Sex and the Soul: Plato’s Equality Argument in the <i>Republic</i>

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Parker, Michael L.
Language:English
Published: University of Cincinnati / OhioLINK 2006
Subjects:
Online Access:http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ucin1147887701
id ndltd-OhioLink-oai-etd.ohiolink.edu-ucin1147887701
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-OhioLink-oai-etd.ohiolink.edu-ucin11478877012021-08-03T06:10:56Z Sex and the Soul: Plato’s Equality Argument in the <i>Republic</i> Parker, Michael L. Philosophy Plato Republic Equality Feminism Guard Dog Analogy Myth of Er Laws Nature Soul Phusis Nomos Female Nature Guardians Plato is distinguished as one of the earliest Western philosophers to offer a philosophical argument for the equality of men and women. His primary argument for equality is presented in Book V of the Republic (451-457), and culminates with the claim that everything said about men applies equally to women in the sculpting of rulers for his ideal city (Republic 540c). He argues specifically that women are equal to men to serve as Guardians. Scholars have engaged in extended discussion over the meaning of this argument, including vigorous debate by modern feminist scholars. Not as much attention, however, has been given to the philosophical basis upon which Plato makes his case for equality. This dissertation is an inquiry into Plato’s philosophical basis for his equality claim. From the Guard Dog Analogy (Republic Book II), the Equality Argument (Republic Book V), and the Myth of Er (Republic Book X) the conclusion is reached that Plato’s equality claim is based upon his metaphysical conception of the soul. In part, Plato’s conception is that souls are equal in their origin and design; souls are the source of life and knowledge in the bodies they incarnate; and souls are asexual. From this foundation Plato makes his claim that men and women are equally capable to serve as Guardians inasmuch as the requirements of Guardianship have to do with features located in the soul, not the body. Since souls are asexual, sexual difference is irrelevant to Guardian service. This thesis is explored from three different perspectives: first, from within Plato’s corpus, primarily the Republic, although including the Timaeus; second, in relation to the broader nomos - phusis discourse, including Xenophon, Antiphon, and Euripides; and third, with respect to its continuity in Plato’s Laws. 2006-07-17 English text University of Cincinnati / OhioLINK http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ucin1147887701 http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ucin1147887701 unrestricted This thesis or dissertation is protected by copyright: all rights reserved. It may not be copied or redistributed beyond the terms of applicable copyright laws.
collection NDLTD
language English
sources NDLTD
topic Philosophy
Plato
Republic
Equality
Feminism
Guard Dog Analogy
Myth of Er
Laws
Nature
Soul
Phusis
Nomos
Female Nature
Guardians
spellingShingle Philosophy
Plato
Republic
Equality
Feminism
Guard Dog Analogy
Myth of Er
Laws
Nature
Soul
Phusis
Nomos
Female Nature
Guardians
Parker, Michael L.
Sex and the Soul: Plato’s Equality Argument in the <i>Republic</i>
author Parker, Michael L.
author_facet Parker, Michael L.
author_sort Parker, Michael L.
title Sex and the Soul: Plato’s Equality Argument in the <i>Republic</i>
title_short Sex and the Soul: Plato’s Equality Argument in the <i>Republic</i>
title_full Sex and the Soul: Plato’s Equality Argument in the <i>Republic</i>
title_fullStr Sex and the Soul: Plato’s Equality Argument in the <i>Republic</i>
title_full_unstemmed Sex and the Soul: Plato’s Equality Argument in the <i>Republic</i>
title_sort sex and the soul: plato’s equality argument in the <i>republic</i>
publisher University of Cincinnati / OhioLINK
publishDate 2006
url http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ucin1147887701
work_keys_str_mv AT parkermichaell sexandthesoulplatosequalityargumentintheirepublici
_version_ 1719432325216862208