Antisthenica Cynica Socratica
Suvák Vladislav (ed.)Příspěvky v tomto výboru rekonstruují Antisthenovo myšlení v širším rámci antické filosofie. Antisthenés zde představuje spojnici mezi klasickou sókratovskou tradicí a hellénistickými formami sokratismu.
Hlavní důraz je kladen na kynismus, který přejímá sókratovský odkaz právě díky Antisthenově etické nauce. The contributions contained in the collection of essays Antisthenica Cynica Socratica attempt to reconstruct Antisthenes’ thinking in the wider context of ancient philosophy. Antisthenes is approached as an important personality forming some kind of bridge between the classical Socratic tradition of thought and Hellenistic forms of Socratism. In this respect, a crucial place is held by Cynicism, which espouses the Socratic legacy thanks to Antisthenes’ ethical teaching. The contributions included in this collection of essays deal with the question of Antisthenes’ and Diogenes’ Socratism from various points of view. Pedro Pablo Fuentes González and Vladislav Suvák address the relationship between Antisthenes Sokratikos and Diogenes Antisthenikos, Giuseppe Mazzara and Susan Prince interpret Antisthenes’ speeches Ajax and Odysseus from different perspectives, Aldo Brancacci reconstructs the relation between philosophy and rhetoric in Antisthenes, Claudia Mársico questions some methodological dimensions of Antisthenic philosophy, Igor Deraj asks how Socratic Antisthenes’ investigation of names is, Louis-André Dorion looks into Antisthenes’ conception of autarkeia (“self-sufficiency”), Lívia Flachbartová looks for the possible meanings of Diogenes as Socrates mainomenos (“Socrates gone mad”), Kajetan Wandowicz asks if early Cynics speak against homosexuality, Dominique Bertrand expounds the Cynicism of Charles Coypeau Dassoucy, and William Desmond tries to show how we can understand Hegel’s interpretation of Antisthenes.
