shiner - must philebus 59a-c refer to trascendent forms

7/24/2019 Shiner - Must Philebus 59a-c Refer to Trascendent Forms

1/8

Journal of the History of Philosophy, Volume 17, Number 1, January

1979, pp. 71-77 (Article)

DOI: 10.1353/hph.2008.0207

For additional information about this article

Access provided by Universidad Complutense de Madrid (2 Sep 2015 13:24 GMT)

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v017/17.1shiner.html
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v017/17.1shiner.htmlhttp://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v017/17.1shiner.html


2/8

N o t e s a n d i s c u s s io n s

M U S T P h i l e b u s 5 9 A - C R E F E R T O T R A N S C E N D E N T F O R M S ?

T h e a p p e a r a n c e o f R o b e r t F a h r n k o p f ' s c r i t iq u e ' o f a n a r g u m e n t i n m y m o n o -

g r a p h ' a f f o r d s m e t h e o p p o r t u n i t y o f r e - p r e s e n t i n g s o m e o f t h e r e l e v a n t is s u e s . I

a i m e d i n K R P ( a s I s a i d , p p . 3 4 - 3 5 ) t o b e g i n , r a t h e r t h a n t o e n d , d e b a t e , ~ a n d I a m

h a p p y t o c o n t i n u e t h e d i s c u s s i o n .

F a h r n k o p f ' s g e n e r a l s t r a t e g y i n p a g e s 2 0 2 - 5 i s a s f o l l o w s : P l a t o m u s t i n P h i l e b u s

5 5 c - 6 2 a b e a d h e r i n g e it h e r t o T r a n s c e n d e n t R e a l is m ( T R ) o r to I m m a n e n t R e a l i s m

( I R ) . S h i n e r w a n t s to d e n y t h a t P l a t o a d h e r e s t o T R ; s o h e c o m m i t s P l a t o t o I R . B u t

i f P l a t o i s c o m m i t t e d t o I R , v a r i o u s h o r r e n d o u s c o n s e q u e n c e s f o l l o w . S o P l a t o , a f t e r

a l l , m u s t b e c o m m i t t e d t o T R , a n d S h i n e r m u s t b e w r o n g . T h e c r u c i a l c l a im i n t h i s

a r g u m e n t i s t h e fi rs t o n e ; w i t h o u t i t t h e a r g u m e n t c o l l a p s e s . H o w e v e r , t o u s e t h i s

c l a i m a s a p r e m i s e i n a n a r g u m e n t a g a i n s t m y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h is p a s s a g e i s

q u e s t i o n - b eg g i n g . L e t m e m a k e f ir st s o m e p r e l i m i n a r y r e m a r k s . '

A . T h e r e i s a d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e s e t w o q u e s t i o n : ( I) W h a t p h i l o s o p h i c a l l y i s

i t p o s s i b l e t o b e li e v e a b o u t c o n c e p t s a n d t h e i r re l a t i o n t o t h e i r i n s t a n c e s ? ( 2 ) W h a t

e v i d e n c e is t h e r e t h a t e l s e w h e r e P l a t o h i m s e l f d i s t i n g u i s h e d b e t w e e n s u c h p o s s i b i l i -

t i e s? W i t h r e s p e c t t o (1 ), t h e r e i s a d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n ' c o n c e p t i o n ' , ' c o n c e p t ' p h i l o -

s o p h i c a l ly u n i n te r p r e t e d , a n d ' c o n c e p t ' p h i l o s o p h i c a l l y i n t e r p r e t e te d . C o n c e p t i o n s

a r e p e r s o n a l , t h e p o s s es s i o n s o f i n d i v i d u a ls o r g r o u p s o f i n d i v i d u a l s ( m y c o n c e p t i o n

o f a f i r st - c la s s u n d e r g r a d u a t e e s s a y , C a r t e r ' s c o n c e p t i o n o f h u m a n r i g h t s ) . ' C o n -

c e p t s , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , a r e i m p e r s o n a l , s o m e t h i n g l i k e , i n C . I . L e w i s ' s w o r d s ,

t h e l o g i c a l i n t e n s i o n o r c o n n o t a t i o n o f a t e r m . . , e x e m p l i f i e d b y d i c t i o n a r y d e f i n i-

t i o n s w h e r e th e s e a r e s a t i s f a c t o r y . ' E m p i r i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n c o u l d s h o w u s t h a t

s o m e o n e ' s o r s o m e g r o u p ' s c o n c e p t i o n o f X w a s n o t w h a t w e t h o u g h t i t w a s . E m p i r -

i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n w o u l d n o t i n t h e s a m e w a y s e t tl e w h e t h e r t h e c o n c e p t o f S w a s

w h a t s o m e o n e t h o u g h t i t t o b e ; o n l y r e f l e ct i o n o n t h e g r a m m a r ( W i t t g e n s t e i n ' s

s e n s e ) o f t h e c o n c e p t c o u l d d o t h a t .

S u p p o s e n o w t h a t a p h i l o s o p h e r r e p l i e s t o t h e a b o v e , I d o n o t s e e t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n

' Form s in the Ph i l eb u s , ' this Jo u r n a l , 15 (April, 1977):202-7.

2 K n o w l e d g e a n d R e a l i ty i n P l a t o ' s P h i l e b u s (Assen: Van G orcu m, 1974); hereafter cited as K R P .

Fahr nkop f makes me out to b e more dog matic (p. 202). I do not conclude that there is no evidence

incom patible with revisionism in th e Ph i l eb u s ; I aim to present a case for saying there is none. Any defini-

t ive answer to the question of the interpretation of 59aft . and other passages requires a satisfactory

account o f the later ontology and epistemology generally . I did not prov ide such a comprehensive account

in K R P a n d certainly will not here. Moreover, 1 do no t concede that t here is no positive evidence for revi-

sionism in the Philebus; I say that the evidence can be seen to be in the P h i l e b u s only in the light shed on

that dialogue by other later dialogues. That does not imply that such evidence is not there.

' These preliminary remarks summarize arguments made at greater length in chaps. I-5 o f K R P . Fahrn-

kop f does not refer to this ma teria l. 1 find it hard to believe that if he had take n it into account his text

would have remained unchanged.

See Ronald Dworkin, T a k in g R ig h t s S er io u s l y (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1977),

pp. 134ff.

S M i n d a n d t h e W o r l d O r d e r (New York: Scribners, 1929), p. 67.

[71]


3/8

7 2 H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Y

y o u a r e a f t er ; c o n c e p t s a r e n o m o r e t h a n c o n c e p t i o n s . T h i s r e m a r k s h o w s t h e d i s-

t i n c ti o n I w a n t t o m a k e b e t w e e n ' c o n c e p t ' p h i l o s o p h i c a l l y u n i n t e r p r e t e d a n d ' c o n -

c e p t ' p h i l o s o p h i c a l l y i n t e rp r e t e d . T h i s p h i l o s o p h e r i s p r e s u p p o s i n g a n o n p h i l o s o p h -

i ca l i n d e p e n d e n t l if e f o r b o t h ' c o n c e p t i o n ' a n d ' c o n c e p t ' w h e n h e sa y s th a t c o n c e p t s

a r e n o m o r e t h a n c o n c e p t i o n s . H e is t a k i n g a w o r d , c o n c e p t , t h a t h a s i ts o w n l if e

i n e v e r y d a y d i s c o u r s e a n d is g iv i n g a p h i l o s o p h i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t io n o f t h a t t e r m . S o m e

o t h e r p h i l o s o p h e r w h o s a y s t h a t c o n c e p t s a r e u n i t a r y e n t i t i e s e x i s t i n g i n t h e i r o w n

t r a n s c e n d e n t w o r l d i s a l so t a k i n g a t e r m t h a t h a s a c u r r e n c y i n o r d i n a r y l a n g u a g e

a n d g i v in g a p h i l o s o p h i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f it - a r a t h e r d if f e re n t o n e f r o m t h e r e d u c -

t i o n is t a b o v e . I n e a c h c a s e , th e t h o u g h t t h a t t h e r e is a d i st i n c t io n b e t w e e n ' c o n c e p -

t i o n ' a n d ' c o n c e p t ' i s s e p a r a b l e f r o m t h e t h o u g h t t h a t s u c h - a n d - s u c h i s t h e c o r r e c t

p h i l o s o p h i c a l a c c o u n t t o b e g i v e n o f c o n c e p t s . T h i s is s o , e v e n i n t h e s p e c i a l ca s e

w h e r e t h e v i e w is t h a t t h e c o r r e c t a c c o u n t r e d u c e s c o n c e p t s t o c o n c e p t i o n s .

B . B e g i n n i n g w i t h t h e p r e a n a l y t i c r e a l i z a t i o n o f t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n a

c o n c e p t i o n , a c o n c e p t , a n d i ts i n s ta n c e s , o n e c a n f u r t h e r d i st in g u i s h f o u r s t ag e s o f

p h i l o s o p h i c a l t h e o r i z i n g a b o u t t h e s e d i s ti n c t io n s :

a . U n d e r s t a n d i n g o f a c o n c e p t C

b . U n d e r s t a n d i n g t h a t t h e n a t u r e o f C is s o m e t h i n g t h a t c a n a n d , f o r ep i s te -

m o l o g i c a l p u r p o s e s , o u g h t t o b e d e f i n e d

c . U n d e r s t a n d i n g t h a t r e al d e f i n i ti o n i s a n a c c o u n t o f t h e n a t u r e o f a n e x i s ti n g

t h i n g

d . U n d e r s t a n d i n g t h a t r e a l d e f i n i ti o n i s a n a c c o u n t o f t h e n a t u r e o f a T r a n -

s c e n d e n t R e a l i t y , o f w h i c h s e n s i b l e p a r t i c u l a r s a r e i n c o m p l e t e , l e s s t h a n r e a l

i m a g e s

C . T h e T h e o r y o f T r a n s c e n d e n t F o r m s ( T T F ) I t a k e to b e a h ig h l y s p e c if ic i n t e r-

p r e t a t i o n o f th e d i s t i n c ti o n b e t w e e n a c o n c e p t a n d i ts i n st a n c e s, o n e t h a t c o n t a i n s t h e

f o l l o w i n g f o u r e s s e n t i a l e l e m e n t s :

i . T h e r e a r e t w o s e p a r a t e w o r l d s , t h e tr a n s c e n d e n t i n t e ll ig i b le w o r l d o f B ei n g

a n d t h e n a t u r a l s e n s ib l e w o r l d o f B e c o m i n g ; o n l y t h e f o r m e r is r e a l.

i i. K n o w l e d g e i s o n l y o f B e i n g ; o f B e c o m i n g t h e r e is o n l y b e l i e f.

i ii . C o n c e p t s c o n s t i t u t e th e f u r n i t u r e o f t h e w o r l d o f B e in g ; t h e y c a n b e d e f in e d

b y t i m e l e ss l y t ru e r e a l d e f i n i ti o n s , a n d k n o w l e d g e is f u n d a m e n t a l l y k n o w l -

e d g e o f t h e s e d e f i n i t i o n s .

i v . C o n c e p t s a r e i n n o w a y m i n d - d e p e n d e n t .

G i v e n A - C , m y v i e w

f i nd i n t he P h i l e b u s is

e v i d e n c e f o r a n y o f t h e

i s t h a t o n a m i n i m a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h e s t ro n g e s t p o s i t i o n w e

a c o m b i n a t i o n o f b a n d c . T h e r e i s n o d i r e c t i n d e p e n d e n t

f o l l o w i n g t h r e e c l a i m s :

1 . T h e r e a r e t w o

onto logical l y s eparate wor lds

o f R e a l i ty / B e i n g a n d A p p e a r -

a n c e / B e c o m i n g .

2 . T h e f ormer only i s r ea l ; t h e l a t t e r i s n e i t h e r r e a l n o r u n r e a l .

3 K n o w l e d g e i s o n l y o f t h e f o r m e r .


4/8

NOTES AND DISCUSS IONS 73

In the

Philebus

Plato is a dualist, if you like, insofar as he still distinguishes between

concepts and instances as two kinds of thing; but to be a dualist in this minimal sense

is not necessarily to hold a Two W or lds theory of reality of the kind represented

by the TTF. To be a dualist in this minimal sense not only does not require accep-

tance of the TTF; it does not require acceptance of any given particular philo-

sophical view at all at the level of d above. Nor does it even require the view that

one can on ly believe b or c if one has m ade a selection from the comp eti ng views at

level d.

The last sentence should make clear the light into which I wish to put Fahrn kopf 's

central claim (p. 204) that Plato mus t - g i v en the references to Being, Becoming, and

so on, in

Philebus

59aft. and to Justice, Divine Circle, and Divine Sphere in 62a-be

either an Immanen t Realist or a Transcen dent Realist. There is no such mu st

about it. The claim is wrong on two counts. First, as a plain matter of philosophical

fact, it does not follow from a philosopher's distinguishing between concepts and

instances as two kinds of thing that he must hold to either TR or IR. Nor does it

follow that he must hold to some deep interpretive theo ry of concepts. Furthe rmore,

not merely does it therefore follow afortiori that the same is true of Plato; the

stronger claim can be defended that there is indeed evidence in the Platonic corpus as

a whole of Plato's sensitivity to the extent to which one can make greater or lesser

ontological commit ments and signify these by essentially similar vocabul ary. 7

Fahrnkopf takes to be decisive the reference at 62a-b to the Divine Circle and

Divine Sphere, and to Justice itself. He thinks these must be references to t ranscen-

dent Forms of the middle-dialogues type: We have a straightforward example of a

Form or- -a s Shiner prefers to sa y- -a conc ept (p. 205). This remark needs dis-

ambiguation. If 'Fo rm' or 'c oncept' are taken to imply in their ontological commit-

ment nothing more than the minimal dualism I have just mentioned, then we indeed

do have in Justice, the Divine Circle, and the Divine Sphere straightforward exam-

ples of a Form or a concep t. But on that view the passage will not supp ort Fahrn -

koprs criticism. We will have no evidence that Justice, and so on, are 'Forms' or

'concepts' in the strong sense he needs. The meaning of the passage would be well

captured by an ontol ogica lly defus ed translation such as that offered by Gosling:

Let us then posit a man with an intellectual grasp of what justice is, powers of

reasoning to match his understanding, and, further, in the same condition as regards

his thoughts on all such truths. ''s On the other hand, if the claim is that we have here

a straightforward example of a middle-dialogues transcendent Form, that claim begs

the interpretive question being raised about the amoun t of ontological commitment

the Greek carries.

The question is not, pace Fahrnkopf (p. 205), Does 62a-b refer to immanent

Forms or to transcendent Forms? The question is, Can we conclude from the

appearance

alone

of the locutions a6Tflq 6t~0ttoo6v'qq and ~0 rL ou K~t~ oq)Qfpct~

ct6x~q ~q 0crag that there is a reference here to transc ende nt F orms , given that , as

' In chap. 3 ofKRP 1 argued that the evidence of the early Socratic dialogues would place Plato at

no further than c. For a recent, thorough discussion of this topic, see J. M. Rist, Plato's Early Theory of

Forms, Phoenix29 (1975) : 336-57.

i Plato,

Philebus

trans., with notes and commentary, J. C. B. Gosling (Oxford: Clarendon Press,

1975), p. 65.


5/8

74 H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Y

b o t h F a h r n k o p f a n d I a g re e , t h e r e is n o q u e s t i o n o f a t t r ib u t i n g t o P l a t o a n e x p l i c i t

b e l i e f i n A r i s to t e l i a n i m m a n e n t F o r m s ? T o t h a t q u e s t i o n , t h e a n s w e r d e f e n d e d i n

KRP a n d r e p e a t e d h e r e i s n o . A s I se e i t, o n e w h o w i s h e s t o s e c u r e a n a f f i r m a t i v e

a n s w e r , a s F a h r n k o p f w i sh e s to , m u s t s u p p l y m o r e e v i d e n c e t h a n m e r e l y a v e r b a l

s i m i l a r i t y b e t w e e n t h i s p a s s a g e a n d p a s s a g e s i n t h e m i d d l e d i a l o g u e s , a n d m o r e e v i -

d e n c e t h a n , o n m y r e a d i n g , i s s u p p l i e d b y t h i s p a s s a g e . T h a t s h o w s u n e q u i v o c a l l y

o n l y t h a t P l a t o s ti ll w i sh e s t o d r a w a d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n c o n c e p t s a n d t h e i r

i n s t a n c e s , t o s p e a k o f t h e s e a s tw o d i f f e r e n t k i n d s o f t h i n g , a n d e v e n t o r e g a r d k n o w l -

e d g e o f t h e f o r m e r a s i n s o m e w a y s u p e r i o r . T h e p o i n t o f t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l d i s ti n c -

t io n s l m a d e a b o v e w a s t o a r g u e t h a t t h e t h o u g h t s e x p r e s s e d i n th e p r e v i o u s s e n t e n c e

d o n o t a m o u n t t o a T T F . O n e m i g h t b e i n c l in e d to a s k h o w P l a t o c o u l d p o s s i b l y

b e l ie v e a ll th a t a b o u t F o r m s a n d n o t r e g a r d t h e m a s t r a n s c e n d e n t i n th e m i d d l e -

d i a l o g u e s f a s h i o n . O n e w h o r e g a r d e d t h a t q u e s t i o n a s p u r e l y r h e t o r i c a l w o u l d s h o w

h i m s e l f u n a b l e t o t a k e t h e s t ep s P l a t o h i m s e l f t o o k p r i o r t o t h e lahilebus ( s e e c h a p . 4

o f

KRP

o f d i s t in g u i s h i n g w h a t t h e d e s i r e t o r e t a i n c e r t a i n d i s t in c t i o n s d o e s a n d d o e s

n o t c o m m i t o n e t o i n t e r m s o f fu l l- s ca l e o n t o l o g y .

C o n t r a r y t o t h e i m p r e s s i o n g i v e n b y F a h r n k o p f ' s a n a l y s i s , t h e r e i s i n t h e G r e e k o f

6 2 a 2 - b 4 n o w o r d e v e n r e m o t e l y t r a n s l a t a b l e a s s o r t . I h a v e g o n e a lo n g w i th t h e

f o r m o f w o r d s t w o s o r t s o f t h i n g f o r c o n v e n i e n c e ' s a k e . B u t it i s j u s t t h a t , a f o r m

o f w o r d s . E v e n w e p h i l o s o p h e r s u s e w o r d s s u c h a s s o r t , k i n d , t h i n g , a ll t h e

t i m e b e c a u s e t h e y a r e c o n v e n i e n t . S i m p l y t o u s e t h e m d o e s n o t i m p l y a n y p h i l o -

s o p h i c a l t h e o r y . O n l y w h e n a p h il o s o p h e i u s e s s u c h t e r m s in a s e l f - c o n s c i o u s l y

t e c h n i ca l w a y w i ll w e b e o n s a f e g r o u n d i n a t tr i b u t i n g a p o s i t i v e t h e o r y t o h i m . T h a t

k i n d o f s e l f - c o n s c io u s o n t o l o g y is s t ri k i n g ly a b s e n t f r o m t h e l a s t p a r t o f t h e Philebus;

that is t h e p o i n t . S u c h d o e s g o o n i n t h e m i d d l e d i a l o g u e s , a n d P l a t o d o e s d e v e l o p a

v o c a b u l a r y t o s i g n if y h is d o c t r i n e . H o w e v e r , i t i s p e r f e c t ly p o ss i b le t o r e a d t h e

Philebus

o n i ts o w n a s c o n t a i n i n g n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n o c c a s i o n a l s u r v iv a l s o f th e

v o c a b u l a r y . P l a t o d o e s n o t e v e r s t a te d i r e c t l y i n

Philebus

59af t . j us t wha t spec i f i c

o n t o l o g i c a l c o m m i t m e n t w e a r e t o i n f e r f r o m t h e t e rm s h e u s e s . A g a i n s t a c e r t a in

i n t e r p r e ti v e b a c k g r o u n d ( w h i c h c a n n o t , o f c o u r s e , b e d e f e n d e d h e r e ) o f c r it ic i sm s i n

t h e ' c r i t i c a l d i a l o g u e s o f t h e T T F (s e e c h a p . 4 o f KRP i t i s t h e r e f o r e a n o p e n

q u e s t i o n w h a t o n t o l o g i c a l c o m m i t m e n t P l a t o h a d i n m i n d , i f i n d e e d h e h a d a n y i n

m i n d a t a l l. T h e o p e n n e s s o f t h e q u e s t i o n i s all I need f o r m y p o s i t i o n , w h i c h i s ,

r e c a l l , t h a t a r e v i s i o n i s t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n / s possible.To c o m b a t t h a t , a u n i t a r i a n

s u c h a s F a h r n k o p f h a s t o s h o w th a t t h e w o r d s u s e d must unequivocally b e g i v e n a

t r a n s c e n d e n t a l i s t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . N e i t h e r t h e v e r b a l e c h o e s n o r t h e l i m i te d d o c t r i n a l

p a r a l l e ls s e c u r e t h a t c o n c l u s i o n , f o r th e r e i s n o e x p l i c i t m e n t i o n o f t h e t h r e e c r u c i a l

e l e m e n t s o f th e T T F I li s te d a b o v e .

A s F a h r n k o p f r i g h t l y n o t e s ( p p . 2 0 5 f f . ) , I d o a t t e m p t i n

KRP

t o s t r e n g t h e n t h e

c a s e f o r t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f a r e v i si o n i s t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e Philebus b e y o n d t h e

c o n s i d e r a t i o n s s o f a r o u t l i n e d . I a r g u e t h a t t h e epistemological d o c t r i n e i n 5 5 - 6 2 i s

s i g n if i ca n t ly d i ff e r e n t f r o m t h a t o f t h e T T F , a n d t h a t i n t h e T T F e p i s t e m o l o g y a n d

o n t o l o g y w e r e e n t w i n e d i n s u c h a w a y a s t o m a k e i t im p o s s i b l e f o r s o m e o n e t o g i v e

u p t h e e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l p a r t w h i le r e ta i n i n g t h e o n t o l o g i c a l p a r t . F a h r n k o p f i s n o t

i m p r e s s e d b y t h i s m a n e u v e r . H i s a r ti c le c o n t a i n s , i f I u n d e r s t a n d h i m a r i g h t , t w o

m a i n c o m p l a i n t s a b o u t m y a r g u m e n t :


6/8

N O T E S A N D D I S C U S S I O N S 75

I . T h e d o c t r i n e o f e p i s t e m o i o g i c a l e x c l us i v e n e s s ( d if f e re n t c o g n i t i v e o b j e c t s ,

s o d i f f e r e n t s t a t e s o f m i n d ) i s

n o t

a n e c e s s a r y p a r t o f T R .

I I . T h e c h a n g e f r o m c o n t r a s t i n g k n o w l e d g e a n d b e li e f t o c o n t r a s t i n g s u p e r i o r

a n d i n f e r io r k i n d s o f k n o w l e d g e i s i n s i gn i f ic a n t ; a n d b e s i d e s, s o m e o f t h e

u ses o f ~ 5o ~ ti i n t h i s p as sag e are c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e T T F .

F a h r n k o p f ' s c l a i m w i t h r e s p e c t t o I is u n c l e a r : " I s e e n o t h i n g w h i c h c o m p e l s u s to

t ie t h e o n t o lo g i c a l c l a i m o f t r a n s c e n d e n t r e a l i s m t o t h is p a r t i c u l a r e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l

v i e w [sc. t h e d o c t r i n e o f e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l e x c l u s i v e n e s s ] " ( p . 2 0 6 ). T h i s i s a m b i g u o u s ,

a n d c r u c i a l l y a m b i g u o u s , b e t w e e n (1 ) " I s e e n o r e a s o n p e r s e w h y o n e ( a n y o n e ) w h o

h o l d s to o n e s e t o f t h e s es s h o u l d b e c o m p e l l e d t h e r e b y t o h o l d t o a n o t h e r " a n d ( 2) " I

s e e n o r e a s o n w h y P l a t o , g i v e n t h a t h e h e l d t o o n e s e t o f t h e s e s, s h o u l d b e c o m p e l l e d

t o h o l d t o a n o t h e r . " C l a i m ( I ) i s n o t r e a l l y t o t h e p o i n t , a l t h o u g h p e r f e c t l y t r u e ;

t h e r e i s n o s u c h

f i b e r h a u p t

c o m p u l s i o n . I t is w h a t P l a t o i s l i k e ly to h a v e t h o u g h t t h a t

c o u n t s . B u t ( 2) i s s t il l a m b i g u o u s . D o e s i t m e a n ( 2 ' )

t h a t

t h e r e i s n o e v i d e n c e i n t h e

t e x ts t h a t P l a t o d i d h o l d t o a c e r t a i n e p e i s t e m o l o g i c a l v i e w , o r ( 2 ") t h a t , a l t h o u g h t h e

e v i d e n c e is t h e r e t h a t P l a t o a t a c e r t a i n t i m e d i d h o l d b o t h a c e r t a i n e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l

v i e w a n d a c e r t a i n o n t o l o g i c a l v i e w , t h e r e i s n o e v i d e n c e i n th e t e x t s t h a t P l a t o s a w

t h e m t o b e s o c o n n e c t e d t h a t t o h o l d t h e l a t te r c o m m i t s o n e t o h o l d i n g t h e f o r m e r ?

F a h r n k o p f d o e s n o t a t t e m p t t o d is p u t e t h e a p t n e ss o f m y c h a r a c t e r i z a t io n o f th e T T F

i n t h e m a n n e r i m p l i e d b y ( 2 ') ; s o w e m u s t t a k e h i s p o i n t t o b e ( 2 ") . B u t t h e n t h e c l a i m

i s w e a k . I t is a c o m m o n p l a c e o f G r e e k p h i l o s o p h y t h a t k n o w l e d g e i s o f r e a l i t y a n d

o n l y o f r e a li t y . T h e c e n t r a l p a r t o f t h e

R e p u b l i c

s y m b o l i z e d b y t h e a l l e g o r i e s o f th e

L i n e a n d t h e C a v e , i s f ul l o f t h e v i e w t h a t t h e r e i s a n e s s e n t i a l s y m m e t r y b e t w e e n

o n t o l o g i c a l s t a t u s a n d c o g n i t i v e f a c u l t y . 9 I d o n o t s e e h o w s e n s e c o u l d b e m a d e o f

t h o s e p a s s a g e s i f i t w e r e c o n s i d e r e d c o i n c i d e n t a l r a t h e r t h a n n e c e s s a r y t h a t a t t h e

t i m e t h e p il g r im w a s c o n d i t i o n e d t o t h e s u n l i g h t , r e a l o b j e c t s a r e w h a t h e w o u l d b e

a b l e to c o n t e m p l a t e ; a t t h e t i m e h e w a s c h a i n e d i n th e C a v e , s h a d o w s c a s t b y m o d e l s

w o u l d m e e t h is e ye ; a n d s o f o r th . T h u s F a h r n k o p f ' s c o m p l a i n t I s e e m s t o m e p l a i n l y

fa l se .

I d o n o t f in d c o m p l a i n t I I a n y m o r e c o g e n t . T h e l a t t e r p a r t i s c e r t a i n l y c o r r e c t ,

a n d t h e r e a r e o t h e r p a r a l l e l s t o o . O n e m u s t c e r t a i n l y n o t o v e r s t a t e t h e c a s e , a n d I

t r i e d n o t t o d o t h a t i n

K R P .

I d o b e l i e v e t h a t P l a t o w a s a b l e t o d e t a c h a c c e p t a n c e o f

t h e s e pa r a l l e ls f r o m t h e e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l a n d o n t o l o g i c a l e x t r e m e s o f t h e T T F .

N o w h e r e i n K R P d o I c o n t e n d , a s F a h r n k o p f h a s m e c o n t e n d ( p . 2 0 6) , t h a t P l a t o ' s

v ie w ha s u n d e r g o n e " r a d i c a l " c h a n g e ( t h o u g h t h e a d v e rt i s in g b l u r b o n t he b o o k ' s

j a c k e t c o n t a i n s t h a t p h r a s e ) . I e x p l ic i t ly d i s a v o w s u c h t a l k o n p a g e 3 5 . I r e s e r v e th e

t e r m " r a d i c a l r e v i s i o n " f o r a d o c t r i n e t h a t I a r g u e is n o t f o u n d i n t h e l a t e r d i a l o g u e s

( p p . 4 6 -4 8 ) . I re f e r t o th e c l a i m e d c h a n g e i n P l a t o ' s p o s i t i o n a s " i m p o r t a n t " ( p . 36 )

a n d , b y i m p l i c a t i o n , a s " s i g n i f i c a n t " ( p . 60 ). T h e s e e p i t h e t s I c o n t i n u e t o t h i n k a r e

j u s t i f i e d . W h e n i n h i s

E t h i c s

G . E . M o o r e a d d e d t o h i s p o s i t i o n i n

P r i n c i p ia E t h i c a

t h e c l a i m t h a t g o o d n e s s w a s a s u p e r v e n i e n t q u a l i t y , t h i s m i g h t h a v e s e e m e d a s m a l l

' Although Resp. 515d uses the expression ~tSkkov bvxa, these muc h vaunted "degrees of reality" do

not imply that there is full reality lower in the scale. Ana logously, one m ay call a scale of grades from A to

F "a scale of excellence" without implying that F w ork is excellent work.


7/8

76

HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY

change; there was so much to which others objected that he did not alter. But it was

a crucially important change. It constituted a concession by a nonnaturali st of the

truth of a core tenet of naturalism. Likewise, for Plato to retreat from the transcen-

dence of the Forms and the total exclusivity of knowledge, even if it were ever so

slight a retreat, is for him to concede that the philosophical problems of this world

must be solved from its own resources and not from resources imported from the

next. That , whatever else remained the same, deserves to be called an impo rtant shift

of perspective.

With respect to the change in contrast that Fahrnkopf outlines in complaint II, he

wishes to highlight the fact that it is still a contrast. That is so, but, for me, what is

important is that it is now a contrast within knowledge, and not between knowledge

and something else. Again, it might seem that the difference is trivial, but I do not

think it is. Plato in this part of the Ph i l ebus is still making a contrast that is impor-

tant t o him and, moreo ver, is still making it in ways that relate to the nature o f the

subject matter of the discipline in question. Gosling's characterization seems to me

felicitous, and 1 quo te it in full:

The claim that one has a full grasp of the truth on something needs various conditions to be

satisfied for its substantiation. The something must be such that some universal descriptions

hold of it (where is in a process of change is incomplete or for some other reason does not

count), there must be no areas of obscurity, there must be no margin of error, and there are

possibly some other conditions . It looks as though Plato treats these as related in that, say,

only if there is no margin o f error are we dealing with subjects that allow of universal truths,

and so only if that condi tion is satisfied is there hope o f satisfying the condit ion of removing all

obscurities. ' 0

Notably missing from Gosling 's list, which is the type of view I take Plato to hold, is

any mention of the need for the som eth ing to be real, to be separate , to be b y

i tsel f ,

and so forth. I believe this omission to be the significant fact, and to be

associated with the cont rasts now being within knowledge. The use of terms such as

6vx a an d ytyv6~tevt~ ar e now little mor e tha n labels for sets of con diti ons s uch as

those described by Gosl ing, redolent t hough these terms are with echoes of an earlier

theory.

Let me sum up my argument. The aim of my monograp h was to offer an account

of the remarks on knowledge and reality in the Ph i l ebus that would not allow the

Ph i l ebus to stand as a knock-down argument against a so-called revisionist view of

later Plato. T o do that, 1 had to argue that 59aft., amo ng other passages, did not

unequivocally imply a belief in the TTF. I tried t o do that by showing, first of all,

that the philosophical possibilities here were more varied than a simple argument

such as Fahrnkopf's implies. Then I tried to assemble evidence for a sensibility on

Plato's part to this range of possibilities, and I proceeded to discuss the Ph i l ebus in

that light. Fahrnkopf, by contrast, presents a Plato who must always be using the

same terms to imply the same doctrine. Of course, if we were to take passages such

as 59aft. on their own, Fah rnk opf 's Pla to is quite possibly the person they represent.

But, I argue, so is my Plato such a person. That the references to Justice, Divine

~ P h i l e b u s , p . 2 2 3 .


8/8

N O T E S A N D D I S C U S S I O N S 7 7

C i r c le a n d s o o n a r e p o s si b l y r e f e re n c e s t o t r a n s c e n d e n t F o r m s d o e s n o t i m p l y t h a t

t h e y

m u s t

b e s u c h r e f e r e n c e s . Y e t t h e l a t te r s t r o n g e r c l a i m is w h a t F a h r n k o p f h a s t o

e s t a b l is h . H e d o e s n o t e s t a b l i sh t h i s b y a n y a p r i o r i s t i c a r g u m e n t b a s e d o n t h e

a s s u m p t i o n t h a t J u s t ic e a n d s o o n m u s t b e e i th e r t r a n s c e n d e n t F o r m s o r i m m a n e n t

F o r m s . T h e s t er i li ty o f a n y s u c h a s s u m p t i o n f o r in t e r p r e t i n g t h e Phi l ebus i s o n e

t h in g m y m o n o g r a p h s o u g h t to d e m o n s t r a t e a n d t h e a r g u m e n t s f o r t h a t d e p l o y e d i n

t h e c h a p t e rs o f th e b o o k p r i o r to t h e o n e F a h r n k o p f d i sc u ss e s a re n o t m e n t i o n e d

a n d t h e r e f o r e n o t c o u n t e r e d b y h i m a t a l l. T h e t r u t h o f a re v i si o n is t in t e r p r e t a t i o n o f

l a t e r P l a t o is n o t t h e i s su e e i t h e r i n m y m o n o g r a p h o r h e r e . T h e i s s u e i s w h e t h e r

t h e r e i s i n 5 9 a f t. a n y i r r e f u t a b l e e v i d e n c e f o r t h e f a l s i t y o f s u c h a v i e w . M y c l a i m i s

t h a t t h e t e x t is su f f ic i en t ly n o n c o m m i t t a l a s t o t h e t y p e o f o n t o l o g y p r e s u p p o s e d s o

t h a t i t is c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e a t t r i b u t i o n t o P l a t o o f a b e l i e f i n s o m e t h i n g l e ss t h a n t h e

f u ll T T F . I f i t i s s o c o n s is t e n t t h e n I h a v e a ll I n e e d . T h e a r g u m e n t s F a h r n k o p f

p r e s e n t s d o n o t c u t d e e p e n o u g h t o u n d e r m i n e t h i s c o n s i s t e n c y .

R O G E R A S H I N E R

Univers i ty o f l be r ta

shiner - must philebus 59a-c refer to trascendent forms

Documents