Talk:The Republic (dialogue of Plato)

Title

Good start! I think the CZ rules suggest making the title one word: "Republic" (Plato did not use "the") as used by the Stanford Encyclopedia at [1] Richard Jensen 12:44, 31 March 2008 (CDT)

They refer to it as "Plato's Republic" in the body of the text, but the title of the article is "Plato's Ethics and Politics in The Republic". I've generally heard it referred to as "The Republic", too. I just checked, and my Jowett of Plato gives it as "The Republic", whereas it gives others as just the single word, e.g. "Euthypro", "Crito", etc. (For me, Jowett's The Man - whatever he says goes!) These Classic books are of course a bit of a problem, since the concept of titles didn't even exist back in their day, IIRC. J. Noel Chiappa 14:25, 31 March 2008 (CDT)

two poinbts. In recent years a [clear majority of scholars, as shown here, drop "the"; also the CZ rules recommend against "the" whenever possible, which is the case here. Plato did not use "the" (it's not part of GreekRichard Jensen 14:32, 31 March 2008 (CDT)

Seems sensible. I am not particularly bothered either way. Wikipedia titles theirs "Plato's Republic", which I'm not keen on, but I'm not keen on simply "Republic". That said, consider me disinterested. --Tom Morris 14:38, 31 March 2008 (CDT)

Well, we can't move it to Republic, because that ought to be either i) about the political construct, or ii) a disambiguation page.

Oh, and if I recall my classic Greek correctly (only took it for one term, unlike Latin, which I suffered through for several years :-), it does have the definite article; "'Oi polloi" means "the people". J. Noel Chiappa 14:52, 31 March 2008 (CDT)

Speaking as a philosopher, not as Editor-in-Chief, I think the article would best be placed at The Republic of Plato (a very common name for it) or Plato's Republic (which is fine), or Republic (dialogue of Plato) (see below). Obviously, the article can't live at Republic, because we do (or will) have an article titled republic, concerning the concept of republics generally. While the phrase "the Republic" is often used by philosophers to refer to the dialogue (we refer to other dialogues in the same way, the Timaeus, the Sophist, perhaps as shorthand for "the X of Plato), the phrase itself does not really convey the subject of our article clearly enough. This isn't because anyone who knows about the Republic will confuse the topic of this article with any other work called "the Republic," but because those who need the article are best instructed from the title itself that it is about a work of Plato. There are other instances of titles that are "disambiguated" not because they are apt to be confused with anything else, but because we want the topic of the article to be clearer--I can't think of any other examples off hand, but I know I've seen many.

Naming articles is tricky business, and this is no exception. In this case, the best way forward might be to think of sets of articles. How should we be naming works of philosophy, and Plato's dialogues, in particular? I'm inclined to think that the best way might be to use Dialogue Name (dialogue of Plato), e.g., Sophist (dialogue of Plato), Euthyphro (dialogue of Plato), etc. If we use Plato's Republic, parallelism would suggest that we title other articles Plato's Sophist and Plato's Euthyphro. But as far as I recall, those dialogues are not often referred to that way. "Plato's Republic" is in currency because we often want to say which republic we're referring to--the imaginary one described by Plato, or the book about that republic. There is no similar reason to speak of "Plato's Euthyphro," etc.

Yes, of course Greek has definite articles, but there is no definite article in the name of the dialogue. --Larry Sanger 15:02, 31 March 2008 (CDT)