title: Whom did Plato Mean in the Parable of ‘Gigantomachia over Being’ (Sophist 246a4 ff.)?
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Lebedev, Andrei V.
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2024-12-02T20:06:04Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2024-12-02T20:06:04Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2023-09
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Lebedev A. V. Whom did Plato Mean in the Parable of ‘Gigantomachia over Being’ (Sophist 246a4 ff.)? Philologia Classica 2023, 18 (2), 154–169. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu20.2023.201
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu20.2023.201
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/48069
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: The mythopoetic parable of ‘Gigantomachia over being’ in Plato’s Sophist 246a4 ff. is neither
  a theoretical construction ad hoc of some general trends, nor a reference to a single contemporary
  debate, e. g., between Plato’s Academy and atomists in 4th century BC. The controversy
  on the nature of being is described as a real battle on epic scale (ἄπλετος μάχη) between two
  camps, as a debate about fundamental problem of philosophy, that has always existed (ἀεὶ
  συνέστηκεν) and is still going on. In favor of the identification of the two camps primarily
  with the Ionian and Italian traditions in the pre-Platonic philosophy speaks the juxtaposition
  of the ‘Ionian and Italian Muses’ (Ἰάδες καὶ Σικελικαὶ Μοῦσαι) in the preceding context Soph.
  242de. The ‘unreformed giants’ are the Ionian physikoi from Anaximander to Democritus,
  while their ‘divine’ adversaries, who reduce being (ousia) to immaterial forms, are the Pythagoreans,
  Eleatics and Platonists, as well as Socrates, who dismisses the Ionian περὶ φύσεως
  ἱστορία in Plato’s Phaedo and who upholds the theory of ideas in the Republic and Phaedrus.
  The ‘improved’ giants of the second generation are metaphysical dualists like Anaxagoras and
  Empedocles who admit incorporeal causes like Mind and Love alongside with matter, as well
  as Heraclitus, the Ionian Sophists and Antisthenes who combined ontological naturalism
  with teaching arete. The general scheme of the development of theories of archai in Aristotle’s
  Metaphysics is very similar: from those who recognized only material causes to those who
  admitted incorporeal moving cause (Anaxagoras and Empedocles).
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: en
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Philologia Classica;Volume 18; Issue 2
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Plato
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: ‘Gigantomachia over being’
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Sophist
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: Whom did Plato Mean in the Parable of ‘Gigantomachia over Being’ (Sophist 246a4 ff.)?
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 01.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/48069/1/01.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 743,58 kB