Group B: Greek and Roman Philosophy

Paper B1: Plato

Course Director: Dr M Hatzimichali

Aims and objectives

(This course is intended to be accessible to all students who have taken either Classical Tripos Part I, Paper 8, or the Plato element of Philosophy Tripos Part IB Paper 4, whether or not they know Greek.)

1. To give an understanding of the way Plato’s thought develops from his middle-period to his later dialogues, particularly in metaphysics and epistemology and in his conceptions of philosophical method.
2. To give a detailed understanding, through close study of a prescribed dialogue, of (i) some particular area or areas of Plato’s philosophy; (ii) Plato’s conception or conceptions of philosophical method as evidenced by the prescribed work; (iii) his use or uses of the dialogue form.
3. To encourage students both to deepen their knowledge of Plato’s writings and to engage in sustained critical dialogue with them.
4. To encourage students to be alert, not only to interconnections between Plato’s ideas, but also to their intellectual context.
5. To encourage students to develop their own powers of philosophical analysis and argument.

Scope and structure of the examination paper 2025–26

There will be two sections to the paper. Section A will contain questions on the set text, which is the Theaetetus.

Section B will contain questions on the following topics as pursued in Platonic dialogues other than the Theaetetus, notably the Republic, the Parmenides Part I, the Sophist, and the Timaeus.

1. Sophistry, philosophy, dialectic
2. Knowledge, forms and explanation
3. Falsehood
4. Becoming like god

Candidates will be required to answer three questions, at least one from each section.

The questions will be so formulated as to be answerable without knowledge of Greek, but those with Greek will be rewarded for demonstrating appropriate knowledge of the original text.

(Supervisions for this course are not centrally organized. Your director of studies will arrange for a supervisor. A typical supervision pattern is: two on the set text, two on topics from section b, and one revision session probably focused on the set text.)

In 2026-27 this paper will be replaced by a paper on ' Plato The Republic'.

Course descriptions

What is knowledge? If anything goes, and all opinions are equally true, what about the opinion that not all opinions are equally true?  You can’t touch what isn’t there; so how can you believe in something that isn’t real? These are among the questions that Socrates and his interlocutors debate in this literary and philosophical classic.

Read the text in advance, and bring a copy to the lectures. Recommended:

Greek text, in vol. 1 of the Oxford Classical Text of Plato, edited by E.A. Duke and others (Oxford 1995).

Translations/Commentaries

Burnyeat, M.F. (1980), The Theaetetus of Plato (translation preceded by comprehensive introduction)

McDowell, J., (1973) Plato’s Theaetetus, Oxford: The Clarendon Plato Series (translation with full commentary)

 Further reading, and analytic handouts, will be provided at the lectures.

This course traces central questions in Plato’s metaphysics and epistemology, which are intricately bound up with his ethics and politics, as knowledge of the highest metaphysical principles is the main qualification for ruling in the Republic. We will briefly review the Theory of Forms of the ‘middle period’ dialogues, asking also how the philosopher comes to know them. We will then see how Plato himself raises puzzles that are potentially very damaging to his own theory in the Parmenides. Finally, we will explore the new metaphysical avenues that are opened up in the Timaeus and Sophist, with the introduction of a creator-god and the ever-combining Greatest Kinds respectively. We will be inquiring into the extent to which these dialogues can be read as responding to puzzles about the Theory of Forms, and also into how they relate to the puzzles raised into Theaetetus set text.

Use the OCT for the Greek text; good translations of all the dialogues are available in the one-volume edition edited by J. Cooper, Plato, Complete Works (Hackett 1997). Suitable preparatory reading includes G. Fine (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Plato (2008), esp. chapters 1-3, 7-10, 16-19. Further reading will be supplied at the lectures.

Paper B2: Aristotle on Wisdom and First Philosophy

Course Director: Dr L Castelli

Aims and objectives

(This course is intended to be accessible to all Part II students in the Classics Tripos and the Philosophy Tripos, regardless of their knowledge of Greek, and regardless of what other papers they have taken in Part IB or are taking in Part II.)

1. To provide an understanding of Aristotle’s perspective, in its historical and cultural context, on basic philosophical questions, such as the nature and limits of human knowledge and rationality, the relation between understanding the world and understanding human nature, the value of theoretical and practical knowledge.
2. To enable students to engage critically with a series of central philosophical works, to draw connections and contrasts between their diverse treatment of human nature, rational excellence, knowledge, the soul, natural substances. 
3. To encourage students to evaluate critically, and understand historically, Aristotle’s views and arguments on specific issues.
4. To encourage students to develop their facility with philosophical analysis and argument.

Scope and structure of the examination paper 2025-26

The three-hour paper will contain twelve to fifteen essay questions on the topics covered in lectures, classes and supervisions. Candidates are required to answer three questions.

Questions will be formulated so as to be answerable without knowledge of Greek or Latin.

(Supervisions for this course will be centrally organised for students taking the classical tripos whose directors of studies consent to the arrangement.)

In 2026-27 the scope and structure of the examination paper will remain unchanged.

Course description

‘All human beings naturally yearn for knowledge.’ This statement, opening what we read as Aristotle’s Metaphysics, can be taken as emblematic of Aristotle’s views on human nature: human beings are naturally capable of and striving for the rational understanding of the world and their place in it. But what does that natural human yearning for knowledge exactly amount to? Where does the confidence that we can reason things out, about the world and ourselves, come from? And, even if we concede that all human beings have a natural capacity for understanding how things are, and are at least partially successful in acting on that knowledge, is better knowledge of the world supposed to make us better people? If so, what is it that we are supposed to figure out about the world if we want to be excellent human beings and live the best life we can live? Do we need to know anything about human nature in order to live a good life? Do we need an encompassing understanding of our place as humans in the world in order to understand human nature?

In this course, we shall explore the way in which Aristotle understands these questions and provides his own answers. As we shall see, Aristotle’s approach to these issues cuts across various areas of his philosophy, including his views on natural substances and living beings; on the nature of the soul and, in particular, of the human soul and its activities; on the forms of excellence that reason, theoretical and practical, can take; on the nature and structure of knowledge, and on the specific kind of knowledge that, most of all, is characteristic of what Aristotle calls ‘first philosophy’, i.e. the knowledge of the first causes and principles of all things; and (last but not least) on the nature and activity of divine entities in the cosmos.

Familiarity with Aristotle’s philosophy and with ancient Greek may be advantages but are not required.

Preparatory reading list:

There are several translations of Aristotle’s works. A complete translation can be found in:

J. Barnes (ed.), The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation, 2 vols., Princeton 1998.

Key texts for this course will be Aristotle’s Metaphysics (in particular, books I, VII-IX and XII); Nicomachean Ethics (in particular, books I, VI and X); Posterior Analytics (Book I chs. 1-3, and Book II chs. 1-2). You are welcome to start to acquaint yourself with all these texts, especially with Metaphysics books I and XII, and Nicomachean Ethics books VI and X.

Helpful introductory reading can be found in:

• Anagnostopoulos, G. (ed.), A Companion to Aristotle, Wiley-Blackwell 2009 (Chapters 1, 2, 4, 8-14, 17, 18, 21, 22, 26).
• Barnes, J., Aristotle: A Very Short Introduction, OUP 2000.
• Barnes, J. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Aristotle, CUP 1995 (Chapters 1, 3-7).
• Cooper, J., Reason and Human Good in Aristotle, Harvard UP 1975.
• Frede, M. & Striker, G. (eds.), Rationality in Greek Thought, OUP 1996.
• Lear, J., Aristotle. The Desire to Understand, CUP 1988.
• Polansky, Ronald (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2014 (Chapters 9 and 10). 
• Ross, W.D., Aristotle, Routledge 1995 (6th edition).
• Shields, Ch. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Aristotle, OUP 2012 (Chapters 1-4, 14-17).

  Paper B3: Greek and Roman Philosophers on Beauty

  Course Director: Dr F Sheffield

  Aims and objectives

  (This course is intended to be accessible to all Part II students, whether in the Classics or in the Philosophy Faculty, regardless of their knowledge of Greek and Latin, and regardless of what other papers they have taken in Part IB or are taking in Part II.)

  1. To provide an understanding of ancient Greek and Roman philosophical theories and arguments about the nature and value of beauty, and to explore the ways in which such theories are applied in their philosophies beyond the narrowly 'aesthetic'.
  2. To enable students to engage critically with a series of central philosophical works, to draw connections and contrasts between their diverse treatment of beauty and to consider how this is informed by more fundamental philosophical differences between various schools of thought.
  3. To encourage students to evaluate critically, and understand historically, various accounts of beauty.
  4. To encourage students to develop their facility with philosophical analysis and argument.

  Scope and structure of the examination paper 2025-26

  The three-hour paper will contain twelve to fifteen essay questions on topics covered in lectures, classes and supervisions. Candidates are required to answer three questions.

  Questions will be formulated so as to be answerable without knowledge of Greek or Latin.

  (Supervisions for this course are not centrally organised. Your Directors of Studies will arrange for a supervisor.)

  In 2026-27 this paper will be replaced by a paper on 'Ancient Scepticism'.

  Course description

  GREEK AND ROMAN PHILOSOPHERS ON BEAUTY

  DR F SHEFFIELD DR L CASTELLI PROF. J WARREN (14 L: Michaelmas, 10 L: Lent)

  Beauty can be seen in persons, objects, ideas, nature, and even in propositions and proofs; but what is beauty? The nature of beauty is a central question for many Greek and Roman philosophers. The concept of beauty is not only fundamental to what we would call ‘aesthetics’, but was also seen as a more wide ranging and fundamental value, alongside goodness and truth. Its nature, however, was (and still is) contested. Is beauty a real, objective, property, or is it merely in the eye of the beholder?

  Is the description of such diverse items as beautiful just a loose association, or is there some single property that such various things display? Are judgements of beauty merely the expression of an approving attitude, or can they be subject to rational reflection and development? What state of mind does the judgement of something as beautiful express? What reasons are given by those philosophers who defend a realist approach to beauty, or to those who think beauty is a subjective psychological response, or a matter of social convention? If beauty is not an objective reality, is there any rational basis for our judgments of beauty? Can one person’s judgement be better than another’s, or improve over time? Why are human beings so responsive to beauty and why does it matter to us? For many thinkers beauty is a fundamental value, though it is less clear what sort of value it is. Beauty is sometimes associated with goodness and truth, but this becomes questionable if the allure of beauty is misleading. If beauty is related to a thing’s appearance, can we be sure that it will lead to being and truth?

  In this course we shall explore the answers given to these and other questions by a range of Greek and Roman philosophers. The course will explore theories of beauty including those in art, but go beyond what we now call ‘aesthetics’ to accommodate the range of items philosophers considered in their reflections on beauty, including the beauty of virtuous action, wisdom, mathematics, and even the cosmos itself. No prior knowledge of Greek or Roman philosophy, or Latin and Greek, is required to take this paper.

  Introductory Reading

  Brand, P.Z., (2000), “Introduction” in Beauty Matters, ed. Brand, P.Z., pp. 1-24

  Kirwan, J., (1999) Beauty (Manchester)

  Konstan, D.,(2014), Beauty: The Fortunes of an Ancient Greek Idea (Oxford)

  Scruton, R., (2009), Beauty (Oxford)