Abstract

An attempt to understand a problem fundamental to Plato's thought, and in a way which avoids the pitfalls of modern opinion, the author's expressed intention is to understand Plato as he understood himself. Though not indicated by the table of contents, her expository procedure is to present a sequential interpretation of the dialogues in relation to one another. As a result, the book does not relate in any systematic detail what might be the similarities and differences within the family of Platonic terms related to desire; horme, himeros, boulesthai, eros, epithymia, thymos, and philia. The author's procedure might be readily understandable insofar as the dialogue form requires contextual interpretation. But it is puzzling insofar as her reflections on the hermeneutic problem posed by the dialogue are limited to a brief footnote remark : "Ce n'est pas seulement en vertu de son génie littéraire que la forme s'est imposée à l'oeuvre, au sens de l'oeuvre; sans le recours au moindre artifice, les Dlalogues sont une éducation en train de se faire."