span.BalloonTextChar {mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char"; mso-style-link:"Balloon Text"; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"; color:#1A1A1A;} p.msochpdefault, li.msochpdefault, div.msochpdefault {mso-style-name:msochpdefault; margin-right:0mm; margin-left:0mm; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#1A1A1A;} .MsoChpDefault {font-size:10.0pt;} @page WordSection1 {size:595.3pt 841.9pt; margin:20.0mm 42.5pt 20.0mm 30.0mm;} div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;} p.LPar { font-family:Tahoma, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size:11pt; } div.MsoNormal1 {margin:0mm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:12.0pt; text-align:center; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";} div.aff1 {mso-style-name:!5:F8O; margin-top:18.0pt; margin-right:0mm; margin-bottom:6.0pt; margin-left:14.2pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"; font-variant:small-caps;} div.aff2 {mso-style-name:>45@0B>@K; margin-top:0mm; margin-right:0mm; margin-bottom:6.0pt; margin-left:14.2pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"; font-variant:small-caps;} li.MsoNormal1 {margin:0mm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";} li.aff1 {mso-style-name:!5:F8O; margin-top:18.0pt; margin-right:0mm; margin-bottom:6.0pt; margin-left:14.2pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"; font-variant:small-caps;} li.aff2 {mso-style-name:>45@0B>@K; margin-top:0mm; margin-right:0mm; margin-bottom:6.0pt; margin-left:14.2pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"; font-variant:small-caps;} p.MsoNormal1 {margin:0mm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";} p.aff1 {mso-style-name:!5:F8O; margin-top:18.0pt; margin-right:0mm; margin-bottom:6.0pt; margin-left:14.2pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"; font-variant:small-caps;} p.aff2 {mso-style-name:>45@0B>@K; margin-top:0mm; margin-right:0mm; margin-bottom:6.0pt; margin-left:14.2pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"; font-variant:small-caps;} --> </style> <link href="../2014/tabs.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" /> <link href="../../design/plato.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" /> </head> <body> <!-- SPBU top panel loader --> <script type="text/javascript"> (function(){ var sc = document.createElement('script'); sc.type = 'text/javascript'; sc.async = true; sc.src = '//topbar.spbu.ru/loader.js'; var ls = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; ls.parentNode.insertBefore(sc, ls); })(); </script> <!-- /loader --> <table class="Pwrapper"> <thead> <tr> <td colspan="2"> <a href="../../index.htm">;0B>=>2A:>5 D8;>A>DA:>5 >1I5AB2></a></td> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td class="Pmenu"> <a href="../../index.htm"><img src="../../design/logo.gif" width="166" height="74" alt="Plato" /></a> <div><a href="../../ABOUTUS/index1.htm"> =0A</a></div> <div><a href="../../AKADEMIA/index2.htm">:045<88</a></div> <div><a href="../index3.htm">>=D5@5=F88</a></div> <div><a href="../../SUMMERSCHOOL/index4.htm">5B=85 H:>;K</a></div> <div><a href="../../PROJECTS/index5.htm">0CG=K5 ?@>5:BK</a></div> <div><a href="../../DISSERTATION/index6.htm">8AA5@B0F88</a></div> <div><a href="../../TEXTS/index7.htm">"5:ABK ?;0B>=8:>2</a></div> <div><a href="../../RESEARCH/index8.htm">AA;54>20=8O ?> ?;0B>=87<C</a></div> <div><a href="../../COMPANIONS/index11.htm">!?@02>G=K5 8740=8O</a></div> <div><a href="../../PARTNERS/index9.htm">0@B=5@K</a></div> <!-- <div><a href="../../INFO/index10.htm">=B5@=5B-@5AC@AK</a></div> --> <hr width="70%" /> <div><a href="../../pfsforms/index.html"> &laquo;;0B>=>2A:>5 D8;>A>DA:>5 >1I5AB2>&raquo;</a></div> </td> <td> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> function SetBodyProps() { document.body.onresize="BodyResized()"; document.body.onload="BodyResized()"; } var tInit = SetBodyProps(); </script> <!-- InstanceBeginEditable name="MainContent" --> <blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'> <p align="right" style='text-align:right'><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt; font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;'><a href="../index3.htm">  !!# $ &</a></span></b></p> </blockquote> <div style="text-align: center;"> <center> <table> <tr> <td> <img src="IMAGES/PPhS.png" border="0" alt="" /> </td> <td style="text-align: center; white-space: nowrap; vertical-align: middle;"> <span style="text-align: center; font: Georgia; font-size: 40px; font-weight: bold; font-variant: small-caps;">The Universe of Platonic Thought<br /> #=825@AC< ?;0B>=>2A:>9 <KA;8</span><br /> <span style="text-align: center; font: Georgia; font-size: 20px; font-weight: normal; font-variant: small-caps;">26th International Conferecne&nbsp;&nbsp;&middot;&nbsp;&nbsp;XXVI 564C=0@>4=0O :>=D5@5=F8O</span><br /> <span style="text-align: center; font: Georgia; font-size: 14px; font-weight: normal">28&ndash;30 August 2018&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;St Petersburg, Russia&nbsp;&nbsp;&middot;&nbsp;&nbsp;28&ndash;30 023CAB0&nbsp;2018&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;!0=:B-5B5@1C@3, >AA8O</span> </td> <td> <img src="IMAGES/pla150.png" border="0" alt="" /> </td> </tr> </table> </center> </div> <hr /> <div class="d1"> <table class="ovrBtn"> <tr> <td class="c1" style="vertical-align:bottom !important;"> <img src="IMAGES/ovrbrd_11.png" alt="" /> </td> <td class="c1"> <img src="IMAGES/ovrbrd_12.png" alt="" /> </td> <td class="c7"> </td> <td class="c1"> <img src="IMAGES/ovrbrd_15.png" alt="" /> </td> <td class="c1" style="vertical-align:bottom !important;"> <img src="IMAGES/ovrbrd_16.png" alt="" /> </td> </tr> <tr> <td class="c1"> <img src="IMAGES/ovrbrd_18.png" alt="" /> </td> <td colspan="3" class="c8" > <a href="upt26en.htm">Back to the Conference Program</a> </td> <td class="c1"> <img src="IMAGES/ovrbrd_19.png" alt="" /> </td> </tr> <tr> <td class="c1"> <img src="IMAGES/ovrbrd_23.png" alt="" /> </td> <td class="c1"> <img src="IMAGES/ovrbrd_24.png" alt="" /> </td> <td class="c9"> </td> <td class="c1"> <img src="IMAGES/ovrbrd_26.png" alt="" /> </td> <td class="c1"> <img src="IMAGES/ovrbrd_27.png" alt="" /> </td> </tr> </table> </div> <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td><img src="tabs/tii_48.png" border="0" /></td> <td style="background:url(tabs/tii_45a.png) repeat-x"></td> <td><img src="tabs/tii_56.png" border="0" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td style="background:url(tabs/tii_68.png) repeat-y"></td> <td width="100%" bgcolor="#F0FFF0"> <div style="text-align:right;font-family:Tahoma, Geneva, sans-serif;font-size:16px;"><span style="color:#555">5B @CAA:>9 25@A88</span></div> <div style="font-family:Tahoma, Geneva, sans-serif;font-size:14px;"><p class='pcAuthor'><span class='pcName'>Raul Gutierrez</span><span class='pcAffil'>, Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru, Departamento de Humanidades</span><span class='pcPosition'>, Professor</span></p> <p class='pcTitleD'>Some aspects of the dianoetical consideration of the soul in <I>Republic</i></p><p class='hcAbstract'>Plato s images of the sun, line and cave are just an outline (504d6-7). They leave many things unsaid (509c7) and are, therefore, controversial. One of them concerns the description of <i>dianoia</i>. First of all, the interchange of <i>pistis</i> and <i>dianoia</i> at 509d7-8 and 511e2 shows that Plato knew that dividing the line according to the same proportion (509d7-8; 511e2) implies the equality of the intermediate subdivisions, but that dividing it according to clarity and truth as criteria, implies their inequality (509d6). Why this contradiction? Secondly, even if the distinction between <i>dianoia</i> and <i>noesis</i> were merely methodological, much has been discussed about the nature of the mathematical entities mentioned by Socrates  are they Ideas, visible or mental images of Ideas, intermediates  and about their role as mere examples or as exclusive objects of <i>dianoia</i>. My proposal presupposes 1) the parallelism between the line and the cave (517b1, 517a8-518b5, 532a1-535a1), 2) that these images and the whole of the <I>Republic</i> illuminate mutually and 3) will try to show the dianoetical character of the analysis of the soul in <I>Republic</i> IV 434d-444e and its consequences for the nature of soul s tripartition. &nbsp;</p> <p class='hcAbstract'>&nbsp;</p> <p class='hcAbstract'>As in the <I>Iliad</i> and the <I>Odyssey</i>, the first word in the <I>Republic</i>  º±Ä­²·½  introduces the main action in the dialogue, the <i>katabasis</i> of the philosopher to the cave and the corresponding <i>anabasis</i> out of the cave. In this way Plato introduces an allegorical topography. Thus Glaucon and Adeimantus propose to consider justice in the soul, but because the enquiry is  not easy and requires a keen vision , Socrates proposes the city/soul analogy: to consider political justice, in order to examine personal justice (369a1-2). This presupposes that political justice is an image of personal justice (369a3-4) and, therefore, reminds us of the method of <i>dianoia</i>. For <i>dianoia</i> and the mathematicians use visible images (510b4, 510d5) and reason about them, thinking not of them but of that which they resemble (510d6-7). We have the same procedure in both cases. However, during a long period the discussion remains focused on political justice. Even in <I>Republic</i> IV Socrates says that political justice  is somewhere here , but  the place appears to be hard going and steeped in shadows, it is certainly dark and hard to search thoroughly (432c1-9). So we are still in the cave, not discussing the shadows (<I>Republic </i>I), but the statues of justice (<I>Republic</i> II-IV 434d)<sup><a name='ret25_1' href='#ftn25_1' class='ftnLink'>1</a></sup>, since there is already a trace (4ǽ¿Â, 432d3), for «it was apparently tumbling about our feet ¾ ÁÇÆ» (d8-9). The meaning of  ¾ ÁÇÆ will be precisely determined as  when we were founding our city in <I>Republic</i> II, and the trace is the <i>physis</i>/<i>ergon</i> correspondence (433a5-6). «This or some form of this is justice» (433a3, 433b3). This vagueness is due to the fact that political justice is just a visible trace of personal justice. On the contrary, concluding the examination of personal justice, Socrates speaks of an ascent in the argument (½±²µ²uº±¼µ½ Ä¿æ »y³¿Å) up to a point from where  as from a watch tower , we can look with complete clarity (ñÆsÃıı) (445b-c). Thus we have a spatial ascent which corresponds to the advancement of knowledge according to the criterion of more or less clarity applied in the line and to the transition from political justice to justice in the soul. This is the ascent from <i>pistis</i> to <i>dianoia</i>. As such, looking fr¿m that height downwards we can describe this relation as a dialectic of original and image (<I>Sophist</i> 240a7-8), as the appearance of the same as other depending on the clarity of the  place where it appears and of the more or less righteousness of sight. This procedure will be used time and again as a pattern of thought: 1) in the analogy polis/psyche, 2) the expositions of the civic and the ethical virtues, and 3) the two levels of mathematical studies of the philosopher. All three cases are well represented by the equality and inequality of the middle sections of the line. &nbsp;</p> <p class='hcAbstract'>&nbsp;</p> <p class='hcAbstract'>After the enquiry into political justice we should transfer its results to the individual and to consider if they share a similar structure. Glaucon believes it is not an easy question:  perhaps there s some truth in the old saying that everything fine is beautiful (435c7-8). The contrast between the easiness of the former investigation and the difficulty of the present one signals the ascent to a new reflection level, that of <i>dianoia</i>. Socrates proposes now to complete the enquiry  ½æ½ ´¿ ºÄµ»­Ãɼµ½ Ät½ ú­È¹½, 434d5. But this doesn t occur straightforward. We have to look first into the soul and see if the city s forms and dispositions are there or not,  rubbing them together like sticks, until light comes up (434e-435a). The difficulty relating the structure of the soul and how we act concerns whether that by which we learn, that by which we feel anger, and that by which we feel physical pleasure are the same or different; and, if they are different, whether in every case we act with just one of them or with the entire soul (436a). This enquiry requires a change of method. Then the methods used until now - analogy and the narrative of the genesis of the city  do not allow for the handling of this problem accurately. In order to get <i>akribeia</i> we have to take a longer and further road,<i> </i>that of dialectics, which won t be immediately followed. But there may be another way <i>worthy</i> (¶¾¯ÉÂ) of the foregoing statements and investigations about political justice. This is the method attributed to <i>dianoia</i>. Then, using nearly the same wording as in the line, Socrates takes as its starting point an hypothesis (QÀ¿¸s¼µ½¿¹ 437a6, 510c3, 510c6), considered as evident (´Æ»¿½ 436b8, 510d1), that is, as a principle (ÁÇ®), according to which thought must get in agreement with itself (A¼¿»¿³sñ½ÄµÂ, 437a6, 510d2), without giving any explanation neither to itself nor to others (436e7-437a1; 510c1-d1, 511b5). This hypothesis is the earliest version of the principle of non-contradiction:  It is clear that the same will not be willing to do or suffer opposites with regard to the same, in relation to the same and at the same time, so that if we find these [things] occurring among the operations [of the soul] we shall know that it is not the same but more than one (436b9-c2). Starting from this hypothesis, Socrates distinguishes two contrary movements in the soul, one of acceptance and one of refusal, of longing to take something and of rejecting it, and so on (437b1-3), which correspond to the rational and the irrational. In need of mediation between the two, he will introduce a third movement, the spirited, as an auxiliary by nature to the rational (441a). &nbsp;</p> <p class='hcAbstract'>Whereas the analogy relates two different ontological levels, the (rational) soul finds in itself the principle that it needs as a starting point in order to enquire about its own structure. Consequently, we are not dealing with a simple transfer of the city s structure to the soul, but with a reflection on its structure based on a principle that, as a principle of thought, shares its nature. As such, this principle constitutes the formal aspect of the self-reflexive movement of the soul. Therefore, self-reflection and principle of non-contradiction imply mutually, so much so that this principle finds its first formulation in and because of this reflection. Furthermore, based on this principle, the rational soul distinguishes the nature and functions of the operative principles in virtue of which the soul relates itself with itself - ½Äx ÀÁ¬¾¹Â - and with the world - ¾É ÀÁ¬¾¹Â (443d); as such, and like the mathematical entities, these principles can be considered by themselves or in relation to the world - an aspect which is also well represented by the equality and inequality of the middle sections of the line. Precisely this kind of knowledge grounded in the principle of contradiction is the one which presides over every just action establishing and preserving a just order in the soul. Therefore, it deserves to be called <i>sophia</i> (443e): it is the wisdom of <i>dianoia</i>. But having in mind the hypothetical character of that principle, the deduction following therefrom is not to be taken as absolutely certain, though it delivers a suitable or reasonable (À¹µ¹ºöÂ) (612a5) explanation model of the soul in its present condition, an explanation of its phenomenic and operational aspect, as long as it dwells in the body, but not of its true and primordial nature (611b-612a). The limits of this model become evident if we have in mind, first, that directly from the hypothesis are deduced just the rational and the irrational aspects of the soul; second, that not just the spirited, but many other instances are considered in between (¼µÄ±¾{, 443 d7) and, last but not least, the introduction of three kinds of pleasures, appetites and rules corresponding to each part of the soul (580d). This model is not sufficient in order to explain the unjust kinds of soul, particularly the democratic soul, conceived as all various (À±½Ä¿´±À̽), full of the greatest number of dispositions and many-coloured (À¿¹º¯»¿½) (561e2-3). In order to do this, those intermediate instances are required, which let us think of the soul as one and an indefinite plurality. In any case, the image of the soul as a triform creature  a human being, a lion and a many headed beast, with the outward appearance of a human being (588b10-e2)  seems to conciliate both perspectives.&nbsp;</p> <p class='hcAbstract'>&nbsp;</p> <p class='hcAbstract'>In any case, as long the objections to the principle of non-contradiction are not thought to consternate or persuade us (436e7/8), both cases which Socrates mentions shall be taken much more as an illustration of the validity of this principle and, accordingly, of the value of that dianoetic wisdom not just at the level of <i>dianoia</i>, but also of <i>pistis</i>. For against the fictional objector it should be made clear that the man standing still while moving his hands and head, represents no real counterexample to that principle, for actually it is just a part of it that stays still, while another part moves (436d1). We are clearly speaking of a visible entity, like the city, with physical independent parts. We are still at the level of <i>pistis</i>. In the second case, we have a spinning top, which according to the fictional objector, stands still as a whole and moves at the same time  a point of view which Socrates rejects (436d8), since he thinks that the top moves and stands still but not in the same respect: it stands still with respect to the axis and it moves with respect to the circumference. Thus far we are dealing mathematically with a physical object in a way which clearly shows not just the difference, but also the connection between two ontological levels. For, first of all, the axis and the circumference are not physical parts, but mathematical entities which, nonetheless, act upon the spinning top: like the different aspects of the soul on the body. Secondly, as much as the perfect circular movement of the circumference is not possible without the top staying still in respect to the axis, the harmony of the just soul is not possible without the dianoetical wisdom grounded on the principle of non-contradiction. This is a good image of the just soul as far as everything in it follows the <i>logistikon</i>. But Socrates introduces a second version of the spinning top. This time he says that if the top wobbles to the right or the left, forward or backward, the whole spinning top also moves (436e) as if every part of it would pull it to its direction, very much like the confused and wandering parts of the unjust soul (444a-b). Consequently, as long as the first top moves around its fixed axis and the second one moves as a whole in every possible direction, we have an extraordinary image of one of the central ideas of the <I>Republic</i>: there is one form of excellence and unlimited forms of evil (445c5-6).&nbsp;</p> <p class='hcAbstract'>&nbsp;</p> <p class='hcAbstract'>Having shown that the principle of non-contradiction functions as a hypothesis in the same sense as the mathematical entities which Socrates mentions in the line as examples of the objects of dianoetical thinking, there is no reason to limit these to mathematical entities or to consider these as Forms. Then, in the same way as the principle of non-contradiction, they must be of a purely conceptual nature. As such they also emerge in the soul by and during its own reflexive movement. Against this has been objected that Socrates mentions the square itself and the diagonal itself (510d), supposedly as Forms. Many interpreters have already noticed that that kind of expression is used somewhere else by Plato nearly <i>ad</i> <i>nauseam</i>, but not to refer to Forms. I would just like to emphasize that this passage appears in this dianoetical context where he contrasts two different ontological levels, first, certain phenomena considered in themselves and, then, these same phenomena under certain circumstances, very much as in the case of the mathematical studies in <I>Republic</i> VII. And again, this is well represented by the middle sections of the line. Thus, thirst as such (º±¸¿ Eÿ½ ´wȱ) or thirst in itself (±PÄx Äx ´wȱ) is referred to drink itself (±PÄ¿æ À}¼±Ä¿Â), and thirst under certain circumstances is thirst of a certain drink, if warmth is added, it would be of a cold drink, if cold is added, of a warm drink, and so on. And again, every desire in itself (±PÄt ! À¹¸Å¼w±) is a desire only of its natural object, and a qualified desire of a qualified thing. It is always something additional (Äp ÀÁ¿Ã³¹³½y¼µ½±) of qualitative, quantitative or temporal nature, that makes it a desire for this or that particular kind of object. And Socrates generalizes this distinguishing in this way merely conceptual, unqualified instances from sensible, qualified instances of the same phenomena. Both kinds of instances reflect the difference between the parts of the soul considered as separate in themselves and when they are involved in action. Those of the first kind allow us to distinguish their respective natural functions and objects, and make possible the analysis of virtues. The second suggests how they act under certain circumstances. &nbsp;</p> <p class='hcAbstract'>Consequently, the square itself and the diagonal itself must not refer to Forms, but to those merely conceptual  things themselves (ºµÖ½± ±PÄq) which can be seen only through <i>dianoia</i> (511a1-2). We should understand this sentence as an example of those phenomena considered in themselves as related exclusively to their proper objects. In this very sense, we should understand also the reference to an arithmetic that is studied for the sake of knowledge, not trade:  it strongly leads the soul upwards and compels it to discourse about the numbers themselves (525d6). These numbers,  which can only be thought (ÀµÁv Ä¿ÍÄɽ c½ ´¹±½¿·¸Æ½±¹ ¼Ì½¿½), and which you cannot handle in any other way , are contrasted with visible or tangible bodies having numbers (525d-526a). This contrast we find also in the other mathematical disciplines.<sup><a name='ret25_2' href='#ftn25_2' class='ftnLink'>2</a></sup> Once again, we can understand this relation in terms of the dialectics of original and image well represented by the equality and inequality of the middle sections of the line. &nbsp;</p> <p class='hcAbstract'>&nbsp;</p> <p class='hcAbstract'>Glaucon confesses not to understand the difference between qualified and unqualified relatives (438b3). If we apply to the soul the more general statement about the one-directional relatives used by Socrates up to now, he hasn t understood that, by themselves, every  part of the soul has by nature an specific function, but, as suggested by the examples mentioned, when they act, they do it jointly. This will be considered again by a new series of examples. Socrates appeals again to mathematical relations, but not, as in the case of the appetites, to one directional relative, but to two directional relative terms:  - Don t you understand that the greater is such as to be greater than something?  Certainly.  Than the less?  Yes.  And the much-greater than the much-less, isn t that so? (438b4-c5). All these and further relations show clearly that in every case, in each and every point of the relation, both opposites are simultaneously present but in different degrees. The same applies also to the two opposite movements of the soul. And an illustration of this cooperation appears in a passage which is essential for the project of the <I>Republic</i>. Speaking of the intellect and the <i>logistikon</i>, Socrates says that it must be turned around with the whole soul from the world of becoming to that of being (518c5-8). Precisely this exhortation to the reorientation of the soul, insofar as it presupposes its double movement as a whole in opposite directions, downwards or upwards, as much as the former mentioned intermediate instances of the soul and the different kinds of pleasures, appetites and rules, should warn us to take the tripartition model too rigidly. It should remind us of the comparison of the soul with a flux or stream (åµæ¼±), which goes wherever its desires go (485d6-8, 544e1-2, 550e6-8). This means that the conception of the soul as self-moving (<I>Phaedrus</i> 245c7; 245d7, 245e7-246a1; 245e3; <I>Laws</i> 896a1-2) is not alien to the <I>Republic</i>. Consequently, we shouldn t think of the parts of the soul as psychological subjects or as <i>homunculi</i>, but as principles of movement that, as the soul itself, move themselves and are identical with their operations and, at the same time, move the whole soul in one or other direction. That s also why they are conceived as self-reflexive.&nbsp;</p> <p class='hcAbstract'>&nbsp;</p> <p class='hcAbstract'>Looking backwards to the <i>anabasis tou logou</i>, we can confirm that the  just man will not be any different from the just city with respect to the form itself of justice (º±Ä¿ ±PÄx Äx ÄÆ ´¹º±¹¿Ã{½·Â µ6´¿Â), but will be like it (435a6-b2). Even if for the first time appears here an expression which from the point of view of the philosopher refers undoubtedly to the Form of justice, its paradigmatic function will not be introduced until <I>Republic</i> V472c4, where the just man will be considered as the closest (³³{ıı) to justice itself and as the one who participates in it more than the others, but in no way identical with it (472c). This clearly implies that personal justice is an image of the Form of justice or of  doing its own at the level of Forms. This is undoubtedly implied by the idea that the philosopher must imitate and assimilate himself as much as possible to that order whose elements, the Forms, neither do injustice to one another nor suffer it from each other (500c4-5). Thus we have to take into account these three ontological levels in order to establish the one to which the objects of <i>dianoia</i> belong. As we saw, as conceptual entities they belong in the realm of the soul.&nbsp;</p> <p class='hcAbstract'>Having in mind the conception of the soul as <i>rheuma</i>, we can say that city and soul relate to each other as a discrete to a continuous magnitude. Therefore, when we consider justice as each class of the city or each aspect of the soul  doing their own , even if in both cases they build a unity, this unity is correspondingly of a different kind in every case. Given that personal justice is understood not just as a complete unity out of many (443d8-9), but is also compared with musical harmony (443d5-7), we can conceive the just soul not only as number (Äx º ¼¿½±´ö½ Ãųºµv¼µ½¿½ À»Æ¸¿Â, Euclide VII, Def. 2), but also, as in later Platonism, as a number moving itself.<sup><a name='ret25_3' href='#ftn25_3' class='ftnLink'>3</a></sup> This movement is, on the one side, self-reflexive or turned inwards  ÀµÁv Ät½ ½ÄÌÂ, ` »·¸ö ÀµÁv ±ÅÄx½ º±v ±ÅÄ¿æ (443d1) -, on the other side, merely intentional or turned outwards  ÀµÁv Ät½ ¾É ÀÁ¶Ç¹½ Äö½ ±QÄ¿æ (443c10, e2-6), but both sides interact very much like the mathematical axis and the circumference of the spinning top. As we saw, up to this point, this condition and these actions are grounded in the knowledge of the principle of non-contradiction. Precisely, in order to avoid being confused and dominated by contradictory appearances and, therefore, having in mind this principle, Socrates appeals to measuring, to counting and to weighing as helpers, which are functions of the <i>logistikon</i> (602a-603a). This can clearly be understood in terms of the relation between the inner and outer praxis of the just soul. If what I have been saying is right, the measures according to which the <i>logistikon</i> proceeds, are in the soul. Like the so called parts of the soul, they emerge when the soul reflects on its own structure and on its own flux  as one and an indefinite plurality  , as distinguished and separated fixed moments which constitute  the lowest-level articulation of the world as it is objectively speaking (Burnyeat 2000). <p class='pcEndnotesSection'>&nbsp;</p> <p class='pcFootnote'><sup><a name='ftn25_1' href='#ret25_1' class='ftnLink'>1</a></sup>&nbsp; 517d8-9: ³É½¯¶µÃ¸±¹ ÀµÁv ´¹º±¯¿Å ú¹ö½ " ³±»¼¬Äɽ g½ ±0 ú¹±¯. See 514c1; 361d5: ½´Á¹¬Â.</p> <p class='pcFootnote'><sup><a name='ftn25_2' href='#ret25_2' class='ftnLink'>2</a></sup>&nbsp; About geometrical entities see: aÂ Ä¿æ µv D½Ä¿Â ³½ÎõÉÂ, »»p ¿P Ä¿æ À¿Ä­ Ĺ ³¹³½¿¼­½¿Å º±v À¿»»¿Å¼­½¿Å, 527b4-7. About astronomy: 529b4-530c2. About harmony: 531a1-c4.</p> <p class='pcFootnote'><sup><a name='ftn25_3' href='#ret25_3' class='ftnLink'>3</a></sup>&nbsp; Cf. Aristotle, <I>De Anima</i> I 2, 404 b27-8; 4 408 b32-33; Macrobius, In Cic. Somn. Scip. 1, 14, 19-20.</p></p> </div> </td> <td style="background:url(tabs/tii_69.png) repeat-y"></td> </tr> <tr> <td><img src="tabs/tii_72.png" alt="" /></td> <td style="background:url(tabs/tii_74.png) repeat-x"></td> <td><img src="tabs/tii_79.png" alt="" /></td> </tr> </table> <p class="MsoNormal" align="right" style='text-align:right'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;'>© ;0B>=>2A:>5 >1I5AB2>, 2018 3. </span></p> <p align="right" style='margin-top:0mm;margin-right:3pt;margin-bottom: 0mm;margin-left:-36.0pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:right'><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;'><a href="../index3.htm">  !!# $ &</a></span></b></p> <!-- InstanceEndEditable --> </td> </tr> </tbody> </body> <!-- InstanceEnd --></html>