Questions regarding Philosophical Anthropology - 1st semester


a) Acquire a high level of knowledge in the field of Philosophical Anthropology and in particular a detailed knowledge of the fundamental concepts and of the history of Philosophical Anthropology, of its methodological and doctrinal controversies and of its interlinking with other branches of philosophy and science.

b) Acquire detailed knowledge of the fundamental texts in the field of Philosophical Anthropology, with a mastering of past interpretations and of the current state of research.

c) Acquire a high ability to analyse, compare, criticise and use anthropological concepts, and also to independently discuss problems and doctrinal views in the field of Philosophical Anthropology.

d) Acquire the ability to carry out research work under supervision in this field that meets high scientific quality standards.

e) Acquire the ability to carry out independent research in this area.

General characterization





Responsible teacher

Filipe Nobre Faria, Mário Jorge Carvalho, Susana Cadilha


Weekly - 3 letivas + 1 tutorial

Total - Available soon

Teaching language



Not applicable


Burnet, I. (Ed.) (1905). Platonis Opera, Tomus I. Oxonii.
Duke, E. A./Hicken, W. F. et al. (Ed.) (1995). Platonis Opera, Tomus I,. Oxonii.
Campbell, L. (Ed.) (1883). The Theaetetusof Plato. Oxford.
Diès, A. (Ed.) (1923). Platon Théétète. Paris.
Cornford, F. M. D. (1935). Plato’s Theory of Knowledge. The ‘Theaetetus’ and the ‘Sophist’ of Plato. London.
Fowler, H. N. (Ed.) (1967). Theaetetus and Sophist (Loeb Classical Library). London/Cambridge (Mass.).
Macdowell, J. H. (Ed.) (1973). Plato Theaetetus. Oxford.
Narcy, M. (Ed.) 1994. Platon Théétète, traduction inédite, introduction et notes. Paris.
Valgimigli, M. (Ed.) (1999). Platone Teeteto. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
Levett, M. J./Burnyeat, M. (Ed.) (1990). The Theaetetus of Plato. Indianapolis/Cambridge.
Rowe, C. (Ed.) (2015). Plato Theaetetus and Sophist. Cambridge.
Ferrari, F. (Ed.) (2011). Platone Teeteto. Milano.
Ambuel, D. (Ed.) (2015). Turtles all the Way Down: On Plato’s Theaetetus. A Commentary and Translation. Sankt Augustin.

Teaching method

This curricular unit has a theoretical-practical character.
Seminar-oriented classes.
Reading and interpretation of and commentary on Plato’s Phaedrus. Analysis and discussion both of interpretive (including syntactic and semantic) issues and related philosophical questions and concepts.
The teaching methodology combines: a) a thorough interpretation of Plato’s Phaedrus (of its different components, of their connection both with each other and with the rest of the corpus platonicum) b) a theoretical analysis of philosophical problems, and c) a discussion of alternative views, objections, counter-examples, etc.

Evaluation method

Individual appraisal. Each student will have to present a research paper (of about 20 pages) on a topic individually agreed upon with the Lecturer and then discuss this paper with the latter. This counts for 3/4 of final marks. Class participation (participation in the discussion) counts for 1/4 of final marks.

Subject matter

In the mirror of the Phaedrus
Mirrors provide a chance to overcome some of the natural limitations of vision. In particular, they provide a chance to see something which otherwise would remain completely out of sight and in this sense is the farthest object, namely: oneself.
Plato’s Phaedrus holds a metaphorical mirror to us, in which we can see blind spots viz. things outside our normal “field of vision” – and in particular a metaphorical mirror in which we can see ourselves reflected and discover blind spots in our own awareness of self and others
But on the other hand, Plato’s Phaedrus also resembles a puzzle – and reading it (trying to make sense of its many components) is like having to piece together a very complex jigsaw. In short, the Phaedrus is much like a “jigsaw mirror”. In order to “use” this mirror or to see oneself in it one must exert oneself to put the pieces together. This effort is what this seminar is all about.