The Puzzle of the Sophist

Justin Vlasits

doi:10.1515/agph-2019-0109

Article

The Puzzle of the Sophist

Justin Vlasits

Published/Copyright: August 18, 2021

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Submit Manuscript Author Information Explore this Subject

From the journal Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie Volume 105 Issue 3

Abstract

The many definitions of sophistry at the beginning of Plato’s Sophist have puzzled scholars just as much as they puzzled the dialogue’s main speakers: the Visitor from Elea and Theaetetus. The aim of this paper is to give an account of that puzzlement. This puzzlement, it is argued, stems not from a logical or epistemological problem, but from the metaphysical problem that, given the multiplicity of accounts, the interlocutors do not know what the sophist essentially is. It transpires that, in order to properly account for this puzzle, one must jettison the traditional view of Plato’s method of division, on which divisions must be exclusive and mark out relations of essential predication. It is then shown on independent grounds that, although Platonic division in the Sophist must express predication relations and be transitive, it need not be dichotomous, exclusive, or express relations of essential predication. Once the requirements of exclusivity and essential predication are dropped, it is possible to make sense of the reasons that the Visitor from Elea and Theaetetus are puzzled. Moreover, with this in hand, it is possible to see Plato making an important methodological point in the dialogue: division on its own without any norms does not necessarily lead to the discovery of essences.

Ammann, A. 1953. IKOS bei Platon. Freiburg.Search in Google Scholar

Balme, D. M. 1987. “Aristotle’s Use of Division and Differentiae”. In Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology. Ed. A. Gotthelf/J. G. Lennox. Cambridge, 69–89.10.1017/CBO9780511552564.008Search in Google Scholar

Barnes, J. 2003. Porphyry: Introduction. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar

Brown, L. 2010. “Definition and Division in Plato’s Sophist”. In Definition in Greek Philosophy. Ed. D. Charles. Oxford, 151–71.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199564453.003.0005Search in Google Scholar

Cohen, S. M. 1973. “Plato’s Method of Division”. In Patterns in Plato’s Thought. Ed. J. Moravcsik. Dordrecht, 181–91.10.1007/978-94-010-2545-4_10Search in Google Scholar

Cooper, J. M. 1997. Plato: Complete Works. Indianapolis.Search in Google Scholar

Cornford, F. M. 1957. Plato’s Theory of Knowledge. London.Search in Google Scholar

Crivelli, P. 2012. Plato’s Account of Falsehood: A Study of the Sophist. Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9781139015004Search in Google Scholar

Dillon, J. 2003. The Heirs of Plato: A Study of the Old Academy 347–274 BC. Oxford.10.1093/0198237669.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Gill, M. L. 2010. “Division and Definition in Plato’s Sophist and Statesman”. In Definition in Greek Philosophy. Ed. D. Charles. Oxford, 173–99.Search in Google Scholar

Grams, L. W. 2012. “The Eleatic Visitor’s Method of Division”. Apeiron 45(2), 1–27.10.1515/apeiron-2011-0007Search in Google Scholar

Hambruch, E. 1904. Logische Regeln der Platonischen Schule in der Aristotelischen Topic. Berlin.Search in Google Scholar

Henry, D. 2011. “A Sharp Eye for Kinds: Collection and Division in Plato’s Late Dialogues”. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 41, 229–55.Search in Google Scholar

Kuehner, R./Gerth, B. 1904. Ausfuehrliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache. Hannover.Search in Google Scholar

Lukas, F. 1888. Die Methode der Eintheilung bei Platon. Halle.Search in Google Scholar

Magee, J. 1998. Anicii Manlii Severini Boethii De Divisione Liber. Leiden.10.1163/9789004321021Search in Google Scholar

Meinwald, C. 1992. “Good-bye to the Third Man”. In The Cambridge Companion to Plato. Ed. R. Kraut. Cambridge, 365–96.10.1017/CCOL0521430186.012Search in Google Scholar

Miller, M. 2016. “What the Dialectician Discerns: A New Reading of Sophist 253d–e”. Ancient Philosophy 36(2), 321–52.10.5840/ancientphil201636223Search in Google Scholar

Moravcsik, J. M. E. 1973a. “The Anatomy of Plato’s Divisions”. In Exegesis and Argument. Ed. E. N. Lee/P. D. Mourelatos/R. M. Rorty. New York, 324–48.Search in Google Scholar

–. 1973b. “Plato’s Method of Division”. In Patterns in Plato’s Thought. Ed. J. M. E. Moravscik. Dordrecht, 158–80.Search in Google Scholar

Moss, J. 2007. “The Doctor and the Pastry Chef: Pleasure and Persuasion in Plato’s Gorgias”. Ancient Philosophy 27, 229–49.10.5840/ancientphil20072721Search in Google Scholar

Muniz, F./Rudebusch, G. H. 2018. “Dividing Plato’s Kinds”. Phronesis 48(4), 392–07.10.1163/15685284-12341355Search in Google Scholar

Notomi, N. 1999. The Unity of Plato’s Sophist. Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9781107297968Search in Google Scholar

Pellegrin, P. 1986. Aristotle’s Classification of Animals: Biology and the Conceptual Unity of the Aristotelian Corpus. Berkeley.10.1525/9780520330412Search in Google Scholar

Rickless, S. C. 2010. “Plato’s Definitions of Sophistry”. Ancient Philosophy 30(2), 289–98.10.5840/ancientphil201030230Search in Google Scholar

Sayre, K. M. 2006. Metaphysics and Method in Plato’s Statesman. Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9780511584596Search in Google Scholar

Shorey, P. 1903. The Unity of Plato’s Thought. Chicago.Search in Google Scholar

Smyth, H. W. 1956. Greek Grammar. Cambridge.Search in Google Scholar

Stenzel, J. 1940. Plato’s Method of Dialectic. Oxford.Search in Google Scholar

de Rijk, L. M. 1970. Petrus Abelardus: Dialectica. Assen.Search in Google Scholar

von Fragstein, A. 1980. Die Diairesis bei Aristoteles. Amsterdam.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2021-08-18

Published in Print: 2023-09-05

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/agph-2019-0109