Plato by R. M. Hare, and: Aristotle by Jonathan Barnes (review)

BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS 177 R. M. HARE. Plato. Past Masters series. Oxford and New York, Oxford Universit'Yl>ress, 1982. Pp. 82. Cloth, ISBN 0-19-287586-8. Paper, ISBN 0-19-287585-X. JONATHAN BARNES. Aristotle. Past Masters series. Oxford and New York, Oxford University Press, 1982. Pp. 101. Cloth, ISBN 0-19-287582-5. Paper, ISBN 0-19-287581-7. Teachers of Classics at universities and in the high schools will greet these two slender, affordable and reliable introductory surveys with considerable satisfaction. There has been a real need for clear and concise general accounts of antiquity's greatest philosophers, aimed at the junior undergraduate or advanced high-school student, and these two books fill that need. No instructor need hesitate to use these books in courses on classical civilization or ancient philosophy, wherever the goal is to inform students and simultaneously to whet their appetites for more. Many books do the former, though few so well and none with such economy; and no book that I know of succeeds in the latter and equally important task. Both Hare and Barnes begin with the biography, setting the philosophers against their historical background. Hare provides a particularly vivid account of Plato's experience in Athenian life and politics as it shaped his thought and writing. The surviving works of Plato and Aristotle are so different in kind that they require different strategies. Hare begins with the central problems of knowledge and definition, moves on through dialectic to Plato's views on education, ethics, psychology and politics. At each stage he discusses Plato from a modern perspective, not assuming (as so many older books do) that readers have an antecedent familiarity with and sympathy for Plato's style of thought. This works well by and large, and the tendency to anachronism so common to such discussions is kept firmly under control. But it is hard to avoid another common failing which attends this kind of approach; there is, of necessity, a definite narrowness in Hare's selection of the modern perspectives which he uses to illuminate Plato's thought. Anyone who is deeply out of sympathy with the liberalism and empiricism of an Oxford philosophy don will sometimes be puzzled at Hare's choice of themes. For example, "objective prescriptivism" as a thesis in twentieth-century ethics, however clearly explained, is not necessarily the best way to get at the essentials of Plato's ethics. Hare, perhaps, has erred by defining his audience too narrowly. His discomfort with the religious side of Plato's thought and with his political authoritarianism is also apparent. This bias does not seriously affect the accuracy or fairness of the book, but it may limit slightly the number of readers Hare will convince to read Plato for themselves. But then, most people do not need much encouragement to sample Plato. But with other themes, Hare's choice of approach is excellent: the Meno is used to introduce Plato's epistemology and his discussion of eaucation and virtue. This dialogue is often read first, and rightly so. For it has the best balance of philosophical substance 178 BOOK REVIEW5/COMPTE5 RENDU5 and readability in Plato's corpus. As Hare shows. its problems are still problems. its interests are still interesting. The dialogue which best introduces the modern reader to Plato rightly takes pride of place in Hare's survey. Easing the non-philosopher into Aristotle is a difficult task; to accomplish this. Barnes concentrates on him as a man of science. a philosopher-scientist. This is the ideal perspective in which to present Aristotle to twentieth-century students. and by following this thread Barnes expertly guides his readers through a formidable range of material and problems. The control Barnes exercises over Aristotelian texts and scholarship is never obtrusive. but manifests itself in his confident and sensitive choice of themes. Aristotle is more challenging for the beginner than Plato. because of the immense range of his work and the form of the surviving treatises. Barnes' own obvious love for Aristotle makes the reader want to penetrate to the heart of this difficult material; yet he does not disguise the challenges which lie ahead (although one may...