Talk:Charmides (dialogue)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Greece      (Rated Start-Class) Greece Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece, an attempt to expand, improve and standardize the content and structure of articles related to Greece. If you would like to participate, you can improve Charmides (dialogue), or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (comments) Mid This article has been rated as a Mid priority article Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome     (Rated Start-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome. To participate, improve this article or visit the project page for more information. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. Mid This article is on a subject of Mid-importance within classical antiquity. WikiProject Books      (Rated Start-Class) Books Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate, you can edit the article. You can discuss the Project at its talk page. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at in the comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) WikiProject Philosophy      (Rated Start-Class) Philosophy Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. Additional information: Related task forces (major fields): Philosophical literature

WikiProject Echo has identified Charmides (dialogue) as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the French language Wikipedia.

[edit] Original research in the "Subtextual interpretation" section

Aside from its truly hideous title, the "Subtextual interpretation" section is problematic because it makes interpretive statements without giving any citations to secondary scholarship. I feel quite sure that the interpretation given is the idiosyncratic view of the editor who wrote it, rather than a widely held view in scholarship, but if I am wrong, it should certainly not be difficult to give references, following the example of WP:CITE and WP:FOOTNOTE. I have posted an {{Original research}} template on several of the other articles on Plato's dialogues, some of which also have sections bizarrely entitled "subtextual interpretation". --Akhilleus (talk) 04:25, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

This section was deleted , as in A Short History Of Ethics p20, it was stated that Socrates considered his duty as a teacher to make his pupils wiser by making them discover their own ignorance, thus he tends to infuriate them to force them into philosophical reflection upon moral matters. It was also stated on page 21 that Socrates believed that virtue is teachable but denies the existence of teachers; this paradox was explained later in Plato works by the thesis that knowledge is already present in us and has only to be brought to birth by a philosophical midwife.Marc j (talk) 13:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Granted, it WAS Ugly

Prompted by biting criticism from Mr.Achilles and Mr.Zoosnoose, I've re-phrased the analysis of Charmides. I agree, the original phrase was "hideous." Thanks for pointing it out. But the techniques in Charmides are from Rhetoric 101, and if you don't think it correct, you ought to come up with a better interpretation instead of just hacking mine off. As it is, you fellows want to leave Plato having made no particular point in this dialog. Brenda maverick 22:17, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

You seem to have missed the main point of the criticism, which is that any interpretation of primary source material must be supported by citations from secondary sources. Please see WP:OR. Statements like "Plato hints powerfully that Socrates' has ulterior (sexual) motives for his double quackery" are original research, unless you can demonstrate that this view has been published in a reliable source. --Akhilleus (talk) 22:39, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Achilles, I am trying not to be willfully thickheaded, and I bet that I speak for you as well. We might omit that particular sentence, but leave the rest. The Greeks were masters at rhetoric, and to depict Plato as having no particular point to make, that is what it is to misrepresent his genius. Give me a little time to relocate an article published by a Harvard classicist in 1920 called "Comedy in Plato." Will ya? Brenda maverick 02:38, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I haven't deleted anything in that section, but unless it can all be supported by secondary scholarship, I think it should be. Plato obviously has a point, otherwise his work wouldn't be around, but the point is that the article needs to represent what secondary sources say about his philosophy, rather than making stuff up ourselves. --Akhilleus (talk) 02:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)