Philosophical Review 80 (4):448-475 (1971)
The main lines of interpretation offered to date of the Third Man Argument in Plato's Parmenides (132a1-b2) are considered and rejected. A new, set-theoretic, reconstruction of the argument is offered. It is concluded that the philosophical point of the argument is different from what it has been generally supposed to be: Plato is pointing out the logical shortcomings in his earlier formulated principle of One-Over-Many.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Aristotle on Mathematical Truth.Phil Corkum - 2012 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 20 (6):1057-1076.
Similar books and articles
The Tense Logic for Master Argument in Prior's Reconstruction.Tomasz Jarmużek & Andrzej Pietruszczak - 2009 - Studia Logica 92 (1):85 - 108.
No Pairing Problem.Andrew M. Bailey, Joshua Rasmussen & Luke van Horn - 2011 - Philosophical Studies 154 (3):349-360.
Plato's Response to the Third Man Argument in the Paradoxical Exercise of the Parmenides.Bryan Frances - 1996 - Ancient Philosophy 16 (1):47-64.
Erratum: Plato's Causal Logic and the Third Man Argument.Richard Sharvy - 1987 - Noûs 21 (3):455 -.
Third Men: The Logic of the Sophisms at Arist. SE 22, 178b36–170a10.Ermelinda Valentina Di Lascio - 2004 - Topoi 23 (1):33-59.
Plato's "Third Man" Argument (PARM. 132a1-B2): Text and Logic.Gregory Vlastos - 1969 - Philosophical Quarterly 19 (77):289-301.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads92 ( #56,858 of 2,177,988 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #112,944 of 2,177,988 )
How can I increase my downloads?