Search results for 'Socratic paradox' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. Roger Wertheimer (1993). Socratic Scepticism. Metaphilosophy 24 (4):344-62.score: 108.0
    The Socratic Paradox (that only Socrates is wise, and only because only he recognizes our lack of wisdom) is explained, elaborated and defended. His philosophical scepticism is distinguished from others (Pyrrhonian, Cartesian, Humean, Kripkean Wittgenstein, etc.): the doubt concerns our understanding of our beliefs, not our justification for them; the doubt is a posteriori and inductive, not a priori. Post-Socratic philosophy confirms this scepticism: contra-Descartes, our ideas are not transparent to us; contra-Verificationism, no criterion distinguishes sense from (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. George Nakhnikian (1973). The First Socratic Paradox. Journal of the History of Philosophy 11 (1).score: 90.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Renford Bambrough (1960). Socratic Paradox. Philosophical Quarterly 10 (41):289-300.score: 90.0
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. David Gallop (1964). The Socratic Paradox in the "Protagoras". Phronesis 9 (2):117 - 129.score: 90.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Paula Gottlieb (2009). The Socratic Paradox and its Enemies – Roslyn Weiss. Philosophical Quarterly 59 (234):168-170.score: 90.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Irving Thalberg (1965). The Socratic Paradox and Reasons for Action. Theoria 31 (3):242-254.score: 90.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Maureen Eckert (2008). The Socratic Paradox and its Enemies (Review). Journal of the History of Philosophy 46 (3):pp. 476-477.score: 90.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. C. G. Luckhardt (1975). Remorse, Regret and the Socratic Paradox. Analysis 35 (5):159 - 166.score: 90.0
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. James King (1987). Elenchus, Self-Blame and the Socratic Paradox. Review of Metaphysics 41 (1):105 - 126.score: 90.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Sung-Hoon Kang (2008). Review of Roslyn Weiss, The Socratic Paradox and its Enemies. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2008 (3).score: 90.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Kenneth R. Seeskin (1976). Courage and Knowledge: A Perspective on the Socratic Paradox. Southern Journal of Philosophy 14 (4):511-521.score: 90.0
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. David Wolfsdorf (2008). Weiss (R.) The Socratic Paradox and its Enemies. Pp. Xii + 235. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 2006. Cased, £22.50, US$35. ISBN: 978-0-226-89172-. [REVIEW] The Classical Review 58 (01).score: 90.0
  13. Thomas M. Tuozzo (2009). The Socratic Paradox and Its Enemies. Ancient Philosophy 29 (1):203-208.score: 90.0
  14. David Gallop (1964). The Socratic Paradox in the Protagoras. Phronesis 9 (2):117-129.score: 90.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Alex Long (2008). Philosophy (R.) Weiss The Socratic Paradox and its Enemies. Chicago and London: U of Chicago P, 2006. Pp. Xii + 235. £22.50. 9780226891729. [REVIEW] Journal of Hellenic Studies 128:277-.score: 90.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Robin Waterfield (2007). The Socratic Paradox and its Enemies. By Roslyn Weiss. Heythrop Journal 48 (4):615–617.score: 90.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Sara Ahbel-Rappe (2010). Roslyn Weiss, The Socratic Paradox and its Enemies Reviewed By. Philosophy in Review 29 (1):76-78.score: 90.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Sara Ahbel-Rappe (2009). Roslyn Weiss, The Socratic Paradox and its Enemies. Philosophy in Review 29 (1):76.score: 90.0
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Annas Cooper (1998). Socratic Paradox and Stoic Theory1. Ethics 4:151.score: 90.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Michael T. Ferejohn (1984). Socratic Thought-Experiments and the Unity of Virtue Paradox. Phronesis 29 (2):105 - 122.score: 72.0
  21. Thomas C. Brickhouse & Nicholas D. Smith (1984). The Paradox of Socratic Ignorance in Plato's Apology. History of Philosophy Quarterly 1 (2):125 - 131.score: 72.0
  22. Rod Jenks (1992). On the Sense of the Socratic Reply to Meno's Paradox. Ancient Philosophy 12 (2):317-330.score: 72.0
  23. Scott Austin (1987). The Paradox of Socratic Ignorance (How to Know That You Don't Know). Philosophical Topics 15 (2):23-34.score: 72.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Thomas C. Brickhouse (2010). Socratic Moral Psychology. Cambridge University Press.score: 44.0
    Machine generated contents note: Introduction; Acknowledgements; 1. Apology of Socratic studies; 2. Motivational intellectualism; 3. The 'prudential paradox'; 4. Wrongdoing and damage to the soul; 5. Educating the appetites and passions; 6. Virtue intellectualism; 7. Socrates and his intellectual heirs: Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics; Appendix: Is Plato's Gorgias consistent with the other early or Socratic dialogues?; Bibliography of works cited; Index of passages; General index.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Gareth Matthews (2009). Whatever Became of the Socratic Elenchus? Philosophical Analysis in Plato. Philosophy Compass 4 (3):439-450.score: 42.0
    Readers who are introduced to philosophical analysis by reading the early Platonic dialogues may be puzzled to find that Plato, in his middle and late periods, largely abandons the style of analysis characteristic of early Plato, namely, the 'Socratic elenchus'. This paper undertakes to solve the puzzle. In contrast to what is popularly called 'the Socratic method', the elenchus requires that Socrates, the lead investigator, not have a satisfactory answer to his 'What is F-ness?' question. Here is the (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Daniel Watts (2007). The Paradox of Beginning: Hegel, Kierkegaard and Philosophical Inquiry. Inquiry 50 (1):5 – 33.score: 42.0
    This paper reconsiders certain of Kierkegaard's criticisms of Hegel's theoretical philosophy in the light of recent interpretations of the latter. The paper seeks to show how these criticisms, far from being merely parochial or rhetorical, turn on central issues concerning the nature of thought and what it is to think. I begin by introducing Hegel's conception of "pure thought" as this is distinguished by his commitment to certain general requirements on a properly philosophical form of inquiry. I then outline (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Robert Talisse (2006). Socratic Citizenship. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 13 (2):4-10.score: 42.0
    For contemporary democrats, Socrates is a paradox: he is both the paragon of intellectual integrity and the archenemy of democracy. In this essay, the author attempts to navigate this paradox. By offering a revised account of the Socratic elenchus and an examination of Socrates’ objections to democracy, the author proposes a view according to which Socrates provides a compelling image of democracy citizenship. This image is then used to criticize and inform current versions of deliberative democracy.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Gail Fine (2014). The Possibility of Inquiry: Meno’s Paradox From Socrates to Sextus. Oxford University Press.score: 40.0
    Meno's Paradox from Socrates to Sextus Gail Fine. sense that they consider the issues it raises; and they argue, against its conclusion, that inquiry is possible. Like Plato and Aristotle, they also explain what makes inquiry possible; and they do ...
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Jonathan Malesic (2007). Illusion and Offense in Philosophical Fragments : Kierkegaard's Inversion of Feuerbach's Critique of Christianity. [REVIEW] International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 62 (1):43 - 55.score: 36.0
    The article shows the "Appendix" to Søren Kierkegaard's "Philosophical Fragments" to be a response to Ludwig Feuerbach's critique of Christianity. While previous studies have detected some influence by Feuerbach on Kierkegaard, they have so far discovered little in the way of specific responses to Feuerbach's ideas in Kierkegaard's published works. The article first makes the historical argument that Kierkegaard was very likely reading Feuerbach's "Essence of Christianity" while he was writing "Philosophical Fragments", as several of Kierkegaard's journal entries from that (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Gail Fine (2010). Signification, Essence, and Meno's Paradox: A Reply to David Charles's 'Types of Definition in the Meno'. Phronesis 55 (2):125-152.score: 30.0
    According to David Charles, in the Meno Socrates fleetingly distinguishes the signification from the essence question, but, in the end, he conflates them. Doing so, Charles thinks, both leads to Meno's paradox and prevents Socrates from answering it satisfactorily. I argue that Socrates doesn't conflate the two questions, and that his reply to Meno's paradox is more satisfactory than Charles allows.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Gerasimos Santas (1964). The Socratic Paradoxes. Philosophical Review 73 (2):147-164.score: 30.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Roy A. Sorensen (2003). A Brief History of the Paradox: Philosophy and the Labyrinths of the Mind. Oxford University Press.score: 30.0
    Can God create a stone too heavy for him to lift? Can time have a beginning? Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Riddles, paradoxes, conundrums--for millennia the human mind has found such knotty logical problems both perplexing and irresistible. Now Roy Sorensen offers the first narrative history of paradoxes, a fascinating and eye-opening account that extends from the ancient Greeks, through the Middle Ages, the Enlightenment, and into the twentieth century. When Augustine asked what God was doing before (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. David Ebrey (2014). Meno's Paradox in Context. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 22 (1):4-24.score: 30.0
    I argue that Meno’s Paradox targets the type of knowledge that Socrates has been looking for earlier in the dialogue: knowledge grounded in explanatory definitions. Socrates places strict requirements on definitions and thinks we need these definitions to acquire knowledge. Meno’s challenge uses Socrates’ constraints to argue that we can neither propose definitions nor recognize them. To understand Socrates’ response to the challenge, we need to view Meno’s challenge and Socrates’ response as part of a larger disagreement about the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. John M. Armstrong (2001). Review of Stephen Everson, Ed., Ethics, Companions to Ancient Thought 4 (Cambridge University Press, 1998). [REVIEW] Ancient Philosophy 21 (1):237–245.score: 30.0
    I review this fine collection of articles on ancient ethics ranging from the Presocratics to Sextus Empiricus. Eight of the nine chapters are published here for the first time. Contributors include Charles H. Kahn on "Pre-Platonic Ethics," C. C. W. Taylor on "Platonic Ethics," Stephen Everson on "Aristotle on Nature and Value," John McDowell on "Some Issues in Aristotle's Moral Psychology," David Sedley on "The Inferential Foundations of Epicurean Ethics," T. H. Irwin on "Socratic Paradox and Stoic Theory," (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Gregory Vlastos (1980). The Philosophy of Socrates: A Collection of Critical Essays. University of Notre Dame Press.score: 30.0
    Vlastos, G. Introduction: the paradox of Socrates.--Lacey, A. R. Our knowledge of Socrates.--Dover, K. J. Socrates in the Clouds.--Robinson, R. Elenchus.--Robinson, R. Elenchus, direct and indirect.--Robinson, R. Socratic definition.--Nakhnikian, G. Elenctic definitions.--Cohen, S. M. Socrates on the definition of piety: Euthyphro 10A-11B.--Santas, G. Socrates at work on virtue and knowledge in Plato's Laches.--Burnyeat, M. F. Virtues in action.--Walsh, J. J. The Socratic denial of Akrasia.--Santas, G. Plato's Protagoras and explanations of weakness.--Woozley, A. D. Socrates on disobeying the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Michael John O'Brien (1967). The Socratic Paradoxes and the Greek Mind. Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press.score: 30.0
  37. Paul Elmer More (1931/1969). Platonism. New York, Greenwood Press.score: 30.0
    The three Socratic theses.--The Socratic quest.--The Platonic quest.--The Socratic paradox: the dualism of Plato.--Psychology.--The doctrine of ideas.--Science and cosmogony.--Metaphysics.--Conclusion.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Craig Walton (1978). Xenophon and the Socratic Paradoxes. Southern Journal of Philosophy 16 (1):687-700.score: 30.0
    No categories
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. W. E. Charlton (1971). The Socratic Paradoxes in Plato. The Classical Review 21 (01):31-.score: 30.0
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. W. E. Charlton (1971). The Socratic Paradoxes in Plato Michael J. O'Brien: The Socratic Paradoxes and the Greek Mind. Pp. Xiv+249. Chapel Hill: North Carolina University Press (London: Oxford University Press), 1967. Cloth, £2·85 Net. [REVIEW] The Classical Review 21 (01):31-33.score: 30.0
  41. O. J. L. (1968). The Socratic Paradoxes and the Greek Mind. Review of Metaphysics 21 (3):558-559.score: 30.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Gregory Vlastos (1971). The Philosophy of Socrates. Garden City, N.Y.,Anchor Books.score: 30.0
    Introduction: the paradox of Socrates, by G. Vlastos.--Our knowledge of Socrates, by A. R. Lacey.--Socrates in the Clouds, by K. J. Dover.--Elenchus, by R. Robinson.--Elenchus: direct and indirect, by R. Robinson.--Socratic definition, by R. Robinson.--Elenctic definitions, by G. Nakhnikian.--Socrates on the definition of piety: Euthyphro 10A-11B, by S. M. Cohen.--Socrates at work on virtue and knowledge in Plato's Laches, by G. Santas.--Virtues in action, by M. F. Burnyeat.--The Socratic denial of Akrasia, by J. J. Walsh.--Plato's Protagoras and (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Amber Carpenter & Jonardon Ganeri (2009). Can You Seek the Answer to This Question?(Meno in India). Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88 (4):571-594.score: 24.0
    Plato articulates a deep perplexity about inquiry in ?Meno's Paradox??the claim that one can inquire neither into what one knows, nor into what one does not know. Although some commentators have wrestled with the paradox itself, many suppose that the paradox of inquiry is special to Plato, arising from peculiarities of the Socratic elenchus or of Platonic epistemology. But there is nothing peculiarly Platonic in this puzzle. For it arises, too, in classical Indian philosophical discussions, where (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. M. F. Burnyeat & Jonathan Barnes (1980). Socrates and the Jury: Paradoxes in Plato's Distinction Between Knowledge and True Belief. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 54:173 - 206.score: 24.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Graham Harman (2011). The Road to Objects. Continent 3 (1):171-179.score: 24.0
    continent. 1.3 (2011): 171-179. Since 2007 there has been a great deal of interest in speculative realism, launched in the spring of that year at a well-attended workshop in London. It was always a loose arrangement of people who shared few explicit doctrines and no intellectual heroes except the horror writer H.P. Lovecraft, an improbable patron saint for a school of metaphysics. Lovecraft serves as a sort of mascot for the “speculative” part of speculative realism, since his grotesque semi-Euclidean monsters (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Thomas C. Brickhouse & Nicholas D. Smith (2012). Reply to Rowe. Journal of Ethics 16 (3):325-338.score: 24.0
    In our reply to Rowe, we explain why most of what he criticizes is actually the product of his misunderstanding our argument. We begin by showing that nearly all of his Part 1 misconceives our project by defending a position we never attacked. We then question why Rowe thinks the distinction we make between motivational and virtue intellectualism is unimportant before developing a defense of the consistency of our views about different desires. Next we turn to Rowe’s criticisms of our (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Barry E. Goldfarb (2004). The Paradox of Political Philosophy: Socrates' Philosophic Trial, by Jacob Howland. Ancient Philosophy 24 (1):211-214.score: 24.0
  48. R. Reilly (1977). Socrates' Moral Paradox. Southwestern Journal of Philosophy 8 (1):101-107.score: 24.0
1 — 50 / 1000