Franco Trabattoni, Essays on Plato's Epistemology

336 Pages·2016·1.729 MB·English

by  Plato, Trabattoni, Franco

ESSAYSONPLATO’SEPISTEMOLOGY
ANCIENTANDMEDIEVALPHILOSOPHY
DEWULF-MANSIONCENTRE
SeriesI
LIII
SeriesEditors
RussellL.Friedman
JanOpsomer
CarlosSteel
GerdVanRiel
AdvisoryBoard
BradInwood,UniversityofToronto,Canada
JillKraye,TheWarburgInstitute,London,UnitedKingdom
JohnMarenbon,UniversityofCambridge,UnitedKingdom
LodiNauta,UniversityofGroningen,TheNetherlands
TimothyNoone,TheCatholicUniversityofAmerica,USA
RobertPasnau,UniversityofColoradoatBoulder,USA
MartinPickavé,UniversityofToronto,Canada
PasqualePorro,UniversitàdegliStudidiBari,Italy
GeertRoskam,KULeuven,Belgium
The“DeWulf-MansionCentre”isaresearchcentreforAncient,Medieval,andRenaissance
philosophyattheInstituteofPhilosophyoftheKULeuven,
KardinaalMercierplein,2,B-3000Leuven(Belgium).
Ithoststheinternationalproject“Aristoteleslatinus”and
publishesthe“Operaomnia”ofHenryofGhentandthe“OperaPhilosophicaetTheologica”
ofFrancisofMarchia.
ESSAYS ON PLATO’S EPISTEMOLOGY
FrancoTrabattoni
LEUVENUNIVERSITYPRESS
©2016byDeWulf-Mansioncentrum–DeWulf-MansionCentre
LeuvenUniversityPress/PressesUniversitairesdeLouvain/
UniversitairePersLeuven
Minderbroedersstraat4,B-3000Leuven(Belgium)
Allrightsreserved.Exceptinthosecasesexpresslydeterminedbylaw,nopartofthis
publicationmaybemultiplied,savedinanautomateddatafileormadepublicinanyway
whatsoeverwithouttheexpresspriorwrittenconsentofthepublishers.
ISBN9789462700598
D/2016/1869/2
NUR:732
ToGiuliana,GiovanniandAnna


Introduction 

ThoughtasInnerDialogue(Theaet.e–a) 

Logosanddoxa:TheMeaningoftheRefutationoftheThirdDefinition
of EpistêmêintheTheaetetus 

Theaetetusd–c:TruthwithoutCertainty 

FoundationalismorCoherentism?OntheThirdDefinitionof Epistêmê
intheTheaetetus 

WhatistheMeaningofPlato’sTheaetetus?SomeRemarksonaNew
AnnotatedTranslationoftheDialogue 

DavidSedley’sTheaetetus 

The“VirtuousCircle”ofLanguage.OntheMeaningofPlato’sCratylus 

TheKnowledgeofthePhilosopher 

WhatRoleDotheMathematicalSciencesPlayintheMetaphorofthe
Line? 

Socrates’ErrorintheParmenides 
 

OntheDistinguishingFeaturesofPlato’s“Metaphysics”(Startingfrom
theParmenides) 

IsThereSuchaThingasa“PlatonicTheoryoftheIdeas”Accordingto
Aristotle? 

TheUnityofVirtue,Self-Predicationandthe“ThirdMan”inProtagoras
e–a 

Plato:Philosophy,PoliticsandKnowledge.AnOverview 
Bibliography 
Index 

ApassagefromtheTimaeus,oneextensivelyquotedwithinthePlatonictradition
(a),maybeseentoeffectivelyencapsulatePlato’sphilosophyfromanontologi-
calasmuchasepistemologicalperspective:therearetwokindsofreality,one
eternal,invisibleandimmobile,theotherever-changing,visibleandmobile;and
thesecorrespondtotwomodesofknowledge,“intellectionaccompaniedbylogos”
and“opinionconjoinedwithsense-perceptiondevoidoflogos”.Byexamining
otherPlatonicworks,however,wesoonrealisethatwhilethisoutlinemaybe
reliableontheontologicallevel(thepresenceofanyintermediatemathematical
entitiesinPlatonicontologywouldnotaffectitsdualisticnature,sincethese
entitieswouldstillbesituatedinthesphereoftheintelligible),itisfarlessreliable
ontheepistemologicallevel.Whatengenderssomedoubtsisthenatureoflogos.
InthepassagefromtheTimaeusinquestion,logosisonlyfullyattributedto
noesis,whereasdoxaisonlythereflectionofanalogosperception.Yetelsewhere
(Theaetetus,Sophist,Philebus)Platodrawsaverycloselinkbetweenlogosand
doxa:theknowledgefoundedonlogosinheritstheintrinsicfallibilityofdoxa,to
whichlogosisconnected,therebyconsiderablyalteringtheclear-cutepistemo-
logicaldualismoutlinedinthepassagefromtheTimaeus.Iflogosisfallibleby
nature(aswereadinapassagefromtheSeventhLetter¹),whatkindofknowledge
canmanactuallyattain?Twopossibilitiesemergehere.IfwebelievethatPlato
grantsmanthepossibilitytoattaincertainknowledgeofreality(whichofcourse
meansofintelligiblenatureaccordingtothephilosopher),wecaneitherattempt
todemonstratethatmanhasaccesstoakindofintuitiveknowledgehigherthan
theoneensuredbylogos,orwecanattempttodemonstratethattheconnections
betweenlogosanddoxainPlatoareonlysporadicandunessential,sothatit
isindeedpossibletofindcertainandinfalliblelogoi(possiblytobeidentified
withdefinitions).Alternatively–andthisisthehypothesisupheldinthepresent
book–wemustadmitthataccordingtoPlatohumanbeings,preciselybyvirtue
oftheirbeingconfinedwithintherealmoflogosanddoxa,havenoaccessto
certainanddefinitiveknowledgeinthislife.
ThesecondhypothesisisnottantamounttoclaimingthataccordingtoPlato
philosophycannotattainanydegreeoftruthatallormakeanyprogresstowards
truth;lessstilldoesitimplythatPlatowasascepticphilosopher.Rather,itmeans
acknowledgingthefactthatwell-foundeddoubtsandobjectionsarealways
possible,andhencethattruthcanonlyeverbegraspedinapartial,approximate
andincompleteway.Thecrucialassumptionbehindareadingofthissort,which
¹OntheSeventhLetterseech.,n..
 
aimstoidentifyaguidingthreadforPlato’sphilosophyasawhole,isarealist
interpretationofPlato’smetaphysics(i.e.theTwoWorldsTheory)anddoctrineof
recollection.Whilethisframeofreferencemayseemcumbersome(especiallyin
theeyesofreadersapproachingPlato’swritingwithamodernsensitivity),inmy
viewitcannotberemovedwithoutjeopardisingourcapacitytounderstandPlato’s
thought.Indeed,ontheonehandthemetaphysicalframeworkprovidesasolid
groundingintruth,enablingmantoconfidentlypursuethetaskofdiscovering
andinterpretingreality;ontheotherhand,itexplainswhythistaskisafarfrom
straightforwardoneinpractice:whyitisactuallyaroughandwindingpathladen
withobstacles.Itexplainswhy,despitehavingtheimpressionoflivinginaworld
markedbyaclear-cutdistinctionbetweenrightandwrong,betweentrueand
false,betweenwhatworksandwhatdoesnot,manisnotcapableofproducing
unconditionalandirrefutabletruthstowhicheveryonemustbow.Thereason
forthisapparentambiguityliespreciselyinreminiscence,whichistosaythe
factthattruthisonlyaccessibleinadirect,evidentandthereforeindisputable
waytothegodsandthedisembodiedsoul.Embodiedsouls,bycontrast,can
onlydrawupontheirmemoriesandtheendlessrangeofdifferentlogoibywhich
theystrivetocorrectlydescribeabygonevision.Thepursuitoftruth,forPlato,
maythereforebeseenasanattempttofindtheunityoraccordance(homologia)
betweenlogoithatcomesclosesttothatpre-logicalunity(thedirectintuitionof
truth)whichoriginallyspawnedthemultiplicityoflogoi.
TheinterpretativeframeworkjustoutlinedsumsuptheoverallviewofPlato’s
thoughtIhaveacquiredeversincethefirstbookIdevotedtothephilosopher.²
Thecollectionofstudiespresentedinthisvolume–previouslypublishedessays
thathavebeensubstantiallyrevised³–constitutesafurtherinvestigationofthe
²Trabattoni().SinceIsupposethattheimageofPlatoIdrawinthebookcould
appeartomanyreaderssomehowunusualandodd,Iwouldliketomentionhere–in
noparticularorder–variousscholarsIfeelparticularlyintunewith(and,nodoubt,I
amforgettingmanyothers):S.Rosen,K.Sayre,F.Gonzalez,D.Hyland,D.Roochnik,
Ch.Griswold,E.Heitsch,R.Polansky,P.Stemmer,Ch.Rowe,M.Dixsaut,G.Casertano,
W.Watson,R.Barney,A.Capra,G.A.Scott,W.Welton,D.Barton,D.Blank,W.Detel,
P.Stern,B.Wachterhauser,M.McCoy,J.Kastely.
³ForeachtextIwillbequotingthetitle,placeofpublicationanddateofthefirst
(usuallyItalian)edition.Ch.:Ilpensierocomedialogointeriore(Theaet.e–a),in
IlTeetetodiPlatone:struttureeproblematiche,ac.diG.Casertano,Loffredo,Naples,
pp.–;Ch.:Logosedoxa:osignificadodarefutaçãodaterceiradefiniçãodeepistêmê
noTeeteto,inJ.TrindadeSantos(ed.),DoSaberaoConhecimento.EstudossobreoTeeteto,
Lisboa,pp.–(it.transl.Λόγοςeδόξα:ilsignificatodellaconfutazionedellaterza
definizionediἐπιστήμηnelTeeteto,in“Rivistadiculturaclassicaemedievale”(),
pp.–);Ch.:Theaetetus,d–c:TruthwithoutCertainty,inA.Havlíček,F.Karfík,
Š.Špinka(eds),Plato’sTheaetetus.ProceedingsofthesixthSymposiumPlatonicumPragense,