St Andrews Research Repository

St Andrews University Home
View Item 
  •   St Andrews Research Repository
  • Classics (School of)
  • Classics
  • Classics Theses
  • View Item
  •   St Andrews Research Repository
  • Classics (School of)
  • Classics
  • Classics Theses
  • View Item
  •   St Andrews Research Repository
  • Classics (School of)
  • Classics
  • Classics Theses
  • View Item
  • Login
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Mind, emotion, and responsibility : studies in Homeric psychology

Thumbnail
View/Open
Thesis-J-Crofts-complete-version.pdf (1.578Mb)
Thesis-J-Crofts-complete-version.docx (655.6Kb)
Date
30/11/2022
Author
Crofts, Joshua Charles John
Supervisor
Halliwell, Stephen
Funder
Scottish Graduate School for Arts and Humanities (SGSAH)
Keywords
Responsibility
Shame
Guilt
Kant
Ruth Benedict
Bruno Snell
Eric Dodds
Arthur Adkins
Homeric psychology
Ought implies can
Metadata
Show full item record
Altmetrics Handle Statistics
Altmetrics DOI Statistics
Abstract
I examine several aspects of Homeric psychology, deploying a variety of theoretical approaches, whilst orienting my discussion around the ideas of three classical scholars: Bruno Snell, Eric Dodds, and Arthur Adkins. After a methodological and thematic prologue, chapter 1 discusses the work of Snell, especially his ‘Discovery of the Mind’, and how the radical and now unpopular ideas about the ‘Homeric mind’ expressed there might, in light of recent work within linguistics and an exploration of Snell’s intellectual antecedents, be provisionally and partly rehabilitated. Chapter 2 focuses on Dodds’ ‘The Greeks and the Irrational’ and its relationship to the anthropologist Ruth Benedict’s work, particularly vis-à-vis shame, and how adopting an alternative to the view that shame is necessarily a ‘social’ emotion might facilitate more complete readings of Homeric scenes in which it is implicated. Chapter 3 concerns Adkins’ ‘Merit and Responsibility’, exploring how Adkins’ erroneous perspectives on contemporary ethics encouraged his misreading of several Homeric scenes in which responsibility assessments are at issue. This concludes with a reading of ‘Agamemnon’s Apology’ within the ‘Iliad’, through a lens of responsibility tied to ‘aretaic appraisal’, rather than the (in)ability which Adkins privileged. The chapters are followed by an epilogue, in which a key theme connecting the chapters, especially 2 and 3, that of ‘agent-centredness’, touched upon throughout the thesis, is highlighted, and directions for future study proposed.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17630/sta/293
Type
Thesis, PhD Doctor of Philosophy
Collections
  • Classics Theses
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/10023/27041

Items in the St Andrews Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Advanced Search

Browse

All of RepositoryCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateNamesTitlesSubjectsClassificationTypeFunderThis CollectionBy Issue DateNamesTitlesSubjectsClassificationTypeFunder

My Account

Login

Open Access

To find out how you can benefit from open access to research, see our library web pages and Open Access blog. For open access help contact: openaccess@st-andrews.ac.uk.

Accessibility

Read our Accessibility statement.

How to submit research papers

The full text of research papers can be submitted to the repository via Pure, the University's research information system. For help see our guide: How to deposit in Pure.

Electronic thesis deposit

Help with deposit.

Repository help

For repository help contact: Digital-Repository@st-andrews.ac.uk.

Give Feedback

Cookie policy

This site may use cookies. Please see Terms and Conditions.

Usage statistics

COUNTER-compliant statistics on downloads from the repository are available from the IRUS-UK Service. Contact us for information.

© University of St Andrews Library

University of St Andrews is a charity registered in Scotland, No SC013532.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter