「고르기아스」편에 나타난 플라톤의 정치철학 = Political Philosophy of Plato in Plato's Gorgias

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study is to analyze the debate between Socrates and Callicles in Gorgias following T. K. Seung's interpretation of political philosophy. That is, this study aims to investigate the essence of the two ways of life that Plato depicts by comparing Socrates and Callicles. Furthermore, this study displays what the challenge of Callicles, the clue to Plato's interpretation of political philosophy according T. K. Seung, is by analyzing the debate between Socrates and Callicles.
T. K. Seung values Gorgias as the most unique dialog in the archipelago of Plato's dialogs. He suggests that the theme throughout all of the dialogs of Plato is the invention of political philosophy. In detail, he asserts that Plato's theme is to meet the challenge of Callicles participating in Gorgias. He also argues that what made Plato's soul tense is the cohesion of the ethos of power politics and the new political weapon of rhetoric. Callicles is the monster that shows the cohesion of these two evils and the confliction between this monster and Socrates are depicted in Gorgias. That is, the confliction of two ways of life is described: the life pursuing power and greed, and the life pursuing justice and piety.
Gorgias consists of three Parts following three people who have dialogs with Socrates in turn. Part one is a dialog between Socrates and Gorgias, part two is a dialog between Socrates and Polos, and part three is a dialog between Socrates and Callicles. Among three parts, the dialog between Socrates and Callicles most clearly indicates the early form of ideal political philosophy that Plato wanted to present.
The dialog of Socrates and Callicles begins with a long speech of Callicles. In this speech, Callicles takes the difference between nomos and physis as a basis on which to criticize philosophy. He also argues natural justice is true justice. Socrates continually argues against him to clarify exactly what the natural justice that Callicles mentioned is. In conclusion, Callicles defines natural justice as follows. “Discreet and brave people in national matters deserve to get more things than inferior people.” The debate moves to the issue of temperance and hedonism by Socrates' question as to whether discreet and brave people in national matters can control themselves. Socrates tries to defeat Callicles who cannot be temperate and displays his greed in cosmic harmony and order. Callicles also consistently maintains virtue of power. Socrates thinks that Pericles, Themistocles, Cimon, Miltiades whom are the greatest rhetoricians and politicians according to Callicles, are only flatterers. They make Athenians to be foolish, cowardly, loquacious and greedy. According to Socrates, the greatest rhetoricians and politicians cure the corruption and depravity of a community, and establish proper order in a community. The greatest rhetoricians have technique and apply what they say and what they act to their soul pursuing justice and temperance. They always keep in mind justice for citizens and strive to eliminate injustice in their souls. They also consider how people can gain temperance, remove intemperance, as well as how citizens can have all the other virtues and lose their vices.
The world of Callicles is the world of Thucydides; it is the world of power and greed, aggression and predation. In such a world, even the Socratic virtue of temperance may not dictate justice, because justice may not be a matter of wisdom. Callicles may have the right to brand a temperate person as a fool and a coward (Gogias 489s-492b). In ancient Greece, to be sure, the virtue of temperate person was supposed to be a just one. But it was also taken for granted that the connection between temperance and justice holds only within a community of friends. In such a community, it is obviously fitting to be just toward others, because the others are one's friends and a friend is an extension of oneself. In antiquity, friendship was based on kinship, and a tribal state was a community of kinship and friendship. But those days of primitive states were gone by the time of imperial Athens.
In the days of Callicles, the ethos of power and greed governed not only the relations of city-states, but also the internal politics of Athens. The city of Athens had become too large and too heterogeneous to be bound by the bond of kinship and friendship, and her internal politics had turned into an internecine war, wherein the politicians fought against one another with the new political weapon of Gorgian rhetoric. If Callicles is a warrior in such a war, how can Socrates convince him that he should seek justice rather than advantage, and that justice is the greatest good? Socrates' argument appears to be contextually misplaced; he appears to advocate for a theater of war what is appropriate for a community of peace and friendship. Hence, many commentators have said that Socrates' position against Callicles is notably ineffectual.
It seems that Socrates failed to prevail over Callicles. According to T. K. Seung's interpretation, we can see that the huge confrontation of two world views meets as imperfection in a nation and as perfection in law.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 서론 1
• 본론 5
• 1. 예비적 논의 5
• 1) 도입부(447a-449c) 5
• 2) 소크라테스와 고르기아스의 대화(449c-461b) 7
• 3) 소크라테스와 폴로스의 대화(461b-481b) 9
• 2. 소크라테스와 칼리클레스의 대화 : 수사술과 정치 12
• 1) 칼리클레스의 연설 14
• 2) “자연적 정의”란 무엇인가? 24
• 3) 절제와 무절제 그리고 쾌락주의의 문제 30
• 4) 훌륭한 수사술과 영혼의 질서 42
• 5) 칼리클레스의 충고에 대한 대답 49
• 3. 참된 정치가이자 철학자인 소크라테스 55
• 1) 정치활동의 목적과 참된 정치가의 자격 55
• 2) 저승에 관한 신화 70
• 결론 73
• 참고문헌 76
• ABSTRACT 81