From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

(Content moved to talk:Trial of Socrates)

From Socratic Irony and Aristotle's "Eiron": Some Puzzles[edit]

By: P. W. Gooch, Scarborough College (University of Toronto)
Published: Phoenix, Vol. 41, No. 2. (Summer, 1987), pp. 95-104.
Obtained from JSTOR Sunday March 2nd, 2008

This Article adresses my some of my comments. (See blockquote below. The text is from a footnote.)

At the end of the last century J. A. Stewart wrote, "Aristotle is the first to make Socrates the type of refined Irony" (Notes on the Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle [Oxford 18921 1.359). Next Burnet: "This passage seems to be the origin of the current phrase 'Socratic irony,' a thing which is almost as mythical as 'tragic irony'" (The Ethics ofAristotle [London 19001 196). Then T. Marshall: "Irony, in the sense in which it is now commonly taken, as meaning an affectation of ignorance, is here attributed to Sokrates . . . . The authority of Aristotle has had a good deal to do with fixing the present meaning of the word" (Aristotle's Theory of Conduct [London 19091 264). And G. G. Sedgewick: "our ideas of Socratic irony spring ultimately from Aristotle's definition of eironeia as a pretence which takes the form of self-depression . . . .[Aristotle] fixed the general sense of Socratic irony for all time" (OfIrony, Especzally in Drama2 [Toronto 19481 11-12). (Works mentioned in this note will be cited by author's name, as will R. A. Gauthier and J. Y. Jolif, ~ ' f ' t h i ~2u eNicomaque [Louvain 19591 and T. Irwin, tr., Nicomachean Ethlcs [Indianapolis 19851).

Looking for a clean version of this article[edit]

So, User:23h112e has been blocked as a sockpuppet of User:Whalestate, blocked indefinitely in December 2015. It is clear to me that User:Drift chambers, blocked indefinitely in March 2012, is also the same editor. Per the blocking policy, this indicates that edits by Whalestate/23h112e can be reverted, and the editor has shown difficulties expressing himself in language that is easily understood. Is the current version of the article an improvement, or would it be worthwhile to try for a clean version of this article? Prior to the entrance of User:Whalestate, that would be something like this version. Or, somewhere around here marks the entrance of User:23h112e. Which is better, one of the older versions or the current one? Dekimasuよ! 07:22, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

I may attempt a reversion based upon my own judgment if no one has any feedback. Dekimasuよ! 18:42, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
I cleaned-up some of User:Whalestate's articles quite recently - he/she created a bunch of articles on Seneca's philosophical works back in December 2015. I can see some of the same problems here: convoluted English and a tendency to massively over-reference even minor details (like dates when other philosophers lived). In the end I was able to save those articles by rewriting lines, rearranging content, and a heavy cutting of the references to ones strictly relevant. I would suggest a similar approach here: check what this user added, keep/reword anything useful, cut the extraneous references. Pasicles (talk) 20:35, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
The version before any of the User:Whalestate interventions in early 2015 I think provides a better starting point for cleaning up this article. Everyone happy to revert to that or do you think there are things worth keeping in this version? KingBrooke (talk) 12:52, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 December 2018[edit]

In the section Socratic problem, Plato is misspelled as Platoo. Jdasto (talk) 22:59, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. corrected now. IdreamofJeanie (talk) 23:19, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 January 2019[edit]

ArgustheMan (talk) 05:11, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DannyS712 (talk) 06:01, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Phrasing of cause of death[edit]

I am curious if anyone would mind some changes in the "Death" section of the infobox and in the article. It's a problem of balancing brevity, accuracy & completeness. I've added my changes. Your comments welcome. Lexein (talk) 03:29, 21 January 2019 (UTC)