406 words
Every educated person should be familiar with Plato, but higher education today is usually a barrier to understanding the great thinkers of the past. Hence the need for Counter-Currents, which Jonathan Bowden described as an online university of the Right.
In the next five Saturday Counter-Currents Radio livestreams (June 24 and July 1, 8, 15, and 22), Greg Johnson will lecture on Plato’s dialogue Gorgias. The theme of the course is “Might vs. Right.” He will be using Donald J. Zeyl’s translation of the Gorgias published by Hackett as both a separate book and as part of their Plato, Complete Works volume. You can use other translations, because all Plato translations have a standard citation format known as Stephanus numbers, which appear in the margins of each translation. There are many free online translations, for instance this one at Archive.org. The first lecture will both introduce the dialogue as a whole and also examine Socrates’ argument with the great Sophist Gorgias, which ends at Stephanus number 466a.
The streams will start at noon Pacific, 3pm Eastern Standard Time, 8pm UK time, and 9pm Central European Time on:
DLive: https://dlive.tv/Counter-Currents
Odysee: https://odysee.com/@countercurrents/ccradio
Send questions & donations to Entropy: entropystream.live/countercurrents
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “Paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
- Third, Paywall members have the ability to edit their comments.
- Fourth, Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Paywall Gift Subscriptions
If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:
- your payment
- the recipient’s name
- the recipient’s email address
- your name
- your email address
To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.
Upcoming%20Livestreams%20Greg%20Johnson%20on%20Platoand%238217%3Bs%20Gorgias
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
Related
-
Jean Raspail’s The Camp of the Saints
-
It’s Time to STOP Shopping for Christmas
-
Counter-Currents Radio Podcast No. 614
-
Decameron Film Festival 2024
-
Remembering René Guénon: November 15, 1886–January 7, 1951
-
John Kennedy Toole’s A Confederacy of Dunces
-
Foreword to Nationalism: The Politics of Identity
-
“We Won”
2 comments
That should be an interesting one. I’ve read it, and my take is that Gorgias was the first postmodernist.
This is a short paragraph, part of Polus’ discourse (from an unremarkable translation). “What do you mean? If a man is detected in an unjust attempt to make himself a tyrant, and when detected is racked, mutilated, has his eyes burned out, and after having had all sorts of great injuries inflicted on him, and having seen his wife and children suffer the like, is at last impaled or tarred and burned alive, will he be happier than if he escapes and becomes a tyrant, and continues all through life doing what he likes and holding the reins of government, the envy and admiration both of citizens and strangers? Is that the paradox which, as you say, cannot be refuted?”. I don’t understand how Socrates can argue against Polus’ argument here, unless you define happiness as a quality of the soul, and you also assign the soul the quality of eternal existence, quite independently of our physical existence on this planet. Unless we accept that the soul is some sort of eternal entity that somehow falls asleep when we are born and wakes up when we die (and during our life we just experience a feeble echo of it), I consider Polus ‘ argument irrefutable, and Socrates ‘ argument untenable. Maybe we’ll find a solution in the next lecture.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.