What is it about?

"Mysticism" comes down to us from the Greek word for "hidden" or "concealed." Although we usually think of philosophy in general and Plato in particular as endeavoring to clarify what is otherwise obscure, there is a sense in which philosophy as practiced by Plato was deliberately self-concealing. I compare two modern interpreters of Plato whose readings center on this fact. Although seldom discussed in the same context, Simone Weil and Leo Strauss shared a hope that the philosophic life according to Plato might be revived, and both see in the self-concealing aspects of Plato’s works the key to his understanding of philosophy.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

"Esoteric" readings of Plato are more diverse than their critics typically allow. And that is less because such readings freely project into Plato doctrines that are not really there than owing to the challenges presented by the ways in which Plato deliberately conceals his own voice. To provoke us to inquire after – and thus reproduce in ourselves – his original conception, Plato denies us the means of definitively interpreting his works.

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: Platonic Revivalists? The Cases of Simone Weil and Leo Strauss, September 2024, Brill,
DOI: 10.1163/9789004679344_005.
You can read the full text:

Read

Contributors

The following have contributed to this page