Home Subjective Realism: A Possible-Worlds Interpretation of the Anti-Relativist Arguments in Plato’s Theaetetus
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Subjective Realism: A Possible-Worlds Interpretation of the Anti-Relativist Arguments in Plato’s Theaetetus

  • Jon Bornholdt EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: October 25, 2021
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

This paper argues for a possible-worlds interpretation of the arguments marshalled by Socrates against Protagoras in Plato’s Theaetetus. Specifically, it reads Protagoras’ position as implying a limited form of modal realism, and evaluates both the self-refutation sequence at 170a–71d and the Future Argument at 177c–9c on the basis of this reading. It emerges that Socrates’ project is only partly successful: while the three main arguments of the self-refutation sequence force Protagoras into ever more awkward and metaphysically top-heavy positions, and the Future Argument is psychologically compelling, these arguments do not force a collapse of the relativist position. Protagoras can still defend himself, though the cost is high.


Corresponding author: Jon Bornholdt, Department of Philosophy, University of Würzburg, Wurzburg, Germany, E-mail:

Thanks to Friedemann Buddensiek and an anonymous referee for valuable comments on earlier drafts of this paper.


References

Barker, E. 1946. The Politics of Aristotle. Translated with an Introduction, Notes and Appendixes. Oxford: Clarendon.Search in Google Scholar

Black, M. 1952. “The Identity of Indiscernibles.” Mind 61 (242): 153–64.10.1093/mind/LXI.242.153Search in Google Scholar

Brogaard, B., and J. Salerno. “Fitch’s Paradox of Knowability.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2019 Edition), edited by E. N. Zalta. Available at https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2019/entries/fitch-paradox/.Search in Google Scholar

Burnyeat, M. 1976a. “Protagoras and Self-Refutation in Later Greek Philosophy.” Philosophical Review 35/1: 44–69.10.1017/CBO9780511974052.003Search in Google Scholar

Burnyeat, M. 1976b. “Protagoras and Self-Refutation in Plato’s Theaetetus.” Philosophical Review 35/2: 172–95.10.1017/CBO9780511974052.004Search in Google Scholar

Burnyeat, M. 1990. The Theaetetus of Plato. Indianapolis: Hackett.Search in Google Scholar

Carnap, R. 1967. The Logical Structure of the World, trans. Rolf George. Berkeley: University of California Press.Search in Google Scholar

Carnap, R. 1947. Meaning and Necessity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chappell, T. 2004. Reading Plato’s Theaetetus. Indianapolis: Hackett.Search in Google Scholar

Chappell, T. 2006. “Reading the περιτροπή: “Theaetetus” 170c–71c.” Phronesis 51 (2): 109–39.10.1163/156852806777006787Search in Google Scholar

DeLacy, P. 1958. “οὐ μᾶλλον and the Antecedents of Ancient Scepticism.” Phronesis 3: 59–71.10.1163/156852858X00057Search in Google Scholar

Dennett, D. 1991. Consciousness Explained. Boston: Little, Brown.Search in Google Scholar

Denyer, N. 1991. Language, Thought and Falsehood in Ancient Greek Philosophy. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Emilsson, E. K. 1994. “Plato’s Self-Refutation Argument in Theaetetus 171A–C Revisited.” Phronesis 39/2: 136–49.10.1163/156852894321052144Search in Google Scholar

Guthrie, W. K. 1950. The Greek Philosophers from Thales to Aristotle. London: Methuen.Search in Google Scholar

Halmos, P. R. 1970. “How to Write Mathematics.” L’enseignement mathématique 16: 123–52.10.1007/978-1-4613-8211-9_16Search in Google Scholar

Holmes, M. R. “Alternative Axiomatic Set Theories.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2017 Edition), edited by E. N. Zalta. Available at https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/settheory-alternative/.Search in Google Scholar

Jaśkowski, S. 1999. “A Propositional Calculus for Inconsistent Deductive Systems.” Logic and Logical Philosophy 7: 35–56.10.12775/LLP.1999.003Search in Google Scholar

Kant, I. 1965. Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Norman Kemp Smith. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kerferd, G. B. 1949. “Plato’s Account of the Relativism of Protagoras.” Durham University Journal 42: 20–6.Search in Google Scholar

King, P. J. 1995. “The Ontology of Possible Worlds.” D. Phil thesis, Oxford. Available at https://web.archive.org/web/20180618162803/http:/users.ox.ac.uk/∼worc0337/modal.realism.html.Search in Google Scholar

Lee, E. D. 1973. “Hoist with His Own Petard.” Phronesis 18: 225–61.10.1163/156852873X00168Search in Google Scholar

Levett, M. J., trans. 1990. The Theaetetus of Plato. In Burnyeat (1990, 249–351).Search in Google Scholar

Lewis, D. 1968. “Counterpart Theory and Quantified Modal Logic.” Journal of Philosophy 65: 113–26.10.1093/0195032047.003.0003Search in Google Scholar

Lewis, D. 1986. On the Plurality of Worlds. Padstow: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Makinson, D. C. 1965. “The Paradox of the Preface.” Analysis 25 (6): 205–7.10.1093/analys/25.6.205Search in Google Scholar

McDowell, J. 1973. Plato’s Theaetetus. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Newman, J. 1982. “The Recoil Argument.” Apeiron 16: 47–52.10.1515/APEIRON.1982.16.1.47Search in Google Scholar

Parsons, T. 1978. “Nuclear and Extranuclear Properties, Meinong, and Leibniz.” Noûs: 137–51.10.2307/2214689Search in Google Scholar

Perseus Digital Library at Tufts University (source of quotations from greek texts). Available at https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/.Search in Google Scholar

Pollock, J. L. 1986. “The Paradox of the Preface.” Philosophy of Science 53 (2): 246–58.10.1086/289309Search in Google Scholar

Postal, P. M. 1974. On Raising: One Rule of English Grammar and its Theoretical Implications. Cambridge: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Sayre, K. M. 1969. Plato’s Analytic Method. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Sider, T. 2010. Logic for Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Smullyan, R. 1978. What is the Name of This Book? Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.Search in Google Scholar

Sokal, A. 1996a. “Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity.” Social Text 46/47: 217–52.10.2307/466856Search in Google Scholar

Sokal, A. 1996b. “A Physicist Experiments with Cultural Studies.” Lingua Franca 6 (4): 62–4.Search in Google Scholar

Swoyer, C. “Relativism.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2010 Edition), edited by E. N. Zalta. Available at https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2010/entries/relativism/.Search in Google Scholar

Thomas, A. D. 2020. “Extended Modal Realism—A New Solution to the Problem of Intentional Inexistence.” Philosophia 48: 1197–208.10.1007/s11406-019-00126-zSearch in Google Scholar

Tigner, S. S. 1971. “The ‘Exquisite’ Argument at Tht. 171 A.” Mnemosyne Series IV 24: 366–9.10.1163/156852571X00046Search in Google Scholar

Varzi, A. C. 2020. “Counterpart Theories for Everyone.” Synthese 197: 4691–715.10.1007/s11229-020-02720-1Search in Google Scholar

Vlastos, G. 1956. Plato’s Protagoras. New York: Liberal Arts Press.Search in Google Scholar

Waterfield, R. 1987. “Essay.” In Plato’s Theaetetus. London: Penguin Books.Search in Google Scholar

Waterlow, S. 1977. “Protagoras and Inconsistency: Theaetetus 171a6–c7.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 59: 19–36.10.1515/agph.1977.59.1.19Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2021-10-25
Published in Print: 2023-01-27

© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 24.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/apeiron-2021-0025/html
Scroll to top button