Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T20:51:52.997Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Measure of Pleasure: A Note on the Protagoras

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2018

RICHARD DAVIES Open the ORCID record for RICHARD DAVIES [Opens in a new window]
RICHARD DAVIES*
Affiliation:
DIPARTIMENTO DI LETTERE, FILOSOFIA, COMUNICAZIONE, UNIVERSITÀ DI BERGAMO (ITALY) davies@unibg.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

To explain the presence of the doctrine of hedonism in Plato's Protagoras (351b–8a), the hypothesis is advanced that the author may have been responding to a suggestion made by Eudoxus of Cnidus that pleasures can be measured in terms of size, number, and intensity. The peculiar ways that Socrates represents these dimensions may indicate that Plato did not fully grasp Eudoxus's suggestion or, conversely, that he saw at once that it was a dead end.

Keywords

PlatoProtagorashedonismEudoxus of Cnidusart of measuring
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the American Philosophical Association , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , Fall 2017 , pp. 301 - 315
Copyright
Copyright © American Philosophical Association 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adam, J. ([1902]1963) The Republic of Plato. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Alexander of Aphrodisias. (2007) (In Metaph.) Alessandro di Afrodisia: Commentario alla Metafisica di Aristotele. Text and Italian translation by Movia, G.. Milan: Bompiani.Google Scholar
Annas, J. (1999) Platonic Ethics, Old and New. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Anscombe, G. E. M. (1958) ‘Modern Moral Philosophy’. In Anscombe (ed.), Collected Philosophical Papers, volume 3 (Oxford: Blackwell, 1981), 26–42.Google Scholar
Gellius, Aulus. (1992) (Noctes) Aulo Gellio: Le notti attiche. 2 vols, text and Italian translation by Bernardi-Perini, G.. Turin: UTET.Google Scholar
Bentham, J. (1823) Principles of Morals and Legislation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Bloom, P. (2010) How Pleasure Works: The New Science of Why We Like What We Like. London: Bodley Head.Google Scholar
Brandwood, L. (1992) ‘Stylometry and Chronology’. In Kraut, R. (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Plato (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 90–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, R. (2015) ‘La recezione delle argomentazioni etiche di Eudosso di Cnido tra l'Accademia e il Liceo’. In Radice, R. and Tiengo, G. (eds.), Seconda Navigazione (Milan: Vita e Pensiero), 157–99.Google Scholar
Denyer, N., ed. (2001) Plato: Alcibiades I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Denyer, N., ed. (2008) Plato: Protagoras Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Laertius, Diogenes. (2005) (Vitæ) Diogene Laerzio: Vite e dottrine dei più celebri filosofi. Text and Italian translation by Reale, G.. Milan: Bompiani.Google Scholar
Donner, W. (1998) ‘Mill's Utilitarianism’. In Skorupski, J. (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Mill (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 255–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, F. (2004) Pleasure and the Good Life. Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gigon, O. (1946) ‘Studien zu Platons Protagoras’. Phyllobolia für Peter von der Mühl (Basel: Benno Schwabe), 93–152.Google Scholar
Huffman, C. A. (2002) ‘Archytas and the Sophists’. In Caston, V. and Graham, D. W. (eds.), Presocratic Philosophy: Essays in Honour of Alexander Mourelatos (Aldershot: Ashgate), 251–70.Google Scholar
Iamblichus. (1975) (In Nic. Arith.) In Nicomachi Arthmeticæ Introductionem Liber. Edited by Pistelli, H.. Stuttgart: Teubner.Google Scholar
Lasserre, F. (1966) Die Fragmente des Eudoxus von Knidos. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Linden, D. J. (2011) Pleasure: How Our Brains Make Junk Food, Exercise, Marijuana, Generosity & Gambling Feel So Good. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
McTaggart, J. (1921–27) The Nature of Existence. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Merlan, P. (1960) ‘Life of Eudoxus’. Appendix to his Studies in Epicurus and Aristotle (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz), 98–104.Google Scholar
Migliori, M., trans. (2000) Platone: Filebo. Milan: Bompiani.Google Scholar
Nails, D., (2002) People of Plato. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Nikolsky, B. (2001) ’Epicurus on Pleasure’. Phronesis, 46, 440–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reale, G., trans. (2001) Platone: Gorgia. Milan: Bompiani.Google Scholar
Richardson, H. S. (1990) ‘Measurement, Pleasure and Practical Science in Plato's Protagoras ’. Journal of the History of Philosophy, 28, 7–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, D. (2005) Plato on Pleasure and the Good Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryle, G. (1954) ‘Pleasure’. In Ryle (ed.), Dilemmas (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 54–67.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. C. W., trans. (1991) Plato: Protagoras. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Warren, J. (2014) The Pleasures of Reason in Plato, Aristotle and the Hellenistic Hedonists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, R. (1979) ‘Aristotle's Criticism of Eudoxan Hedonism’. Classical Philology, 74, 214–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, N. (2006) A Brief History of Happiness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar