Linked bibliography for the SEP article "Plato’s Parmenides" by Samuel Rickless

This is an automatically generated and experimental page

If everything goes well, this page should display the bibliography of the aforementioned article as it appears in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, but with links added to PhilPapers records and Google Scholar for your convenience. Some bibliographies are not going to be represented correctly or fully up to date. In general, bibliographies of recent works are going to be much better linked than bibliographies of primary literature and older works. Entries with PhilPapers records have links on their titles. A green link indicates that the item is available online at least partially.

This experiment has been authorized by the editors of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. The original article and bibliography can be found here.

  • Allen, R. E., 1997, Plato’s Parmenides, revised edition. New Haven: Yale University Press. (Scholar)
  • Bailey, D. T. J., 2009, ‘The Third Man Argument’, Philosophy Compass, 4: 666–681. (Scholar)
  • Brisson, L., 1994, Platon: Parménide. Présentation et traduction par Luc Brisson, Paris: GF-Flammarion. (Scholar)
  • –––, 2002, ‘“Is the World One?” A New Interpretation of Plato’s Parmenides’, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, 22: 1–20. (Scholar)
  • Cecílio, G. A. C., 2016, ‘Considerações acerca do debate em torno do argumento do terceiro homem no Parmênides de Platão’, Journal of Ancient Philosophy, 10: 13–44. (Scholar)
  • Chen, C. H., 1944, ‘On the Parmenides of Plato’, Classical Quarterly, 38: 101–114. (Scholar)
  • Cherniss, H., 1932, ‘Parmenides and the Parmenides of Plato’, American Journal of Philology, 53: 122–138. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1944, Aristotle’s Criticism of Plato and the Academy, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1957, ‘The Relation of the Timaeus to Plato’s Later Dialogues’, American Journal of Philology, 78: 225–266. (Scholar)
  • Cohen, S. M., 1971, ‘The Logic of the Third Man’, Philosophical Review, 80: 448–475. (Scholar)
  • Cornford, F. M., 1939, Plato and Parmenides, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. (Scholar)
  • Cresswell, M. J., 1975, ‘Participation in Plato’s Parmenides’, Southern Journal of Philosophy, 13: 163–171. (Scholar)
  • Crombie, I. M., 1962–1963, An Examination of Plato’s Doctrines, 2 vols., London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. (Scholar)
  • Curd, P., 1986, ‘Parmenides 131C-132B: Unity and Participation’, History of Philosophy Quarterly, 3: 125–136. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1989, ‘Some Problems of Unity in the First Hypothesis of the Parmenides’, Southern Journal of Philosophy, 27: 347–359. (Scholar)
  • Fine, G., 1993, On Ideas: Aristotle’s Criticism of Plato’s Theory of Forms, Oxford: Clarendon Press. (Scholar)
  • Fine, G. (ed.), 2008, The Oxford Handbook to Plato, New York: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
  • Forrester, J. W., 1974, ‘Arguments an Able Man Could Refute: Parmenides 133b-134e’, Phronesis, 19: 233–237. (Scholar)
  • Frances, B., 1996, ‘Plato’s Response to the Third Man Argument in the Paradoxical Exercise of the Parmenides’, Ancient Philosophy, 16: 47–64. (Scholar)
  • Fronterotta, F., 2019, ‘L’ipotesi di Parmenide in Parm. 137b1–4: cosmologia, enologia o ontologia?’, Études Platoniciennes [En ligne], 15 | 2019. doi:10.4000/etudesplatoniciennes.1648.
  • Fujisawa, N., 1974, ‘Echein, Metechein, and Idioms of “Paradeigmatism” in Plato’s Theory of Forms’, Phronesis, 19: 30–58. (Scholar)
  • Gardner, D., 2019, ‘Plato’s Parmenides and the Knowable Many: Cosmos as Discursive Order in Hypothesis 3’, Études Platoniciennes [En ligne], 15 | 2019. doi:10.4000/etudesplatoniciennes.1626. (Scholar)
  • Gavray, M. A., 2014, ‘Penser l’espace d’après le Parménide’, Dialogue, 53: 521–537. (Scholar)
  • Geach, P., 1956, ‘The Third Man Again’, Philosophical Review, 65: 72–82. (Scholar)
  • Gill, M. L., 1996, ‘Introduction’, in Gill and Ryan 1996: 1–116. (Scholar)
  • –––, 2012, Philosophos: Plato’s Missing Dialogue, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 2014, ‘Design of the Exercise in Plato’s Parmenides’, Dialogue, 53: 495–520. (Scholar)
  • Gill, C., and McCabe, M. M. (ed.), 1996, Form and Argument in Late Plato, Oxford: Clarendon Press. (Scholar)
  • Gill, M. L., and Ryan, P. (ed.), 1996, Plato: Parmenides, Indianapolis: Hackett. (Scholar)
  • Goldstein, L., and Mannick, P., 1978, ‘The Form of the Third Man Argument’, Apeiron, 12: 6–13. (Scholar)
  • Grote, G., 1865, Plato and the Other Companions of Sokrates (Volume II), London: John Murray. (Scholar)
  • Hathaway, R. F., 1973, ‘The Second “Third Man”’, in Moravcsik 1973: 78–100. (Scholar)
  • Havlicek, A., and Karfik, F., 2005, Plato’s Parmenides: Proceedings of the Fourth Symposium Platonicum Pragense, Prague: OIKOYMENH Publishers. (Scholar)
  • Hermann, A., 2012, ‘Plato’s Eleatic Challenge and the Problem of Self-Predication in the Parmenides’, Presocratics and Plato: Festschrift at Delphi in Honor of Charles Kahn, Las Vegas: Parmenides Publishing, 205–232. (Scholar)
  • Hermann, A., and Chrysakopoulou, S., 2010, Plato’s Parmenides: Text, Translation, and Introductory Essay, Las Vegas: Parmenides Publishing. (Scholar)
  • Hunt, D., 1997, ‘How (not) to Exempt Platonic Forms from Parmenides’s Third Man’, Phronesis, 42: 1–20. (Scholar)
  • Karasmanis, V., 2012, ‘Dialectic and the Second Part of Plato’s Parmenides’, Presocratics and Plato: Festschrift at Delphi in Honor of Charles Kahn, Las Vegas: Parmenides Publishing, 183–203. (Scholar)
  • Kraut, R. (ed.), 1992, The Cambridge Companion to Plato, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
  • Lee, D., 2014, ‘Zeno’s Puzzle in Plato’s Parmenides’, Ancient Philosophy, 34: 255–273. (Scholar)
  • Lee, E. N., 1973, ‘The Second “Third Man”: An Interpretation’, in Moravcsik 1973: 101–122. (Scholar)
  • Lewis, F., 1979, ‘Parmenides on Separation and the Knowability of the Forms: Plato’s Parmenides 133A ff.’, Philosophical Studies, 35: 105–127. (Scholar)
  • Makridis, O., 2016, ‘The Confusion of Logical Types in Plato’s Parmenides’, Philosophical Inquiry: International Quarterly, 40: 13–29. (Scholar)
  • Malcolm, J., 1991, Plato on the Self-Predication of Forms: Early and Middle Dialogues, Oxford: Clarendon Press. (Scholar)
  • Mann, W. E., 1979, ‘The Third Man=The Man Who Never Was’, American Philosophical Quarterly, 16: 167–176. (Scholar)
  • Mates, B., 1979, ‘Identity and Predication in Plato’, Phronesis, 24: 211–229. (Scholar)
  • Matthews, G., 1972, Plato’s Epistemology and Related Logical Problems, London: Faber. (Scholar)
  • McCabe, M. M., 1994, Plato’s Individuals, Princeton: Princeton University Press. (Scholar)
  • Meinwald, C. C., 1991, Plato’s Parmenides, New York: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1992, ‘Good-bye to the Third Man’, in Kraut 1992: 365–396. (Scholar)
  • –––, 2014, ‘How Does Plato’s Exercise Work?’, Dialogue, 53: 465–494. (Scholar)
  • Miller, M. H. Jr., 1986, Plato’s Parmenides: The Conversion of the Soul, Princeton: Princeton University Press. (Scholar)
  • Moravcsik, J. M. E., 1963, ‘The “Third Man” Argument and Plato’s Theory of Forms’, Phronesis, 8: 50–62. (Scholar)
  • Moravcsik, J. M. E. (ed.), 1973, Patterns in Plato’s Thought, Dordrecht: Reidel. (Scholar)
  • Nabielek, M., 2010, ‘The Third Man Argument (Parm. 132a1-b2): A Purely Metaphysical Exercise?’, Topicos: Revista de Filosofia, 38: 135–151. (Scholar)
  • Otto, K. D., 2017, ‘Resemblance and the Regress’, Apeiron: A Journal for Ancient Philosophy and Science, 50: 81–101. (Scholar)
  • Owen, G. E. L., 1953, ‘The Place of the Timaeus in Plato’s Dialogues’, Classical Quarterly (New Series), 3: 79–95. (Scholar)
  • Panagiotou, S., 1987, ‘The Day and Sail Analogies in Plato’s Parmenides’, Phoenix, 41: 10–24. (Scholar)
  • Patterson, R., 1999, ‘Forms, Fallacies, and the Functions of Plato’s Parmenides’, Apeiron, 32: 89–106. (Scholar)
  • Peck, A. L., 1953, ‘Plato’s Parmenides: Some Suggestions for its Interpretation’, Classical Quarterly, 3/3: 126–150. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1962, ‘Plato Versus Parmenides’, Philosophical Review, 71: 159–184. (Scholar)
  • Pelletier, F. J., and Zalta, E. N., 2000, ‘How to Say Goodbye to the Third Man’, Noûs, 34: 165–202. (Scholar)
  • Penner, T., 1987, The Ascent from Nominalism: Some Existence Arguments in Plato’s Middle Dialogues, Dordrecht and Boston: Reidel. (Scholar)
  • Peterson, S., 1973, ‘A Reasonable Self-Predication Premise for the Third Man Argument’, Philosophical Review, 82: 451–470. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1981, ‘The Greatest Difficulty for Plato’s Theory of Forms: The Unknowability Argument of Parmenides 133c-134c’, Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, 63: 1–16. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1996, ‘Plato’s Parmenides: A Principle of Interpretation and Seven Arguments’, Journal of the History of Philosophy, 34: 167–192. (Scholar)
  • –––, 2000, ‘The Language Game in Plato’s Parmenides’, Ancient Philosophy, 20: 19–51. (Scholar)
  • –––, 2003, ‘New Rounds of the Exercise in Plato’s Parmenides’, Modern Schoolman, 80: 245–278. (Scholar)
  • –––, 2008, ‘The Parmenides’, in Fine 2008: 383–410. (Scholar)
  • Pickering, F. R., 1981, ‘Plato’s “Third Man” Arguments’, Mind, 90: 263–269. (Scholar)
  • Polansky, R., and Cimakasky, J., 2013, ‘Counting the Hypotheses in Plato’s Parmenides’, Apeiron: A Journal for Ancient Philosophy and Science, 46: 229–243. (Scholar)
  • Prior, W. J., 1979, ‘Parmenides 132c-133a and the Development of Plato’s Thought’, Phronesis, 24: 230–240. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1985, Unity and Development in Plato’s Metaphysics, London: Croom Helm. (Scholar)
  • Rangos, S., 2014, ‘Plato on the Nature of the Sudden Moment, and the Asymmetry of the Second Part of the Parmenides’, Dialogue, 53: 538–574. (Scholar)
  • Rickless, S. C., 1998, ‘How Parmenides Saved the Theory of Forms’, Philosophical Review, 107: 501–554. (Scholar)
  • –––, 2007, Plato’s Forms in Transition: A Reading of the Parmenides, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
  • Robinson, R., 1953, Plato’s Earlier Dialectic, 2nd edition, Oxford: Clarendon Press. (Scholar)
  • Ross, W. D., 1953, Plato’s Theory of Ideas, 2nd edition, Oxford: Clarendon Press. (Scholar)
  • Runciman, W. G., 1959, ‘Plato’s Parmenides’, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 64: 89–120. (Scholar)
  • Ryle, G., 1939, ‘Plato’s Parmenides’, Mind, 48: 129–151 and 302–325. (Scholar)
  • Sabrier, P., 2019, ‘Parts, Forms, and Participation in the Parmenides and Sophist: A Comparison’, Études Platoniciennes [En ligne], 15 | 2019. doi:10.4000/etudesplatoniciennes.1601 (Scholar)
  • Sanday, E. C., 2009, ‘Eleatic Metaphysics in Plato’s Parmenides: Zeno’s Puzzle of Plurality’, Journal of Speculative Philosophy, 23: 208–226. (Scholar)
  • –––, 2015, A Study of Dialectic in Plato’s Parmenides, Evanston: Northwestern University Press. (Scholar)
  • Sattler, B. M., 2019, ‘Time and Space in Plato’s Parmenides’, Études Platoniciennes [En ligne], doi:10.4000/etudesplatoniciennes.1717 (Scholar)
  • Sayre, K., 1996, Parmenides’ Lesson: Translation and Explication of Plato’s Parmenides, South Bend: University of Notre Dame Press. (Scholar)
  • Scaltsas, T., 1989, ‘The Logic of the Dilemma of Participation and of the Third Man Argument’, Apeiron, 22: 67–90. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1992, ‘A Necessary Falsehood in the Third Man Argument’, Phronesis, 37: 216–232. (Scholar)
  • Schipper, E. W., 1965, Forms in Plato’s Later Dialogues, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. (Scholar)
  • Schofield, M., 1977, ‘The Antinomies of Plato’s Parmenides’, Classical Quarterly (New Series), 27: 139–158. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1996, ‘Likeness and Likenesses in the Parmenides’, in Gill and McCabe 1996: 49–77. (Scholar)
  • Schweizer, P., 1994, ‘Self-Predication and the Third Man’, Erkenntnis, 40: 21–42. (Scholar)
  • Scolnicov, S., 2003, Plato’s Parmenides, Berkeley: University of California Press. (Scholar)
  • Sellars, W., 1955, ‘Vlastos and “The Third Man”’, Philosophical Review, 64: 405–437. (Scholar)
  • Sharvy, R., 1986, ‘Plato’s Causal Logic and the Third Man Argument’, Noûs, 20: 507–530. (Scholar)
  • Shiner, R., 1974, Knowledge and Reality in Plato’s Philebus, Assen: van Gorcum. (Scholar)
  • Spellman, L., 1983, ‘Patterns and Copies: The Second Version of the Third Man’, Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 64: 165–175. (Scholar)
  • Sprague, R. K., 1967, ‘Parmenides’ Sail and Dionysodorus’ Ox’, Phronesis, 12: 91–98. (Scholar)
  • Strang, C., 1963, ‘Plato and the Third Man’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society (Supplementary Volume), 37: 147–164. (Scholar)
  • Tabak, M., 2015, Plato’s Parmenides Reconsidered, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. (Scholar)
  • Teloh, H., 1981, The Development of Plato’s Metaphysics, University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press. (Scholar)
  • Teloh, H., and Louzecky, D. J., 1972, ‘Plato’s Third Man Argument’, Phronesis, 17: 80–94. (Scholar)
  • Vlastos, G., 1954, ‘The Third Man Argument in the Parmenides’, Philosophical Review, 64: 319–349. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1955, ‘Addenda to the Third Man Argument: A Reply to Professor Sellars’, Philosophical Review, 64: 438–448. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1956, ‘Postscript to the Third Man: A Reply to Mr. Geach’, Philosophical Review, 65: 83–94. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1969, ‘Plato’s “Third Man” Argument (Parm, 132a1-b2): Text and Logic’, Philosophical Quarterly, 19: 289–301. (Scholar)
  • Waterlow, S., 1982, ‘The Third Man’s Contribution to Plato’s Paradigmatism’, Mind, 91: 339–357. (Scholar)
  • Weingartner, R. A., 1973, The Unity of the Platonic Dialogue, New York: Bobbs-Merrill. (Scholar)
  • Yi, B., and Bae, E., 1998, ‘The Problem of Knowing the Forms in Plato’s Parmenides’, History of Philosophy Quarterly, 15: 271–283. (Scholar)

Generated Mon Jan 24 08:05:08 2022