Abstract

Plato's Parmenides is very commonly read as a turning-point in Plato's philosophical development. Most contemporary scholars agree with the view that Plato seriously criticizes his theory of Forms in this dialogue. According to some proponents of this view, Plato deemed these criticisms too damaging to his theory of Forms, and subsequently abandoned this theory. Other proponents of the serious-self-criticism view argue that, instead of abandoning his theory of Forms, Plato lays the foundations of a new and improved theory of Forms in Parmenides--there is little agreement on what this new theory entails. Against this prevailing scholarly wisdom, Mehmet Tabak illustrates that Parmenides is exclusively a satirical dialogue in which Plato attempts to expose the absurd nature of the doctrines and method of his philosophical opponents. Tabak's accessible, historically-sensitive, detailed, and comprehensive account is the first decisive illustration of this view, which has been sporadically defended for many centuries.