@article{oai:glim-re.repo.nii.ac.jp:00000799,
 author = {小島, 和男 and Kojima, Kazuo},
 issue = {32},
 journal = {哲学会誌, Annual of the Philosophical Society, Gakushuin University},
 month = {May},
 note = {application/pdf, This　article　treats　Plato’s　Phaed∂．　In　Phaedo，　Plato　makes　Socrates prove　the　immortality　of　the　soul　four　times．　But　it　is　possible　to　read　it from　the　text　that　all　of．　the　four　proofs　are　imperfect　and　even　the characters，　Socrates　and　his　inner　circle　of　friends，　also　do　not　think　that the　proofs　are　perfect．　Then，　why　are　they　the　proofs？　From　consideration on　77d　ff．，　it　is　understood　that　all　of　the　four　proofs　are，　judging　from　the viewpoint　of　role，　nlust　be　on　par　with　Mythos　and　they　are　only　the charms．　And　the　immortality　of　the　soul　is　not　the　oblect　of　the　inquiry， but　the　conclusion　that　has　already　been　decided，　and　the　hope　which　we have　to　bet　on．　Socrates　in　Plato’s　Phaedo　thought　about　the　immortality of　the　soul　like　that．　Moreover，　because　Plato　wrote　the　work　Phaedo， Plato’s　intention　might　be　able　to　be　read　from　the　assumption　that　the work．Phaedo　per　se　can　be　one　of　the　charms．　If　we　were　able　to　think that　Plato　also，　by　writing　the　work　Phaedo，　was　singing　charms　and trying　to　persuade　the　immortality　of．the　soul　to　himself，　we　could　think that　Plato　was　able　to　be　heartily　agreement　with　such　a　way　of　life　of Socrates　in　this　work，　such　a　way　to　live　singing　charms　and　trying　to persuade　the　immortality　of　the　soul　to　himself。　But，　based　on　the　form that　one　of　the　characters　Phaedo　reports　and　the　declaration　of　Plato’s absence，　we　should　guess　better　that　Plato　put　distance　between　himself and　such　Socrates　and　Socrates　itself　was　the　object　of　the　inquiry　for Plato．, 研究論文(Article)},
 pages = {1--21},
 title = {プラトンは 「魅惑の歌」 を歌っているか?},
 year = {2008},
 yomi = {コジマ, カズオ}
}