Platon „păsărarul” și „mânzul” Aristotel contra și pro Homer
Plato “the Fowler” and Aristotle “the Foal” against and for Homer

Summary/Abstract: I am talking in this text about Plato’s most controversial thesis in the Republic, namely the formal condemnation of the entire education based on the reading of the national poet of Greece. Plato, after crowning Homer with flowers, banishes him from the city and not because he was insensitive to the charm of Homeric epics, but because he is shocked by the false, ruthless ideas offered to the future warriors of the city through education, and Plato considers that art that imitates nature, in itself an imitation of Ideas, cannot lead to truth. On the other hand, Aristotle argues in Politics the following: poetry is much more chosen and philosophical than Plato believed, and Homer’s poetry does not simply imitate individuals, but creates types, that is, Ideas in the Platonic sense, it depicts the universal rather than the private. Where does Plato end up? In an ethical condemnation doubled by an ontological critique. The poet is an imitator, his productions are illusory, Homer is outlawed. The reconciliation of the poet with the philosopher falls to the successors, the first will be Aristotle with the theory of catharsis, which theory responds to the attacks against the emotional effects of poetry. A good connoisseur of Homer, Aristotle, through the theory of mimesis, restores the philosophical value of poetry. We are therefore talking about Plato as Homer’s adversary and about Homer’s defender, Aristotle, on a given theme: the relation between poetry and philosophy.

• Details
• Contents