1G0xxeB

The Unbridled Tongue: Plato, Parrhesia, and Philosophy6 5The Unbridled Tongue:Plato, Parrhesia, and PhilosophyS oph i e B ou rg au ltUniversity of OttawaSophie.Bourgault@uottawa.caMy tongue has been galloping on and obviously I oughtto curb it constantly; I must keep a bridle in my mouthand not let myself be carried away by the argument.—Plato, LawsIs Karl Popper definitely passé in Plato studies? The temptation is great toanswer in the affirmative. Certainly, his controversial polemic The OpenSociety and Its Enemies (where Plato’s name, we will remember, is associatedwith totalitarianism) has been subject to numerous refutations since the1950s. 1 And yet, the ghost of Popper still seems to haunt North Americanpolitical science departments—as is suggested by the number of politicaltheorists who still feel the urge to wrangle with him over his account of Plato.For instance, it is partially in order to discredit Popper that Arlene Saxonhouse,in a fairly recent article, meticulously analyzes the narrative structureof Plato’s Republic. Based on the ambiguity and multidimensionality of this1Karl R. Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies, vol. 1 (Princeton: Princeton University Press,1966). For criticisms and assessments, see R. B. Levinson, In Defense of Plato (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1957); R. Bambrough, ed., Plato, Popper, and Politics: Some Contributions to aModern Controversy (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1967); R. Maurer, “De l’antiplatonisme politicophilosophiquemoderne,” in Contre Platon, vol. 2, Renverser le platonisme, ed. M. Dixsaut (Paris: Vrin,1995); J.-F. Pradeau, Platon, les démocrates et la démocratie (Naples: Bibliopolis, 2005).© 2015 Interpretation, Inc.