Ist der Dialog zwischen Individuen die einzige Form des Philosophierens bei Platon?

Within the critical debate on the nature and function of Plato’s decision to write dialogues – as opposed to treatises, didactic poems or epidictic speeches – the view has gained ground in recent years that, for Plato, the dialogical form is intrinsically linked to philosophy itself. Accordingly, the dialogical form and the philosophical content are regarded as inseparable. From this position follows the view that Plato’s philosophy is, by its very nature, dialogical.

Such a hermeneutical perspective, which is particularly widespread in Anglo-American academic circles, characterises what has been termed the ‘dialogical approach’ or the ‘dialogical turn’, whose leading exponents include C. Gill, F. Gonzalez, G. A. Press and others. This is a position that can trace its origins to a highly significant precursor in Friedrich Schleiermacher, the founder of philosophical hermeneutics, a leading biblical interpreter and the author of the first complete translation of Plato’s works into a modern language (1804–1828).

In this lecture, I intend to loosen – if not entirely dissolve – the connection between dialogue and philosophy – or, if you will, between dialogue and truth – by attempting to show that there are good reasons to attribute to Plato a position different from that ascribed to him by Friedrich Schleiermacher and his contemporary followers. I wish to argue, in fact, that philosophy in Plato is not intrinsically linked to dialogue.

Firstly, it should be noted that whilst Plato may be regarded as the founder of philosophy as an autonomous discipline – a discipline characterised by its own language, specific methods and particular subjects – he was not the inventor of the dialogue. Rather, the dialogue represents a literary genre associated with the figure of Socrates, which had already emerged before and independently of Plato. Secondly, in the Phaedrus, a conception of philosophical communication is developed theoretically, according to which the theoretical level of a conversation always depends on the interlocutors taking part in it. This means that the dialogues written by Plato can only lay claim to containing and conveying truth if – and only if – the characters who populate them possess a high intellectual and moral standard. This is, however, only extremely rarely the case: for Plato almost never portrays the interlocutors in his dialogues as genuine ‘philosophers’. The few instances in which this occurs concern figures such as Diotima and Timaeus; both deliver monologues, thus seemingly evading the dialogical method.

Thirdly, Plato seems to allude to a different form of dialogue from that involving two or more interlocutors. In at least two passages – from the Theaetetus and the Sophist – he refers to the soul’s dialogue with itself, that is, to a form of dialogical thinking that does not presuppose any reference to real interlocutors. This dialogue of the soul with itself undoubtedly proves to be superior to the actual conversation between two individuals, as it possesses a purely rational and objective character and is detached from the individual and subjective component implicit in the personal inclinations of specific interlocutors.

The Republic (or The State) is perhaps regarded as Plato’s most famous work. At the same time, it is the text that seems to embody the dialogical nature of philosophising in a paradigmatic way (it has, for example, been argued that the Republic portrays Plato’s ‘dialogical society’). The opening words of the dialogue describe Socrates’ ‘descent’ into Piraeus. This ‘descent’ is frequently interpreted as the birth of philosophy: Socrates is not yet a philosopher, but only becomes one by entering into dialogue with his interlocutors. It is, however, possible to propose a radically different interpretation of Socrates’ katabasis. According to this interpretation, Socrates is already a fully-fledged philosopher, quite independently of the communicative mechanisms of dialogue. Truth, therefore, takes shape outside the dialogue.

The talk will be held in German.