A Classicist’s Comments
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 10436623 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Daniel M Johnson (0000-0002-1505-6723, Southern Illinois University Carbondale, autor correspondente), David M Johnson (0000-0003-2896-7419, Southern Illinois University Carbondale) |
| Ano | 2025 |
| Volume | 87 |
| Fascículo | 4 |
| Páginas | 585-588 |
| Data de publicação | 2025-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sim |
| Open Access | Sim |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | The Review of Politics (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 0034-6705 • E-ISSN: 1748-6858 |
| Editora | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s0034670525100168 |
| OpenAlex | W7104709168 |
| Idioma | EN |
Sebell’s book provides an intense and insightful commentary on Memorabilia 4, built around the thesis that Xenophon’s central goal is to point good readers toward the theological solution to the problem of politics. That thesis is not overt in the Memorabilia itself, so the bulk of Sebell’s book is devoted to showing how better sorts of readers benefit from thinking through arguments originally addressed to a decidedly limited Socratic interlocutor, Euthydemos. But Sebell’s book is not easy. His sentences are sometimes labyrinthine in their complexity. And as someone Sebell would call, reasonably enough, a conventional classicist, my difficulties in following his argument are larger
Argument (complex analysis · Point (geometry · Reading (process · Socratic method · Classical Philosophy and Thought · Renaissance and Early Modern Studies · Seventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical Thought
| Velocidade de citação | historical |
|---|---|
| Altamente citado | Não |