• PhilPapers
  • PhilPeople
  • PhilArchive
  • PhilEvents
  • PhilJobs
  • Sign in
PhilPeople
 
  • Sign in
  • News Feed
  • Find Philosophers
  • Departments
  • Radar
  • Help
 
profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

David Wolfsdorf

Temple University
  •  Home
  •  Publications
    46
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  Events
    1
  •  News and Updates
    25

 More details
  • Temple University
    Department of Philosophy
    Regular Faculty
Areas of Interest
Philosophy of Mind
Meta-Ethics
Ancient Greek and Roman Philosophy
  • All publications (46)
  •  115
    Desire for good in meno 77b2–78b6
    Classical Quarterly 56 (01): 77-. 2006.
    PlatoPlato: Meno
  •  215
    The Method εξ υποεσεως at Meno 86e1-87d8
    Phronesis 53 (1): 35-64. 2008.
    Scholars ubiquitously refer to the method εξ υποθεσεως, introduced at Meno 86e1-87d8, as a method of hypothesis. In contrast, this paper argues that the method εξ υποθεσεως in Meno is not a hypothetical method. On the contrary, in the Meno passage, υποθεσις means “postulate”, that is, cognitively secure proposition. Furthermore, the method εξ υποθεσεως is derived from the method of geometrical analysis. More precisely, it is derived from the use of geometrical analysis to achieve reduction, that…Read more
    Scholars ubiquitously refer to the method εξ υποθεσεως, introduced at Meno 86e1-87d8, as a method of hypothesis. In contrast, this paper argues that the method εξ υποθεσεως in Meno is not a hypothetical method. On the contrary, in the Meno passage, υποθεσις means “postulate”, that is, cognitively secure proposition. Furthermore, the method εξ υποθεσεως is derived from the method of geometrical analysis. More precisely, it is derived from the use of geometrical analysis to achieve reduction, that is, reduction of a less tractable problem to a more tractable problem. As such, the method εξ υποθεσεως does not by itself serve to solve problems
    PlatoPlato: Meno
  •  99
    Pleasure in Ancient Greek Philosophy
    Cambridge University Press. 2012.
    The Key Themes in Ancient Philosophy series provides concise books, written by major scholars and accessible to non-specialists, on important themes in ancient philosophy that remain of philosophical interest today. In this volume Professor Wolfsdorf undertakes the first exploration of ancient Greek philosophical conceptions of pleasure in relation to contemporary conceptions. He provides broad coverage of the ancient material, from pre-Platonic to Old Stoic treatments; and, in the contemporary …Read more
    The Key Themes in Ancient Philosophy series provides concise books, written by major scholars and accessible to non-specialists, on important themes in ancient philosophy that remain of philosophical interest today. In this volume Professor Wolfsdorf undertakes the first exploration of ancient Greek philosophical conceptions of pleasure in relation to contemporary conceptions. He provides broad coverage of the ancient material, from pre-Platonic to Old Stoic treatments; and, in the contemporary period, from World War II to the present. Examination of the nature of pleasure in ancient philosophy largely occurred within ethical contexts but in the contemporary period has, to a greater extent, been pursued within philosophy of mind and psychology. This divergence reflects the dominant philosophical preoccupations of the times. But Professor Wolfsdorf argues that the various treatments are complementary. Indeed, the Greeks' examinations of pleasure were incisive and their debates vigorous, and their results have enduring value for contemporary discussion.
    History: PleasureAncient Greek and Roman EthicsEpicurusEpicureans: Pleasure
  •  64
    Epicurus on Εuφροσύνη and Eνέργεια
    Apeiron 42 (3): 221-258. 2009.
    EpicurusEpicureans: Metaphysics and Physics, Misc
  • Brill Online Books and Journals
    Phronesis 48 (4). 2003.
  •  147
    The Socratic Fallacy and the Epistemological Priority of Definitional Knowledge
    Apeiron 37 (1). 2004.
    Ancient Greek and Roman PhilosophyClassical Greek Philosophy
  •  1
    Socratic philosophizing
    In John Bussanich & Nicholas D. Smith (eds.), The Bloomsbury companion to Socrates, Continuum. 2013.
    Socrates
  •  2
    Interpreting Plato's Early Dialogues.''
    Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 27 15-40. 2004.
    Ancient Greek and Roman PhilosophyPlatoPlato: Interpretive Strategies
  •  124
    "Euthyphro" 10a2-11b1: A Study in Platonic Metaphysics and its Reception Since 1960
    Apeiron 38 (1): 1-72. 2005.
    Classical Greek PhilosophyPlato: Euthyphro
  •  8
    The Method at Meno 86e1-87d8
    Phronesis: A Journal for Ancient Philosophy 53 (1): 35-64. 2008.
    PlatoPlato: Meno
  •  56
    Review of Daniel C. Russell, Plato on Pleasure and the Good Life (review)
    Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2006 (6). 2006.
    Bertrand RussellHistory: Pleasure
  •  74
    Review of Heda Segvic, From Protagoras to Aristotle: Essays in Ancient Moral Philosophy (review)
    Ancient Philosophy 30 (2): 420-424. 2010.
    AristotleClassicsProtagorasSophists, Misc
  •  1
    ""Comments on Benson:'Socrates' Method of Hypothesis in Meno."'
    Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium of Ancient Philosophy 18 127-43. 2003.
    Classical Greek PhilosophyPlato: EpistemologyPlato's WorksPlato: Meno
  •  73
    Understanding the 'What-is-F?' Question
    Apeiron 36 (3). 2003.
    Ancient Greek and Roman PhilosophyClassical Greek PhilosophyPlato's Works
  •  107
    The historical reader of Plato's Protagoras1
    Classical Quarterly 48 (01): 126-. 1998.
    The popular question why Plato wrote dramatic dialogues, which is motivated by a just fascination and perplexity for contemporary scholars about the unique form of the Platonic texts, is confused and anachronistic; for it judges the Platonic texts qua philosophical texts in terms of post–Platonic texts not written in dramatic dialogic form. In comparison with these, the form of Platos early aporetic dialogues is highly unusual. Yet, in its contemporary milieu, the form of Platonic literature is …Read more
    The popular question why Plato wrote dramatic dialogues, which is motivated by a just fascination and perplexity for contemporary scholars about the unique form of the Platonic texts, is confused and anachronistic; for it judges the Platonic texts qua philosophical texts in terms of post–Platonic texts not written in dramatic dialogic form. In comparison with these, the form of Platos early aporetic dialogues is highly unusual. Yet, in its contemporary milieu, the form of Platonic literature is relatively normal. Dramatic dialogue was the most popular form of Attic literature in the late fifth and fourth centuries. This explains why Plato wrote dramatic dialogues
    PlatoPlato: Why Dialogues?
  •  96
    Plato and the Mouth-Piece Theory
    Ancient Philosophy 19 (Special Issue): 13-24. 1999.
    PlatoClassics
  • Prev.
  • 1
  • 2
  • Next
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University
PhilPeople is currently in Beta Sponsored by the PhilPapers Foundation and the American Philosophical Association
Feedback