Philosophy in Dialogue

In an English-speaking world, the traditional Plato scholarship assumes that Platonic dialogue is simply a collection of arguments. Inevitably, problems arise. If Plato wants to present a series of arguments, why should he write a dialog instead of a paper? Some scholars who are concerned about this problem are experimenting with other more contextual methods of reading and writing. This anthology is the first choice of new ways pursued by various scholars. Therefore, it provides a new view on Plato and a suggestive view of Plato Scholarship as a philosophical historian's laboratory.

The articles gathered here examines important aspects of Plato's many ways, taking into account the dialogue between Thucydides and Homer, the story strategies and medical practices, images and metaphor. They provided amazing new research on in-depth research like the Republic and revealed their views on less-known conversations such as Cratylus and Philebus. With reference to thinkers such as Heidegger, Gadamer, Sartre, the writer places the Platonic dialogue in an inspiring historical context. Those proses should be reviewed in academic studies of Plato's "work" approach - and we should rethink how Plato's philosophical writing influences Plato's philosophy

Dialog philosophy Martin Buber (1878 - 1965) was a German theologian of the Jews. His classic monograph "I and You" (Bob, 1970) provides an attractive interpersonal philosophy that greatly influenced American literary psychology in the 1950s and 1960s. Buber explained that the reality would fall into two opposite areas. In the first real world, "I" treats "you" in the dialogue in the dialogue. In this developing relationship between me and you, the birth and development of mankind fully demonstrate that possibility. To Buber, human beings do not grow in dialogue, except in relationships.

The four related but clear concepts of dialogue are discussed in modern literature on this subject. One of them comes from Martin Bouver's philosophy of treating dialogue as a sort of interpersonal relationship. This tradition thinks that dialogue is fundamentally related to self development, understanding of opponents, and formation of human relations. The second represents dialogue complexity using human interaction. In this tradition, we believe that dialogue is direct face-to-face communication including various ritual rules. The third is about dialogue as a form of cultural knowledge. This tradition shows that we can use human discourse research to study dialogue. Finally, the fourth person understands the dialogue on understanding and interpretation of the text. This tradition sees dialogue as a method of thought and question. Knowledge arises from the process of position to ask questions