Ἀοιδός in an Ambiguous World. In search of ‘Hesiod’ through his perception of ἠήρ. With a contextual review of Hesiodic scholarship ancient and modern

My study domain includes, on the one hand, the presocratic sources (the doctrines of predecessors and contemporaries as well as the perceptible reality they observed), and, on the other hand, what could be called the "knowledge channels" (the epic didactic poems and the mutual communication of the so-called "maîtres de vérité” (Detienne)).

Within this domain, my object of study consists of the discourse / interpretation of the perception as a source of knowledge. Undoubtedly, the so-called ‘natural philosophers’ have drawn their knowledge to a significant extent from sensory perception. However, I’m highly intrigued by the fact that many statements, for instance about being and non-being, are not so much based on empirical findings but rather on reflections discursive (literary, theoretical speculative) representations of perceptible worlds, not just in metaphysical thinking, but also in the cultural, mythological and epic narrative traditions.

The works of Hesiodus and Plato both have a strong “janus” character. In other words, both are recipients in which the fruits of a closed tradition are gathered as a source of inspiration for the next generations.In this respect Hesiodus that is the mythological heritage, of Plato, the presocratic heritage.

My primary research question relates to the relationship between, on the one hand, empirical reality and, on the other hand, the pre-philosophical (i.c. Hesiodic) perception of reality as intellectual sources of Presocratic and Platonic discourse on world and humanity.

Hesiodus serves as a reference point, but exploratory reading will undoubtedly lead to a meaningful perspective and a focus that is manageable within this extremely broad field of study.