BMCR 2009.03.19, Marcelo D. Boeri, Apariencia y Realidad el Pensamiento

Marcelo D. Boeri, Apariencia y Realidad en el Pensamiento Griego.
Investigaciones sobre Aspectos Epistemolo/gicos, E/ticos y de Teori/a
de la Accio/n en Algunas Teori/as de la Antigueedad.  Buenos Aires:
Ediciones Colihue, 2007.  Pp. xii, 376.  ISBN 978-950-563-404-0.
$39.00 (pb).

Reviewed by Reyes Bertoli/n Cebria/n, The University of Calgary
([email protected])
Word count:  675 words
-------------------------------
To read a print-formatted version of this review, see
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2009/2009-03-19.html
To comment on this review, see
http://www.bmcreview.org/2009/03/20090319.html
-------------------------------

The main goal of Boeri's (B.) book is to show how some of the topics
that the ancient philosophers discussed can still be relevant in
contemporary philosophical discussions. The author claims in his
prologue that the distinction between history of philosophy and
philosophy is an artificial one and that any historian of philosophy is
somewhat of a philosopher himself. He also claims that scholars of
ancient philosophy are in a kind of no-man's land in between
contemporary philosophers and classicists. Since I am a classicist and
not a philosopher, I believe that this book is intended mostly for
other philosophers and students of philosophy at the graduate and
senior undergraduate level. B. does a good job explaining the doctrines
of Plato and Aristotle in great detail, but not in a manner that would
necessarily appeal to students in classics. This is evident already
through the bibliography: most of the works cited belong to other
scholars in ancient philosophy.

The title of the book might be a bit misleading. It is not about a
general discussion on the problems of appearance and reality, but only
as these concepts relate to the idea of good. Also, the book is not a
survey on all Greek philosophies, but focuses on Socrates and Plato in
the first part, while the second part is dedicated to Aristotle and the
third to the Stoics. Aristotle gets the lion's share with close to one
hundred and forty pages and Plato gets a hundred but all the Stoics are
explained in only fifty.

B. argues in the introduction that the opposition of the concepts
appearance and reality is already found in the ancient thinkers.
Appearance is thought of as an illusion in perception or an error in
the cognitive realm. There is no word for reality in ancient Greek.
Reality is "that what (truly) is". There is, consequently an
identification between reality, being, and truth. B.'s goal is to
explain whether the ancient philosophers considered truth only as a
theoretical criterion or also practical. In order to discuss the
practical side of truth, B. continues his analysis of "Good" from the
point of view of appearance and reality. In other words, just like
Socrates, B. is interested in the ethical aspect of appearance and
reality.

The first part of the book deals with Socrates and Plato, with no
distinction attempted. B. examines thoroughly passages in the Republic,
Laws, Gorgias, Timaeus, and Theatetus to establish Plato's criteria of
Good, the classification of goods and the idea of Good, as well as
Platonic epistemology. B.'s analysis is focused on primary texts.
Analysis of these sources by other philosophers or historians of
philosophy is rarely mentioned in the body of the text or in the
footnotes, although the comprehensive bibliography indicates that B. is
in fact familiar with other scholarship.

The second part of the book deals with Aristotle's understanding of
appearance and reality. Again, the author bases his hypothesis on the
study of primary sources, in this case mostly the Nicomachean Ethics.
B. points out at length how much Aristotle's ethics were indebted to
Socrates. Later, B.'s examination includes the perception theory and
the study of "passions".

The Aristotelian passions serve as a link to the third part of the book
on the Stoics. B. explains the passions as "apparent good" in Stoic
philosophy. B. first links Stoic ideas on the "real Good" to Socrates
before describing them in detail. This part is necessarily shorter
because sources on Stoic views are not as abundant as for Plato or
Aristotle.

The book can be read as three different units. It lacks a general
conclusion that would have brought together commonalities and
differences between the three studies. It is mostly about B.'s reading
of the ancient authors, or, as he calls it, "a critical dialogue with
the ancient philosophers". B. wanted to make the study of the ancient
philosophers relevant for today's philosophy, however, he established
only very few links with contemporary philosophers. The book remains a
personal interpretation of some aspects of Plato's, Aristotle's and
Stoic philosophies.