SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Kaygı. Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Dergisi / 2025 / Cilt: 24 Sayı: 2

Countering the Formidable Accuser: Plato’s Response to Aristophanes and the Problem of Misology

Heybetli Suçlayıcıya Karşı: Platon'un Aristophanes'e ve Mizoloji Sorununa Yanıtı

Güncel Oğulcan Ülgen(HACETTEPE ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EDEBİYAT FAKÜLTESİ, FELSEFE BÖLÜMÜ)0000-0003-0934-6940
Pages
537–562
Publication Date
2025-09-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In doing so, he not only defends philosophy from the charge of misology but also presents philosophy as the only possible cure for misology.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This paper examines the relationship between argumentation and misology.
📊
Key Findings & Data:By analyzing the Euthydemus, I show how Plato responds to Aristophanes by distinguishing Socrates from the sophists and revealing the latter’s role in generating misology.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In doing so, he not only defends philosophy from the charge of misology but also presents philosophy as the only possible cure for misology.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Mizoloji · Diyalektik · Eristik

Abstract

This paper examines the relationship between argumentation and misology. It argues that Plato’s reclamation of argument constitutes a philosophical response to the problem of misology. I claim that Aristophanes’ Clouds offers a devastating early critique of διαλέγεσθαι, to which Plato responds by reclaiming and reconfiguring it as διαλεκτική. The Clouds portrays the rise of sophistic teaching as a destabilizing force in Athenian society, fostering mistrust in argumentation while associating it with manipulation and distortion. This mistrust constitutes an early instance of misology, a concept that Plato later develops fully in the Phaedo. By analyzing the Euthydemus, I show how Plato responds to Aristophanes by distinguishing Socrates from the sophists and revealing the latter’s role in generating misology. The focus on the Euthydemus is deliberate: there is an intertextual relationship (both formal and thematic) between the Euthydemus and the Clouds that brings them into direct confrontation. In the Phaedo, Plato further argues that misology arises from repeated disappointment with arguments when wielded by those who, by refuting every position, instill universal mistrust in their listeners. Plato’s remedy is to rebuild trust in argumentation by emphasizing philosophy's commitment to inquiry, even in the face of uncertainty. Ultimately, this paper contends that while Aristophanes’ response to the crisis of argumentation is to ridicule and reject it, Plato offers a systematic alternative: he redefines διαλεκτική as a means of countering misology rather than producing it. In doing so, he not only defends philosophy from the charge of misology but also presents philosophy as the only possible cure for misology.

Özet

Bu makale tartışma ile mizoloji arasındaki ilişkiyi ve Platon’un mizolojiye felsefi bir yanıt vermek adına tartışmayı nasıl yeniden sahiplendiğini incelemektedir. Aristophanes’in Bulutlar adlı eseri, Platon’un daha sonra διαλεκτική olarak yeniden tanımlayıp sahipleneceği διαλέγεσθαι pratiğine yönelik erken bir eleştiri sunar. Bulutlar, sofistlerin öğretisinin Atina toplumunda istikrarsızlaştırıcı bir güç olarak ortaya çıkışını tasvir eder; bu öğretinin argümanların çarpıtılması ve manipülasyonu ile ilişkilendirilmesi, tartışma pratiğine karşı bir güvensizlik doğurur. Bu güvensizlik, Platon’un Phaidon diyalogunda tam anlamıyla geliştirdiği mizolojinin erken bir örneğini teşkil eder. Euthydemos diyaloğu üzerinden, Platon’un Aristophanes’e nasıl yanıt verdiğini ve Sokrates ile sofistleri nasıl ayırdığını ortaya koyuyorum; bu ayrım, mizolojinin kaynağının sofistlerde olduğunu gösterir. Phaidon’da Platon, mizolojinin, her görüşün çürütülebileceğini göstermek suretiyle dinleyicilerde evrensel bir güvensizlik aşılayan kişiler eliyle yürütülen tartışmaların tekrar tekrar hayal kırıklığına uğratmasından doğduğunu savunur. Platon'un önerdiği çare, belirsizlikler karşısında bile sorgulamaya bağlı kalan felsefenin, tartışmaya olan güveni yeniden inşa etmesidir. Sonuç olarak Aristophanes’in tartışma krizine verdiği tepki alay etmek ve reddetmek yönündeyken, Platon bu krize yönelik yapısal bir çözüm sunar yani, diyalektiği, mizolojiyi üreten değil, onu bertaraf eden bir yöntem olarak yeniden tanımlamak. Bu yolla Platon, felsefeyi mizoloji suçlamasından korumakla kalmaz, onu mizolojinin mümkün yegâne tedavisi olarak da sunar.

🔖

Cite This Article

Ülgen, G. O. (2025). Countering the Formidable Accuser: Plato’s Response to Aristophanes and the Problem of Misology. Kaygı. Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Dergisi, Cilt: 24 Sayı: 2, 537–562. https://doi.org/10.20981/kaygi.1668824

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (34)

  1. Aristophanes. (2016). “Clouds.” In Frogs and Other Plays, translated by Stephen Halliwell. Oxford: Oxford.
  2. Aristophanes. (2016). “Frogs.” In Frogs and Other Plays, translated by Stephen Halliwell. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  3. Aristotle. (1995). “Rhetoric”. In Complete Works of Aristotle Volume Two, translated by W. Rhys Roberts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  4. Bahr, D. (2017). Philosophy leads to father-beating, or why all parents should read Aristophanes' Clouds. Forbes.
  5. Bonazzi, M. (2020). The Sophists. New Surveys in the Classics, no. 45. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Delcomminette, S. (2018). “Plato on Hatred of Philosophy.” The Review of Metaphysics 72 (1): 29–51. doi:10.1353/rvm.2018.0003.
  6. Deleuze, G. (1990). The Logic of Sense. Edited by Constantin V. Boundas. Translated by Mark Lester and Charles Stivale. New York: Columbia University Press.
  7. Denyer, N. (1991). Language, Thought and Falsehood in Ancient Greek Philosophy. New York: Routledge.
  8. Detienne, M. (1996). “The Masters of Truth in Archaic Greece, Trans.” J. Lloyd. New York: Zone Books.
  9. Elliott, R. T. (1916). The Wasps and Clouds of Aristophanes [Review of The Wasps of Aristophanes and The Clouds of Aristophanes, by B. B. Rogers]. The Classical Review, 30(8), 225–227. http://www.jstor.org/stable/697619
  10. Gagarin, M. (2002). Antiphon The Athenian. Austin: University of Texas.
  11. Grewal, G. (2022). A Note on Plato’s Euthydemus 304b. Poetic (Mis)quotations in Plato. Classics@. 22. Kahn, C. (1996). Plato and The Socratic Dialogue: The Philosophical Use of a Literary Form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  12. Kerferd, G. B. (1981). The Sophistic Movement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  13. McCabe, M. M. (1998). “Silencing The Sophists: The Drama of Euthydemus.” Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium of Ancient Philosophy 14 (1): 139–68.
  14. Miller, T. (2015) “Socrates’ Warning Against Misology (Plato, Phaedo 88c-91c).” Phronesis 60 (2): 145–79. doi:10.1163/15685284-12341282.
  15. Nehemas, A. (1990). Eristic, Antilogic, Sophistic, Dialectic: Plato’s Demarcation of Philosophy from Sophistry. History of Philosophy Quarterly. 7(1). 3-16.
  16. Notomi, N. (2022). Socrates and the Sophists: Reconsidering the History of Criticisms of the Sophists. Humanities, 11(6), 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/h11060153
  17. Nussbaum, M. (1981). “Aristophanes and Socrates on Learning Practical Wisdom.” In Aristophanes: Essays in Interpretation, edited by Jeffrey Henderson, 43–98. Yale Classical Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511933752.003.
  18. O’Regan, E. D. (1992). Rhetoric, Comedy, and the Violence of Language in Aristophanes’ Clouds. New York: Oxford University Press.
  19. Pisano, L. (2019). The Disappearance of Presence: On Heidegger’s Paths for a “Magical” Hermeneutics of Medium and Truth. Sens public.
  20. Plato. (1997). “Euthydemus.” In Plato Complete Works, translated by Rosamond Kent Sprague. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
  21. Plato. (1997). “Phaedo.” In Complete Works Plato, translated by G.M.A Grube. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
  22. Plato. (1997). “Gorgias.” In Plato Complete Works, translated by Donald J. Zeyl. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
  23. Plato. (2004). Republic, translated by C. D. C. Reeve, Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.
  24. Proclus. (1992). Proclus’ Commentary on Plato’s Parmenides. Translated by Glenn R. Morrow and John M. Dillon. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  25. Ricciardone, C. T. (2019). “What Is the Meaning of Socrates’ Last Words?: A Multifaceted Approach.” Ancient Philosophy 39 (2): 267–93. doi:10.5840/ancientphil201939218.
  26. Robson, J. (2013). Aristophanes: An Introduction. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
  27. Scolnicov, S. (1982). Plato’s Euthydemus: A study on the relations between logic and education. Scripta Classica Israelica. (6).19–29.
  28. Sedley, D. (2003). Plato's Cratylus. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  29. Sermamoglou-Soulmaidi, G. (2014). Playful Philosophy and Serious Sophistry: A Reading of Plato’s Euthydemus. Berlin: De Gruyter.
  30. Spargue, R. K. (1962). Plato's Use of Fallacy: A Study of the Euthydemus and Some Other Dialogues. New York: Routledge.
  31. Strauss, B. S. (1997). Fathers and Sons in Athens: Ideology and Society in the Era of the Peloponnesian War. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  32. Vernant, Jean-Pierre. (1984). The Origins of Greek Thought. Cornell University Press.
  33. Timmerman, D. & Schiappa E. (2010). Classical Greek Rhetorical Theory and the Disciplining of Discourse. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
  34. Woolf, Raphael. (2008). “Misology and Truth.” Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 23 (1): 1–24. doi:10.1163/22134417-90000089.