The “Parmenides” as an aporetic dialogue
This text aims at illuminating some of the roles played by the notion of “aporia” in Plato’s Parmenides. Having described some of its uses in Plato’s dialogues, it concentrates on the Parmenides, analyzing: 1. Socrates’ debate with Zeno; 2. The set of objections presented by Parmenides to Socrates’...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2020 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM) |
| Repositorio: | Voluntas - Revista Internacional de Filosofia (Santa Maria) |
| Idioma: | portugués |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/43307 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://periodicos.ufsm.br/voluntas/article/view/43307 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Plato “Parmenides” Aporia “Third Man” Predication Self-predication Platão “Parménides” “Terceiro Homem” Predicação Autopredicação |
| Sumario: | This text aims at illuminating some of the roles played by the notion of “aporia” in Plato’s Parmenides. Having described some of its uses in Plato’s dialogues, it concentrates on the Parmenides, analyzing: 1. Socrates’ debate with Zeno; 2. The set of objections presented by Parmenides to Socrates’ use of “separation” and “participation”, focusing on the “Third Man Argument”; 3. Some paradoxical conclusions resulting from the eight “Hypotheses on the One”, in the second part of the dialogue. Our objective is to sustain the unity of the work arguing in favor of using “the results attained in its II part to solve the problems presented in the I”. Parmenides” exercise on the One and the Others proposes a reformulation of dialectics. It denounces the deficiency in Zeno’s practice of reducing to absurdity the consequences of the hypothesis “if there are many”. Instead it examines the consequences of “If there is One” relating the One to itself and to each of the Others; then the Others in relation to themselves and to whatever other thing, first asserting the hypothesis and then denying it. |
|---|