روایت کسنوفونی از فلسفه سیاسی سقراطی: شرحی بر درباره تربیت کوروش

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار، پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی، تهران

10.22059/jpq.2022.322425.1007787

چکیده

اصلی‌ترین دستاورد نوشتاری کسنوفون در فلسفه سیاسی، تربیت کوروش است. اگر خاطرات در میان قطب سقراطی نوشتارهای کسنوفون در مرکز قرار داشته باشد، هسته اصلی قطب کوروشی نوشتارهای او، تربیت کوروش است. تربیت کوروش، به مانند جمهوری افلاطون، یک اثر تربیتی در معنای سقراطی آن و بدین اعتبار یک متن اصلی در سنت فلسفه‌ سیاسی سقراطی است. صورت زندگینامه‌نویسی این اثر در واقع ناشی از غرض تربیتی نویسنده‌ آن است که می‌خواهد با تمرکز بر افعال کوروش، خواننده را به پرسش از بهترین شیوه زندگی برای آدمی برانگیزد. اگر بپذیریم که خاطرات سقراط نیز صورتی از زندگینامه است، آنگاه به‌خوبی می‌توانیم آن را با تربیت کوروش که آن هم صورتی از زندگینامه است، مقایسه کنیم. یکی از اهداف اصلی پژوهش حاضر این است که به دو پرسش زیر پاسخ دهیم: 1. چگونه توصیف کسنوفون از کوروش به تجسم والاترین نمونه از شیوه‌ زندگی سقراطی تبدیل می‌شود؟ 2. چگونه کسنوفون وزن این والاترین نمونه از شیوه‌ زندگی سیاسی را در پرتو والاترین نمونه از شیوه‌ زندگی فلسفی، از حیث مدخلیت آن در رساندن آدمی به سعادت، می‌سنجد؟  در این مقاله تلاش شده تا نشان داده شود که کسنوفون با طرح مقایسه‌ شیوه‌ زندگی سقراط و شیوه‌ زندگی کوروش ، و با وجود تحسینی که در این اثر نسبت به کوروش وجود دارد، در نهایت از برتری شیوه‌ زندگی سقراطی (یا فلسفی) در برابر شیوه‌ زندگی کوروشی (یا سیاسی) دفاع می‌کند. این عمیق‌ترین لایه‌ تربیتی در فلسفه سیاسی کسنوفون است که در پس پشتِ نقاب تربیت سیاسی در قاموس کوروشی آن پنهان می‌شود. فهم این نکته مستلزم اتخاذ رویکردی خاص به متن این اثر است؛ رویکردی که بتواند از رهگذر جدی‌ گرفتن به‌مثابه‌ یک کل معنادار، غرض مؤلف را از لابه‌لای سطور آن فراچنگ آورد. به همین منظور، برای خواندن تربیت کوروش، از هرمنوتیک اشتراوسی بهره خواهیم گرفت.  

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Xenophontic Narrative of the Socratic Political Philosophy: A Commentary on The Education of Cyrus

نویسنده [English]

  • Shervin Moghimi Zanjani
Assistant Professor, Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

The Education of Cyrus is Xenophon’s magnum opus in political philosophy. If Memorabilia is in the center of his Socratic writings, then The Education of Cyrus is the main work in his portrayal of Cyrus. The Education of Cyrus, as Plato’s Republic, is an educational work in the Socratic sense of the word and hence an original text in the tradition of the Socratic political philosophy. The biographical form of this writing originates from the educational intention of his writer who, by concentrating on the Cyrus’s deeds, encourages the reader to take notice of this question: “what is the best way of life for human beings?” If we confirm that Memorabilia has a biographical form, then we would be able to compare it to The Education of Cyrus. The author attempts to show that Xenophon’s The Education of Cyrus contains a comparison between the Socratic way of life and the Cyrus’ way of life. In spite of showing his admiration for Cyrus nearly in the entire of that work, Xenophon ultimately defends the superiority of the Socratic (or philosophical) way of life as compared to Cyrus the Great’s (or political) way of life. This is the deepest educational layer in Xenophon’s political philosophy hidden behind the disguise of political education in his work on Cyrus. In order to better understand, we should take a distinct stance on the text itself as a totality whose every part serves the whole. By whole, we mean the intention of the writer; and this is the well-known approach innovated and applied by Leo Strauss who is the most eminent commentator of Xenophon’s work. Nevertheless, we should avoid the modern dogmatism in Xenophon’s scholarship which tends to depict him as a marginal or second-rate writer. As mentioned by Strauss, Xenophon “had the courage to clothe himself as an idiot and go through millennia that way— he’s the greatest con man I know.” According to Strauss, and his commentaries in Xenophon scholarship in recent decades, there is no reliable way to understand Xenophon’s intention in the Education of Cyrus, unless we use Strauss’s method of interpretation of Xenophon as a first-rank political philosopher. The Education of Cyrus might be read as a logographic text given that every part of the work “must be necessary for the whole; the place where each part occurs is the place where it is necessary that it should occur.” Using this method, the author has tried to show that—in spite of its pessimistic tone toward the political way of life—the concluding part of The Education of Cyrus is consistent with the great admiration of Cyrus as expressed by Xenophon in the most other parts of this work.  We examine whether Xenophon’s intention in The Education of Cyrus is to expose the education which Cyrus received or the one he did not. Thus, he emphasizes the contradiction in The Education of Cyrus as a whole, and simultaneously in the other Xenophon’s writing, especially his Memorabilia. To understand the two main Xenophontic scholarly work, and their positions in the hierarchy of Xenophon’s philosophical thought, it is necessary to compare the similarities, differences and particularly as they relate to the limitations in the Socratic and Cyrus’ ways of life, and to analyze how each has affected the other. The aim here was to show the true intention of Xenophon as one of the most authoritative Socratic political philosophers. In doing so, we understand Xenophon’s preferences for philosophical or political ways of life. 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Xenophon
  • Education of Cyrus
  • Socrates
  • political philosophy
  • way of life
  1. اشتراوس، لئو. (1394) شهر و انسان، ترجمه رسول نمازی. تهران: آگه.

    2. لُرد، کارنس. (1398) «ارسطو،» ترجمه محمدعلی معمارزاده، در لئو اشتراوس و جوزف کراپسی، تاریخ فلسفه سیاسی، ویراستاری فارسی، یاشار جیرانی و شروین مقیمی. تهران: پگاه روزگار نو.

         3.  Aristotle. (2011) Nicomachean Ethics, trans. Robert C. Bartlett and Susan D. Collins. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    1. Bloom, Allan. (1991) “Interpretative Essay,” in Plato, The Republic of Plato, trans. Allan Bloom. New York: Basic Books.
    2. Burnet, John. (1911) Plato’s Phaedo. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    3. Buzzetti, Eric. (2014) Xenophon The Socratic Prince: The Argument of the Anabasis of Cyrus. London: Palgrave Macmillan, Vol.2.
    4. Cicero, M. T. (1896) Cicero on Oratory and Orators, trans. J. S. Watson. London: George Bell and Sons.
    5. Dannhauser, Werner J. (1974) Nietzsche’s View of Socrates. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
    6. Gera Levine, Debrah. (1993) Xenophon’s Cyropaedia: Style, Genre, and Literary Technique. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    7. Higgins, William Edward. (1977) Xenophon The Athenian: The Problem of the Individual and the Society of the Polis. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
    8. Machiavelli, Niccolo. (1998) The Prince, trans. Harvey Mansfield. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
    9. Nadon, Christopher. (1996, June) “From Republic to Empire: Political Revolution and the Common Good in Xenophon’s Education of Cyrus,” The American Political Science Review 90, 2: 361-374, <DOI:10.2307/2082890>.
    10. Nietzsche, Friedrich. (1989) Ecce Homo, trans. Walter Kaufmann. New York: Vintage Books.
    11. (1984) Four Texts on Socrates: Plato’s Euthyphro, Apology, and Crito, and Aristophanes’ Clouds, Trans. Thomas G. West and Grace Starry West. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
    12. Rausmussen, Paul J. (2009) Excellence Unleashed: Machiavelli’s Critique of Xenophon and the Moral Foundation of Politics. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
    13. Strauss, Leo. (1958) Thoughts on Machiavelli. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
    14. Tatum, James. (1989) Xenophon’s Imperial Fiction: On The Education of Cyrus. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    15. (1914) Xenophon Cyropaedia, trans. Walter Miller, London: William Heinemann.
    16. (1994) Memorabilia, trans. Amy L. Bonnette. Ithaca, New York: Cornel University Press.
    17. Xenophon. (2001) The Education of Cyrus, trans. Wayne Ambler. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.