Deux versions du modèle dans le Timée

The purpose of this article is to emphasize two alternatives introduced by Plato in the Timaeus in order to describe the model. In her argumentation developed in Nature and Divinity in Plato's Timaeus, S. Broadie affirms that a metaphysical reading of the Timaeus should be rejected in favor of...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Luca Jean Pitteloud
Format: Article
Language:deu
Published: Universidade de São Paulo (USP) 2015-05-01
Series:Revista de Filosofia Antiga
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.revistas.usp.br/filosofiaantiga/article/view/85136
id doaj-06d948a49cec4c99a06c69e4c42a96b9
record_format Article
spelling doaj-06d948a49cec4c99a06c69e4c42a96b92021-06-24T15:42:13ZdeuUniversidade de São Paulo (USP)Revista de Filosofia Antiga1981-94712015-05-019110.11606/issn.1981-9471.v9i1p1-21Deux versions du modèle dans le TiméeLuca Jean Pitteloud0Universidade Federal do ABCThe purpose of this article is to emphasize two alternatives introduced by Plato in the Timaeus in order to describe the model. In her argumentation developed in Nature and Divinity in Plato's Timaeus, S. Broadie affirms that a metaphysical reading of the Timaeus should be rejected in favor of a cosmological interpretation. To justify this idea, Broadie distinguishes between two ways of understanding what could be the model at which the demiurge looks in order to shape the cosmos, namely an original or a plan. According to Broadie, since it is the second alternative that is present in the Timaeus, and since this alternative is closely related to a cosmological interpretation of the dialogue, then it would be a mistake to offer a metaphysical reading of Timaeus’ discourse. However, as we shall see, the Timaeus associates the model not only with a plan but also with an original, which suggests that the cosmological reading of this dialogue should be connected with a metaphysical interpretation. Far from leading to a contradiction, the fact that Plato offers two versions of the model could mean that the question of the nature of Forms is not completely absent from the dialogue. In providing a double description of the model, and in offering metaphysical considerations within his cosmological discourse, Plato seems to provide an account of the nature of the intelligible and its explanatory role with regards to an understanding of what is the universe in all its complexity, for the two versions will allow to justify 1) the nature of cosmos as the best possible realization and 2) the ontological status of the sensible which possesses its own degree of being. Are these two versions fully compatible? We will suggest in our conclusion that the tension induced by their presence in the same dialogue actually allows a better understanding of Timaeus’ speech.  https://www.revistas.usp.br/filosofiaantiga/article/view/85136PlatonTiméeModèleAncient Philosophydemiurge
collection DOAJ
language deu
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Luca Jean Pitteloud
spellingShingle Luca Jean Pitteloud
Deux versions du modèle dans le Timée
Revista de Filosofia Antiga
Platon
Timée
Modèle
Ancient Philosophy
demiurge
author_facet Luca Jean Pitteloud
author_sort Luca Jean Pitteloud
title Deux versions du modèle dans le Timée
title_short Deux versions du modèle dans le Timée
title_full Deux versions du modèle dans le Timée
title_fullStr Deux versions du modèle dans le Timée
title_full_unstemmed Deux versions du modèle dans le Timée
title_sort deux versions du modèle dans le timée
publisher Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
series Revista de Filosofia Antiga
issn 1981-9471
publishDate 2015-05-01
description The purpose of this article is to emphasize two alternatives introduced by Plato in the Timaeus in order to describe the model. In her argumentation developed in Nature and Divinity in Plato's Timaeus, S. Broadie affirms that a metaphysical reading of the Timaeus should be rejected in favor of a cosmological interpretation. To justify this idea, Broadie distinguishes between two ways of understanding what could be the model at which the demiurge looks in order to shape the cosmos, namely an original or a plan. According to Broadie, since it is the second alternative that is present in the Timaeus, and since this alternative is closely related to a cosmological interpretation of the dialogue, then it would be a mistake to offer a metaphysical reading of Timaeus’ discourse. However, as we shall see, the Timaeus associates the model not only with a plan but also with an original, which suggests that the cosmological reading of this dialogue should be connected with a metaphysical interpretation. Far from leading to a contradiction, the fact that Plato offers two versions of the model could mean that the question of the nature of Forms is not completely absent from the dialogue. In providing a double description of the model, and in offering metaphysical considerations within his cosmological discourse, Plato seems to provide an account of the nature of the intelligible and its explanatory role with regards to an understanding of what is the universe in all its complexity, for the two versions will allow to justify 1) the nature of cosmos as the best possible realization and 2) the ontological status of the sensible which possesses its own degree of being. Are these two versions fully compatible? We will suggest in our conclusion that the tension induced by their presence in the same dialogue actually allows a better understanding of Timaeus’ speech. 
topic Platon
Timée
Modèle
Ancient Philosophy
demiurge
url https://www.revistas.usp.br/filosofiaantiga/article/view/85136
work_keys_str_mv AT lucajeanpitteloud deuxversionsdumodeledansletimee
_version_ 1721361149114449920