BERNARD FREYDBERGout,” “demonstrate,” and also “prove.” However, as we have seen in the
Phaedrus, the great myth has been called an ajpovdeixi~ that would gain
the trust of the wise (sofoi~) but not of the clever (deinoi~); and citing
yet another quality of the myth that may sound paradoxical to our mod-
ern ears, there are a number of claims to its truth within it (for example,
245c4, 247c5 – 6).^24
How can we understand this peculiar notion of aΔpovdeixi~? I sug-
gest that we understand it as showing forth the uJpovnoia of the poetic inspira-
tion by means of showing forth the inspiration that belongs to philosophy with its
own uJpovnoia. Philosophical ajpovdeixi~, then, is an interpretive doubling,
not a formal proof at all. Its way is the way of inspired questioning explo-
ration. Truth is, in the great Heideggerian interpretation of the Greek
word aj-lhvqeia, un-forgottenness, un-hiddenness.
The Myth of Er, which ends the Republic, recalls two other Homeric
images. Er, who is not ΔAlkivnou (literally “strong of mind,” a pun on the
name of king A lkinoös in the Odyssey) but rather ajlkivmou (strong), is the
only human who returns to earth after dying, that is, crossing the river
Lhvqh (forgetfulness) and descending into Hades. In the course of his
journey he sees Odysseus, who renounces his former life governed by
the love of honor, choosing instead the life of “a private man who minds
his own business” (Republic 620c6– 7). I suggest that this “myth within
the myth” exemplifi es one key method—inspired hyponoetic doubling,
or, if that formulation sounds too technical, “two going together”—that
Plato has Socrates use in order to glean the genuine philosophical con-
tent for his readers. The ujpovnoia of Odysseus’ mindful homecoming is
precisely the choice in this life of a person who, like Socrates, minds his
own business. This is one key feature of the “wily” mevqodo~ with which
Plato, with the poetry he loves, draws us into philosophy.
Notes
- For translations I generally consulted Plato: Complete Works, ed. John M.
Cooper (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1997) as my initial contact; and Platonis Opera,
ed. John Burnet (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968) to supply the Greek
in accordance with which I made my revisions. On occasion I consulted other
translations as well, as indicated in the notes. For my Homer translations, Latti-
more served as my only fi rst contact, and Homeri Opera, ed. David B. Monro and
Thomas W. Allen (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1966) supplied the Greek.
Thanks to all of the above. Responsibility is mine alone.
This particular phrase (Sokravtou~... kalou' kai nevou gegonovto~) is from
the Second Letter (314c2– 4), the authenticity of which is disputed by some. I em-
ploy it for two reasons: (1) because of the eloquent way it speaks to the issue of