Plato 1

Plato 2

August 2002 update

© The several contributors and in this collection as a whole Christopher Gill 2002.


1 Editorial Statement and Call for Contributions, Appel à contributions,  Contributi, Normas para la presentación de collaboraciones, Beiträge Erwünscht - Deadline extended to end October 2002. Christopher Gill
2 Si può parlare di un'evoluzione della dialettica platonica? Enrico Berti
3 Un compte rendu de tome 4, libro V de la commentaire sur la République de Vegetti Luc Brisson
4 Developing the Good itself by itself: Critical Strategies in Plato's Euthydemus Mary Margaret McCabe
5 The Study of Neoplatonism Today Lloyd P. Gerson
6 'Just How Socratic Are Plato's "Socratic" Dialogues?' A response to Charles Kahn, Plato and the Socratic Dialogue: The Philosophical use of Literary Form Christopher Rowe
7 Response to Christopher Rowe Charles H. Kahn
Items added January 2002
8 Friedrich Schleiermacher und das Platonbild des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts Thomas Alexander Szlezák
9 An Introduction to Studies in Plato'sTwo-Level Model Holger Thesleff
10 Notice of a Romanian Translation of Plato Tiberiu Popa

Link to Academia Verlag Website

Link to the International Plato Society Website


Issue Two of this journal, like Issue One, consists of commissioned articles. A common theme in several articles in this issue is that of development. Can we see in Plato’s dialogues a clear development from one phase to another, for instance, from ‘Socratic’ to ‘middle’ dialogues or from ‘middle’ to ‘late’ dialogues. If there is a clear line of development, how important is this for our interpretation of the philosophical content of the dialogues? It has been a longstanding assumption, especially in English-language scholarship, that there is clear line of development; but this assumption has not been shared by all Platonic scholars. Recently, this assumption has been challenged from within English-language scholarship, notably by Charles Kahn.

In this issue, Christopher Rowe discusses Charles Kahn’s book, Plato and the Socratic Dialogue (Cambridge University Press, 1996). He acknowledges the force of some of Kahn’s criticisms of the account of Platonic development (from ‘Socratic’ to ‘Platonic’ dialogues) offered by scholars such as Gregory Vlastos. But he maintains that, in moral psychology, there is still a fundamental difference between the ‘Socratic’ theory of the Protagoras and the ‘Platonic’ theory of the Republic. He suggests that Kahn does not recognise the extent of this difference, in part because Kahn does not acknowledge that the ‘Socratic’ model represents a credible and powerful account of human psychology. In his reply, Kahn restates the interpretative assumptions underlying his book, focusing more on the ‘unitarian’ approach than on the idea of ‘proleptic’ anticipation of later ideas. On moral psychology, he maintains that a single theory runs though the dialogues (the ‘classical theory of action’, centred on the desire for the good). He suggests that the Protagoras should be seen as responding to a specific issue, that of akrasia, rather than as offering a major statement of a substantive theory of moral psychology, that of Socrates.

M.M. McCabe also starts from Charles Kahn’s book and from the question of development. She considers and criticises Kahn’s ‘proleptic’ reading of the dialogues and proposes, as an alternative, a ‘metaleptic’ reading, showing how later dialogues question and criticise earlier ones. She examines, especially, the relationship between the Euthydemus (288-92) and the Republic (Books 6-7), on knowledge and the good, suggesting that it is more plausible to see the Euthydemus as a critique of the Republic than the other way round. Enrico Berti asks whether we can speak about an evolution in Platonic dialectic. He examines three main patterns of dialectical enquiry in the dialogues of different periods. He suggests that, in spite of some changes in formulation, there is a significant degree of continuity in Plato’s aims and methods in using dialectic.

There are two other contributions, not linked with the theme of development. Luc Brisson continues from Issue One his review of Mario Vegetti’s (collaborative) commentary on the Republic, and discusses volume 4 of the commentary, on Book V of the Republic. Lloyd Gerson offers a survey of recent work on Neoplatonism, showing the growth and vigour of this branch of Platonic scholarship.

Electronic methods of publishing make it possible to add to Issue 2 three items which were originally intended to form part of this issue and which have now become available. One is a summary by Holger Thesleff of his 1999 book, Studies in Plato's Two-level Method. The intention is to make the ideas and approach of this important book (published in a specialist series) better known. The second is a discussion by Thomas Szlezák of the role and significance of Schleiermacher for the history of Platonic scholarship in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Century. Originally given as a lecture in the University of München, this will remain in this journal until it is published in hard copy by De Gruyter later in 2002. The third item is a notice of the first ever translation of Plato's works into Romanian. 

Readers who wish to contribute comments on any of the papers in the journal are invited to do so by sending them, to Comments can be in English, French, German, Italian or Spanish and may be subject to editorial revision or reduction.

In Issues One and Two of this journal, there have been articles in English, French, German and Italian, with contributions from scholars in Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK and USA. It is hoped that Issue Three will contain a contribution in Spanish, and from other countries in addition to those mentioned, to develop further the aim of the journal to be a vehicle of international debate on Plato.


From Issue Three onwards, the journal will consist mainly of submitted articles. Articles may be on any aspect of Platonic studies, and should be no more than 4,000 words. In preparing the article, please observe the style-sheet which follows this call. All articles submitted will be refereed by a member of the Editorial Committee (the current Executive Committee of the International Plato Society) or another expert scholar who is fluent in the language of the contribution. Submit articles by email attachment to (deadline 31/10/02)


A partir du numéro Trois, le journal comprendra principalement des articles qui nous auront été envoyés. Ces articles pourront concerner n'importe quel aspect des études platoniciennes, et ne devraient pas excéder 4000 mots. En les préparant, veuilllez repectez les normes de présentation qui suivent cet appel à contributions. Tous les articles envoyés seront étudiés par un membre du comité éditorial (l'actuel comité directeur de la Société Internationale des études platoniciennes) ou par un autre chercheur spécialiste qui parle couramment le langage de l'article. Veuillez envoyer vos articles par email comme un document joint, (avant le 31/10/02).


Dal numero 3 PLATO sarà composta principalmente di articoli non commisionati dalla rivista. I contributi, che non devono oltrepassare le 4000 parole, possono vertere su qualsiasi aspetto degli studi platonici. Gli autori sono pregati di seguire le norme editoriali che seguono questo annuncio. Tutti gli articoli ricevuti saranno valutati da un membro del comitato editoriale (l'attuale Comitato Esecutivo della International Plato Society) o da un altro studioso esperto nel campo che abbia conoscenza della lingua del contributo. Gli articoli possono essere consegnati tramite posta elettronica all'indirizzo  (prima di 31/10/02).


A partir del número 3, la revista consistirá principalmente de trabajos remitidos por colaboradores. Los artículos enviados pueden tratar cualquier aspecto de los estudios platónicos, no deben sobrepasar las 4,000 palabras, y deben seguir las normas de publicación que se indican a continuación. Todos los artículos enviados serán evaluados por un miembro del Consejo de Redacción (el actual Comité Ejecutivo de la International Plato Society) u otro experto con dominio del idioma del trabajo remitido. Los artículos han de enviarse como archivo adjunto a la siguiente dirección de correo electrónico: (antes de 31/10/02)


Ab der dritten Nummer wird die Zeitschrift hauptsächlich aus eigenständig eingesandten Referaten bestehen. Ein jeder Aspekt der Plato-Studien kommt als mögliches Referatsthema in Betracht. Referate sollten nicht mehr als 4,000 Wörter betragen. Sie werden gebeten, sich beim Verfassen des Referats nach den Stilrichtlinien zu richten, die auf diese Ankündigung folgen. Alle Referate werden von einem Mitglied des Herausgebergremiums (d.h. des derzeitigen Vorstands der Internationalen Plato-Gesellschaft) begutachtet, gegebenenfalls auch von einem anderen Fachgelehrten, der die Sprache des Beitrags beherrscht. Referate sind bitte als E-Mail-Attachment an folgende Adresse zu senden: (bei den 31.10.2002).



Use Microsoft Word 6 for wordprocessing. If you have a later version please use the Save As facility to save your document as a Word 6 document.

Please keep formatting to a minimum.

Separate paragraphs with a line space (do not indent).

Do not use footnotes. Please keep endnotes to a minimum and type them in without using the Insert facility in Word (embedded footnotes and endnotes disappear in the conversion process to web documents).

Endnotes should be separated from the main text by a heading NOTES. Please number the notes (do not use asterisks, etc.)

Please do not use "smart" quotes.


Please keep Greek to a minimum.

Sending an article

Please send as an attachment to email to:

Please make the subject of the email message "Plato contribution".

If you cannot send the article as an attachment to an email, send a disk of the article.

References: Plato

When referring to Platonic dialogues by their full title, use the title that is customary in your language, e.g. Phaedo, Phédon. When using abbreviations, please use this standard set:

Apol., Charm., Epist (e.g. VII), Euthyphr., Gorg., Hipp. mai., Hipp. min., Crat., Crit., Lach., Leg., Lys., Men., Parm., Phaid., Phaidr., Phil., Polit., Prot., Rep., Soph., Symp., Theait., Tim.

For other ancient authors and works, use abbreviations standard in your language, e.g. (in English) those in Liddell-Scott-Jones or the Oxford Classical Dictionary.

References: Secondary Works

You can use either the 'Oxford’ system (giving bibliographical references in full form at the first mention and then in a short form) or the 'Harvard system’ (author and date) both in the text and in endnotes. Choose the format that best suits your article. In either case, list all secondary works in full at the end of the article for ease of reference. Use this style:

Vlastos, G., Platonic Studies, Princeton, 1980.

Vlastos, G., 'The Socratic Elenchus’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 1 (1983), 27-58 and 71-4, repr, in G. Vlastos, Socratic Studies, ed. M. Burnyeat, Cambridge, 1994, 39-66.

Vlastos, G., ed., The Philosophy of Socrates: A Collection of Critical Essays, New York, 1971.

For all other queries, email


© 2007 University of Notre Dame. All rights reserved.