Przejdź do treści
Analiza i Egzystencja
76 (2026)
OpenAlex

Dla całego czasopisma, według OpenAlex.

Cytowania
196
Publikacje
300
H-index
6
I10-index
2
Średnia cytowań (2 lata)
0,14
Cytowania w poszczególnych latach
Wykres cytowań czasopisma. Dokładne wartości są dostępne w tabeli poniżej. 2017: 0 2018: 12 2019: 6 2020: 13 2021: 25 2022: 23 2023: 16 2024: 33 2025: 36 2026: 30 2017 2026
Pokaż dane w tabeli
Cytowania w poszczególnych latach
RokPublikacjeCytowania
2017250
20182312
2019236
20202013
20212125
20222623
20232516
20242633
20252536
20262030

Dane pobrane:

Co oznaczają te liczby?

Publikacje i cytowania obejmują rekordy powiązane z tym czasopismem w OpenAlex. H-index to największa liczba h publikacji mających co najmniej h cytowań. I10-index to liczba publikacji cytowanych co najmniej 10 razy. Wykres przedstawia cytowania otrzymane w danym roku; bieżący rok jest niepełny. Zakres bazy może różnić się od WNUS i innych serwisów.

Średnia z 2 lat jest wskaźnikiem OpenAlex. Nie jest to Journal Impact Factor firmy Clarivate.

Zobacz w OpenAlex (nowa karta)
Google Scholar
Znajdź w Google Scholar (nowa karta)

Image and Power in the Socratic Problem

DOI: 10.18276/aie.2026.76-02
Cytuj

Pełny tekst jest dostępny

ISSN:1734-9923
eISSN:2300-7621
Autorzy: Geoff Bowe ORCID
Istanbul Technical University
Słowa kluczowe: Socrates Sages Plato image politics power
Data wydania numeru / monografii:2026
Liczba stron:21 (25-45)
OAI-PMH:Metadane
Klasyfikacja JEL: Z10
CC BY-SA Open Access DOAJ ERIH PLUS Scopus Diamond Discovery Hub
Kod QR

Abstrakt

This paper reinterprets the Socratic problem through the lens of image and power, arguing that the historical Socrates is best understood not as the originator of a philosophical method or doctrine but as a powerful ethical image whose authority reshaped the meaning of philosophy itself. Rather than attempting to reconstruct a system of propositions from Plato’s early dialogues, I contend that the genre of the logoi sokratikoi reveals something more significant: the construction and deployment of the image of Socrates as a vehicle of intellectual and moral influence. Plato’s Apology, constrained by its historical setting and its claim to eyewitness testimony, provides the closest access to Socrates’ self-presentation. There, Socrates emerges not as a methodological thinker but as a protreptic figure whose power lies in exhortation and example. Central to this self-fashioning is the story of the Delphic Oracle. By presenting himself as divinely commissioned yet ignorant, Socrates crafts an image of paradoxical authority—human wisdom grounded in acknowledged ignorance. This image operates as a form of power: it legitimizes his public mission, unsettles Athenian political authority, and displaces traditional claims to expertise. The divergence between Plato’s and Xenophon’s versions of the Oracle further demonstrates how competing representations of Socrates reflect differing investments in the power of his character. Finally, by situating Socrates within the older tradition of the Seven Sages, the paper shows that his enduring influence derives less from doctrinal content than from the symbolic and cultural power of his image as a sage. Across Greek, Roman, Christian, and Islamic traditions, Socrates functions as an exemplar whose authority lies in embodied practice rather than in a theoretical system. The Socratic problem thus becomes not merely a question about historical reconstruction but an inquiry into how philosophical power operates through image, narrative, and cultural memory.

Materiały dodatkowe

02_bowe.g_socrates_sages_fin_dec.pdf.docx
added bibliography and abstract 		Pobierz

PDF

Pobierz PDF
Podgląd PDF

Otwórz PDF

Bibliografia (43)
  1. Alon, I. (2006). Socrates in Arabic philosophy. In S. Ahbel-Rappe and R. Kamtekar (Eds.), A companion to Socrates (pp. 317–336). Blackwell Publishing.
  2. Annas, J. (2002). What are Plato’s “middle” dialogues in the middle of? In J. Annas and C. Rowe (Eds.), New perspectives on Plato, modern and ancient (pp. 1–23). Center for Hellenic Studies, Trustees for Harvard University.
  3. Ausland, H. (2006). Socrates’ definitional inquiries and the history of philosophy. In S. Ahbel-Rappe and R. Kamtekar (Eds.), A companion to Socrates (pp. 511–535). Blackwell Publishing.
  4. Benson, H.H. (Ed.). (2006). A companion to Plato. Blackwell Publishing.
  5. Bett, R. (2006). Socrates and skepticism. In S. Ahbel-Rappe and R. Kamtekar (Eds.), A companion to Socrates (pp. 298–311). Blackwell Publishing.
  6. Blondell, R. (2002). The play of character in Plato’s dialogues. Cambridge University Press.
  7. Brennan, T. (2006). Socrates and Epictetus. In S. Ahbel-Rappe and R. Kamtekar (Eds.), A companion to Socrates (pp. 285–297). Blackwell Publishing.
  8. Brickhouse, T.C., and Smith, N.D. (2000). The philosophy of Socrates. Westview Press.
  9. Brown, E. (2006). Socrates in the Stoa. In S. Ahbel-Rappe and R. Kamtekar (Eds.), A companion to Socrates (pp. 275–284). Blackwell Publishing.
  10. Burnet, J. (1928). Greek philosophy: Thales to Plato. Macmillan.
  11. Dorion, L.-A. (2006). Xenophon’s Socrates (S. Menn, Trans.). In S. Ahbel-Rappe and R. Kamtekar (Eds.), A companion to Socrates (pp. 93–109). Blackwell Publishing.
  12. Dorion, L.-A. (2011). The rise and fall of the Socratic problem. In D.R. Morrison (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Socrates (pp. 1–23). Cambridge University Press.
  13. Dover, K.J. (Ed.). (1968). Aristophanes: Clouds. Clarendon Press.
  14. Giannantoni, G. (Ed.). (1991). Socratis et Socraticorum reliquiae (Vols. 1–4). Bibliopolis.
  15. Gonzalez, F.J. (2002). Socratic elenchus as constructive protreptic. In G.A. Scott (Ed.), Does Socrates have a method? Rethinking the elenchus in Plato’s dialogues and beyond (pp. 161–182). Pennsylvania State University Press.
  16. Hackforth, R. (1933). The composition of Plato’s Apology. Cambridge University Press.
  17. Hanfmann, G.M.A. (1951). Socrates and Christ. Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 60, 205–233.
  18. Janko, R. (2006). Socrates the freethinker. In S. Ahbel-Rappe and R. Kamtekar (Eds.), A companion to Socrates (pp. 48–62). Blackwell Publishing.
  19. Kahn, C.H. (1996). Plato and the Socratic dialogue: The philosophical use of a literary form. Cambridge University Press.
  20. Kraut, R. (2006). The examined life. In S. Ahbel-Rappe and R. Kamtekar (Eds.), A companion to Socrates (pp. 228–242). Blackwell Publishing.
  21. Lapatin, K. (2006). Picturing Socrates. In S. Ahbel-Rappe and R. Kamtekar (Eds.), A companion to Socrates (pp. 110–155). Blackwell Publishing.
  22. Leibowitz, D.M. (2010). The ironic defense of Socrates: Platoapostrophs Apology. Cambridge University Press.
  23. Long, A.A. (2006). How does Socrates’ divine sign communicate with him? In S. Ahbel-Rappe and R. Kamtekar (Eds.), A companion to Socrates (pp. 63–74). Blackwell Publishing.
  24. Morrison, D.R. (2000). Xenophon. In J. Brunschwig and G.E.R. Lloyd (Eds.), Greek thought: A guide to classical knowledge (pp. 775–792). Harvard University Press.
  25. Morrison, D.R. (2005). On the alleged historical reliability of Plato’s Apology. In R. Kamtekar (Ed.), Plato’s Euthyphro, Apology, and Crito: Critical essays (pp. 97–126). Rowman and Littlefield. (Reprinted from “On the alleged historical reliability of Plato’s Apology,” 2000, Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, 82(3), 235–265).
  26. Morrison, D.R. (Ed.). (2011). The Cambridge companion to Socrates. Cambridge University Press.
  27. Nails, D. (2006). The trial and death of Socrates. In S. Ahbel-Rappe and R. Kamtekar (Eds.), A companion to Socrates (pp. 5–20). Blackwell Publishing.
  28. Nehamas, A. (1992). What did Socrates teach and to whom did he teach it? The Review of Metaphysics, 46(2), 279–306.
  29. Prior, W.J. (2006). The Socratic problem. In H.H. Benson (Ed.), A companion to Plato (pp. 25–35). Blackwell Publishing.
  30. Rowe, C. (2006). Interpreting Plato. In H.H. Benson (Ed.), A companion to Plato (pp. 13–24). Blackwell Publishing.
  31. Schleiermacher, F. (1852a). Introduction to the Apology of Socrates. In W. Smith (Ed.), The Apology of Socrates, the Crito, and part of the Phaedo: With notes from Stallbaum, Schleiermacher’s introductions, a life of Socrates, and Schleiermacher’s essay on the worth of Socrates as a philosopher (2nd ed., pp. xi–xix). T. Walton and Maberly.
  32. Schleiermacher, F. (1852b). On the worth of Socrates as a philosopher (C. Thirlwall, Trans.). In W. Smith (Ed.), The Apology of Socrates, the Crito, and part of the Phaedo: With notes from Stallbaum, Schleiermacher’s introductions, a life of Socrates, and Schleiermacher’s essay on the worth of Socrates as a philosopher (2nd ed., pp. cxxix–clv). T. Walton and Maberly. (Original work published 1818).
  33. Slings, S.R. (1999). Plato: Clitophon. Cambridge University Press.
  34. Tarrant, H. (2006). Socratic method and Socratic truth. In S. Ahbel-Rappe and R. Kamtekar (Eds.), A companion to Socrates (pp. 254–272). Blackwell Publishing.
  35. Taylor, A.E. (1911). Varia Socratica: First series. James Parker and Company.
  36. Taylor, A.E. (1955). Plato: The man and his work (6th ed.). Methuen.
  37. Thesleff, H. (1982). Studies in Platonic chronology. Societas Scientiarum Fennica.
  38. Vander Waerdt, P. A. (1993). Socratic justice and self-sufficiency: The story of the Delphic oracle in Xenophon’s Apology of Socrates. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, 11, 1–48.
  39. Vlastos, G. (1971). The paradox of Socrates. In G. Vlastos (Ed.), The philosophy of Socrates: A collection of critical essays (pp. 1–21). Anchor Books.
  40. Vlastos, G. (1991). Socrates: Ironist and moral philosopher. Cornell University Press.
  41. Weiss, R. (2001). Virtue in the cave: Moral inquiry in Plato’s Meno. Oxford University Press.
  42. Weiss, R. (2006). Socrates: Seeker or preacher? In S. Ahbel-Rappe and R. Kamtekar (Eds.), A companion to Socrates (pp. 243–253). Blackwell Publishing.
  43. Xenophon. (1990). Conversations of Socrates (H. Tredennick, Trans.; R. Waterfield, Rev.). Penguin Books.