The Koinōnia of Non-Being and Logos in the Sophist Account of Falsehood
At Sophist 260e3-261a2, the Eleatic Stranger claims that in order to demonstrate that falsehood is, he and Theaetetus must first track down what speech (logos), opinion (doxa), and appearance (phantasia) are, and then observe the communion (koinōnia) that speech, opinion, and appearance have with no...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2022 |
| País: | Perú |
| Institución: | Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú |
| Repositorio: | PUCP-Institucional |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositorio.pucp.edu.pe:20.500.14657/185794 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/arete/article/view/25069/23762 https://doi.org/10.18800/arete.199901-02.010 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Falsehood false statement Non-being Truth Plato Sophist Koinōniai Logos Falsedad Afirmación falsa No-ser Verdad Platón Sofista Koinōníai Lógos https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#6.03.01 |
| Sumario: | At Sophist 260e3-261a2, the Eleatic Stranger claims that in order to demonstrate that falsehood is, he and Theaetetus must first track down what speech (logos), opinion (doxa), and appearance (phantasia) are, and then observe the communion (koinōnia) that speech, opinion, and appearance have with non-being. The Stranger, however, never explicitly discusses the communion of speech, opinion, and appearance with non-being. Yet presumably their communion is implicit in his account of falsehood, given his claim that observing that communion is needed in order to demonstrate that falsehood is (260e5-a2). This essay seeks to make the communion that speech has with non-being explicit. I argue that speech has communion with non-being in that the things and actions speech combines together by means of nouns and verbs need not be combined in a way that reveals (δηλοῖ) how the being a given speech is about combines ontologically with other beings. |
|---|