Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation proposes a new interpretation of Plato’s account of the trial of Socrates, a defining moment in the history of philosophy. Traditionally, Plato’s depiction of Socrates’ condemnation by his fellow citizens is thought to dramatize a perennial conflict between rational inquiry and uncritically received ideologies. I go beyond this traditional characterization and show that Plato’s account dramatizes a conflict at the level of ideology itself. I do this in a series of case studies that bring together the work of cultural historians and historians of philosophy. In the first chapter, I interpret Plato’s Crito in the light of the highly political genre of the Athenian funeral oration and show how, in this dialogue, Socrates’ decision to accept his death sentence exemplifies but also problematizes that genre’s vision of the ideal Athenian. In the second chapter, I argue that Socrates’ defense speech in Plato’s Apology uses the conventions of forensic oratory in a similarly subversive way, amplifying in the figure of Socrates an anxiety internal to Athenian civic identity. The third and final chapter situates my reading of the Apology and Crito within the broader context of Athenian political thought and among Plato’s other depictions of Socrates. Focusing on the Menexenus, Euthyphro, Laches, and Gorgias, it elucidates several ways that Plato uses the figure of Socrates to engage with the political mentality of his time and place. In sum, this dissertation provides new insights both into the image of Socrates received from Plato and into Plato’s political philosophy itself.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.048 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".