Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-25T01:23:21.824Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How Does Plato’s Exercise Work?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2014

CONSTANCE MEINWALD
CONSTANCE MEINWALD*
Affiliation:
University of Illinois at Chicago
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I analyse the pros ta alla/pros heauto distinction in Plato’s Parmenides as a contrast between ordinary predication (corresponding to an individual’s display of a feature or, more technically, instantiation) and tree predication (based on a nature X being involved in a nature Y). I engage with my critics and argue that this interpretation vindicates Plato’s methodological remarks and maximizes his argumentative success. My interpretation shows how the Parmenides bridges the gap between Plato’s Middle Dialogues and the outstanding technical developments of the Late Dialogues.

Dans cet article, la paire pros ta alla/pros heauto dans le Parménide de Platon est analysée dans les termes d’une distinction entre la prédication ordinaire (où un individu présente une qualité) et la prédication en arborescence (fondée sur la relation qui s’établit entre un X et un Y lorsque la nature X fait partie de la nature Y). J’engage une discussion avec mes critiques en soutenant que cette interprétation donne tout leur sens aux remarques méthodologiques de Platon, tout en rendant son argumentation plus efficace. Le Parménide fait le pont entre les dialogues de maturité et les développements techniques des derniers dialogues de Platon.

Type
Articles
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 53 , Issue 3: Special Issue. Plato’s Parmenides, Origins and Aporias of a Dialogue on the One / Numéro spécial. Le Parménide de Platon, les origines et les impasses d’un dialogue sur l’un , September 2014 , pp. 465 - 494
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Burnet, Ioannes (ed.) 1901 Platonis opera (OCT), vol. II. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Burnyeat, Myles 1987“Platonism and Mathematics: A Prelude to Discussion”, in Graeser, A. (ed.), Mathematics and Metaphysics in Aristotle. Bern: P. Haupt: 213–240.Google Scholar
Burnyeat, Myles 1990 The “Theaetetus” of Plato. Indianapolis: Hacket.Google Scholar
Fine, Gail 1993 On Ideas: Aristotle’s Criticism of Plato’s Theory of Forms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Frances, Bryan 1996“Plato’s Response to the Third Man Argument in the Paradoxical Exercise of the Parmenides”, Ancient Philosophy 16: 47–64.Google Scholar
Frede, Michael 1967 Prädikation und Existenzaussage. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Frede, Michael 1992“Plato’s Sophist on False Statements”, in Kraut, R. (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Plato. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 397–424.Google Scholar
Gill, Mary Louise 2014“Design of the Exercise in Plato’s Parmenides”, Dialogue 53: 495–520.Google Scholar
Gill, Mary Louise 2012 Philosophos: Plato’s Missing Dialogue. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gill, Mary Louise and Ryan, Paul 1996 Plato: Parmenides. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Keyt, David 1992 Review of John Malcolm, Plato on the Self-Predication of Forms: Early and Middle Dialogues, Bryn Mawr Classical Review 3.01.08, <http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1992/03.01.08.html>..>Google Scholar
Malcolm, John 1991 Plato on the Self-Predication of Forms: Early and Middle Dialogues. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
McCabe, Mary Margaret 1996“Unity in the Parmenides”, in Gill, C. and McCabe, M.M. (eds.), Form and Argument in Late Plato. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 5–47.Google Scholar
Meinwald, Constance 1991 Plato’s Parmenides. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Meinwald, Constance 1992“Good-bye to the Third Man”, in Kraut, R. (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Plato. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 365–396.Google Scholar
Meinwald, Constance 2005“Literary Elements and Dialogue Form in Plato’s Parmenides”, in Havlicek, A. and Karfik, F. (eds.), Plato’s Parmenides: Proceedings of the Fourth Symposium Platonicum Pragense. Prague: Oikoumene: 9–20.Google Scholar
Owen, G. E. L.1968“Dialectic and Eristic in the Treatment of the Forms”, in Owen, G. E. L. (ed.), Aristotle on Dialectic: The Topics. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 103–125.Google Scholar
Peterson, Sandra 1996“Plato’s Parmenides: A Principle of Interpretation and Seven Arguments”, Journal of the History of Philosophy 34: 167–192.Google Scholar
Peterson, Sandra 2000“The Language Game in Plato’s Parmenides”, Ancient Philosophy 20: 19–51.Google Scholar
Peterson, Sandra 2003“New Rounds of the Exercise of Plato’s Parmenides”, The Modern Schoolman 80: 245–278.Google Scholar
Peterson, Sandra 2008“The Parmenides”, in Fine, G. (ed.), Oxford Handbook of Plato. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 383–410.Google Scholar
Proclus 1864 Commentarium in Platonis Parmenidem. Cousin, V. (ed.). Paris.Google Scholar
Rangos, Spyridon 2014“Plato on the Nature of the Sudden Moment, and the Asymmetry of the Second Part of the Parmenides”, Dialogue 53: 538–574.Google Scholar
Rickless, Samuel C.2007 Plato’s Forms in Transition: A Reading of the Parmenides. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sayre, Kenneth M.1983 Plato’s Late Ontology: A Riddle Resolved. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sayre, Kenneth M.1996 Parmenides’ Lesson. Transl. and Explication of Plato’s Parmenides. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Sayre, Kenneth M.1994 Review of Constance Meinwald, Plato’s Parmenides, Nous: 114–116.Google Scholar
Sayre, Kenneth M.2005“The Method Revisited”, in Havlicek, A. and Karfik, F. (eds.), Plato’s Parmenides: Proceedings of the Fourth Symposium Platonicum Pragense. Prague: Oikoumene: 125–140.Google Scholar
Sayre, Kenneth M.1969 Plato's Analytic Method. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Turnbull, Robert G.1988 The Parmenides and Plato’s Late Philosophy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Vlastos, Gregory 1954“The Third Man Argument in the Parmenides”, The Philosophical Review 63: 319–349.Google Scholar
Vlastos, Gregory 1969“Plato’s ‘Third Man’ Argument (Parm. 132a1–b2): Text and Logic”, The Philosophical Quarterly 19: 289–301.Google Scholar