On the Revisionist reading, Plato's purpose is to refute the theories of Protagoras and Heracleitus. Now he who knows perceives what he knows, and, as far as I can see at present, knowledge is perception.
You forget, my friend, that I neither know, nor profess to know, anything of!
Capital, Theaetetus; and about this there shall be no dispute, because I want you to grow; but there is another difficulty coming, which you will also have to repulse.
Many animal perceptions are superior to human perceptions dogs' hearing, hawks' eyesight, dolphins' echolocatory ability, most mammals' sense of smell, etc.
The empiricist conception of knowledge that Theaetetus unwittingly brings forth, and which Socrates is scrutinising, takes the objects of thought to be simple mental images which are either straightforwardly available to be thought about, or straightforwardly absent.
The problem centers around the problem of either knowing something or not knowing something a.
There follows a five-phase discussion which attempts to come up with an account of false belief. This dialogue is then read aloud to the two men by a slave boy owned by Euclid. Additional Information In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content: Now, if so, you must either say that the rest of us are not the judges of this opinion or judgment of yours, or that we judge you always to have a true opinion: Perhaps the best way to read this very unclear statement is as meaning that the distinctive addition in the third proposal is the notion of inadvertency.
In that opinion I quite agree. But this mistake is the very mistake ruled out as impossible right at the beginning of the inquiry into false belief a-c.
As Plato stresses throughout the dialogue, it is Theaetetus who is caught in this problem about false belief. It then becomes clearer why Plato does not think that the empiricist can explain the difference between fully explicit and not-fully-explicit speech or thought.
D2 "Knowledge is true belief. For I declare that the truth is as I have written, and that each of us is a measure of existence and of non-existence. But without inadvertency, the third proposal simply collapses back into the first proposal, which has already been refuted.
Being acquainted with X and Y means knowing X and Y; and anyone who knows X and Y will not mistake them for each other. Since the argument starts by assuming that Protagoras is correct, then derives a bad result, this is a reductio ad absurdum.
Who, Socrates, would dare to say so? Socrates' implicit task in the critiques which follow is to safeguard Plato's position against any extreme proponents of Protagoras and Heraclitus. Socrates comes to the conclusion that this is absurd and therefore he discards the aviary analogy.
Some think the Second Puzzle a mere sophistry.
Who is our judge? This theory is then joined to the Protagorean doctrine which allows each particular individual to be the infallible witness and final judge of the sensations which arise from the intercourse between subject and object.
More recently, McDowellBostockand Burnyeat are three classic books on the Theaetetus of a decidedly Revisionist tendency.
And now, let us examine together this conception of yours, and see whether it is a true birth or a mere, wind-egg:Socrates asks Theaetetus what knowledge is, spurring the rest of the conversation of the dialogue. Theaetetus responds to Socrates' question by naming traditional academic examples of knowledge: geometry, arithmetic, astronomy.
A reader might find it as hard to say how this is a hypotheti-  JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY OCTOBER cal advance over the criticisms of the Parmenidesas to say how the Theaetetusshould be called an "Eleatic" dialogue.
Persons of the Dialogue SOCRATES THEODORUS THEAETETUS Scene Euclid and Terpsion meet in front of Euclid's house in Megara; they enter the house, and the dialogue is read to them by a servant.
Summary of excerpt: Knowledge is belief accompanied by an explanation (logos) and the dialogue now begins to move in this direction.
Theaetetus and Socrates approach the problem by investigating various modes of explanation The first. Plato Dialogs (Dialogues) Summary. Home > Books & Literature > Ancient > Plato: Dialogues: Site Map: Theaetetus. Socrates asks of the geometer Theodorus and his pupil Theaetetus "what is knowledge"?
It is not just what is perceived or sensed from the material worod or correct opinion. Socrates asks Theaetetus what knowledge is, spurring the rest of the conversation of the dialogue. Theaetetus responds to Socrates' question by naming traditional academic examples of knowledge: geometry, arithmetic, astronomy.Download