Book contents
- Plato on the Metaphysical Foundation of Meaning and Truth
- Plato on the Metaphysical Foundation of Meaning and Truth
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Book part
- Note on the text
- Glossary
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Stability
- Part II Combination
- Part III Truth
- Bibliography
- Index locorum
- General index
- References
Bibliography
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 May 2016
Book contents
- Plato on the Metaphysical Foundation of Meaning and Truth
- Plato on the Metaphysical Foundation of Meaning and Truth
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Book part
- Note on the text
- Glossary
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Stability
- Part II Combination
- Part III Truth
- Bibliography
- Index locorum
- General index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Plato on the Metaphysical Foundation of Meaning and Truth , pp. 243 - 258Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2016
References
Ackrill, J. L. 1955. “ΣΥΜΠΛΟΚΗ ΕΙΔΩΝ.” Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 2. Reprinted in Allen, (1965), 199–206, and Ackrill, (1997), 72–79.Google Scholar
Ackrill, J. L. 1957. “Plato and the Copula: Sophist 251–259.” Journal of Hellenic Studies 57: 1–6. Reprinted in Allen, (1965), 207–18, and Ackrill, (1997), 80–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackrill, J. L. (trans. with notes.) 1963. Aristotle, Categories and De Interpretatione. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Reprinted 1994.Google Scholar
Ackrill, J. L. 1994. “Language and Reality in Plato’s Cratylus,” in Alberti, (1994), 9–28. Reprinted in Ackrill, (1997), 33–52.Google Scholar
Ademollo, F. 2011. The Cratylus of Plato. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alberti, A. (ed.) 1994. Realtà e ragione. Studi di filosofia antica. Florence: Olschiki.Google Scholar
Allan, D. J. 1954. “The Problem of the Cratylus.” American Journal of Philology 75: 271–87.Google Scholar
Allen, R. E. 1960. “Participation and Predication in Plato’s Middle Dialogues.” Philosophical Review 69: 147–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, R. E. (ed.) 1965. Studies in Plato’s Metaphysics. New York: The Humanities Press.Google Scholar
Allen, R. E. (trans. with comm.) 1997. Plato’s Parmenides. Revised edition. New Haven/London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Ambuel, D. 2007. Image and Paradigm in Plato’s Sophist. Las Vegas, Zurich, Athens: Parmenides Publishing.Google Scholar
Anagnostopoulos, G. (ed.) 2009. A Companion to Aristotle. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anagnostopoulos, G. and Miller, F. (eds.) 2013. Reason and Analysis in Ancient Greek Philosophy: Essays in Honor of David Keyt, Philosophical Studies Series 120. Dordrecht, Heidelberg, New York, London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Annas, J. 2002.“What Are Plato’s ‘Middle’ Dialogues in the Middle Of?,” in Annas, and Rowe, (2002), 1–23.Google Scholar
Annas, J. and Rowe, C. (eds.) 2002. New Perspectives on Plato, Modern and Ancient. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Apelt, O. (trans. with intro.) 1914. Platons Dialogue Sophistes. Leipzig: Verlag von Felix Meiner.Google Scholar
Archer-Hind, R. D. (ed. with intro., notes, and appendices.) 1894/1988. The Phaedo of Plato, second edn. Reprinted Salem: Ayer Company, 1988.Google Scholar
Armour-Garb, B. and Woodbridge, J. A. 2010. “Why Deflationists Should be Pretense Theorists (and Perhaps Already are),” in Wright, and Pederson, (2010), 59–77.Google Scholar
Armstrong, D. M. 1997. A World of States of Affairs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, D. M. 2004. Truth and Truthmakers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, J. L. 1939. “Are There A Priori Concepts?” Reprinted in Austin, (1961), 32–54.Google Scholar
Auxier, R. and Hahn, L. (eds.) 2006. The Philosophy of Jaakko Hintikka. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
Bäck, A. 2000. Aristotle’s Theory of Predication. Leiden/Boston/Cologne: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bambrough, R. (ed.) 1965. New Essays on Plato and Aristotle. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Barnes, J. (trans. and comm.) 1975. Aristotle, Posterior Analytics, second edn. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Reprinted 1993.Google Scholar
Barnes, J. (ed.) 1984. Complete Works of Aristotle. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Barney, R. 2001. Names and Nature in Plato’s Cratylus. New York and London: Routledge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belardi, W. 1981. “Riconsiderando la secunda frase del De interpretation.” Studi e saggi linguistici 21: 79–83.Google Scholar
Benardete, S. (trans. with comm.) 1984. Plato’s Theaetetus: Part I of the Being of the Beautiful. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Benardete, S. (trans. with comm.) 1986. Plato’s Sophist: Part II of the Being of the Beautiful. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Blank, D. (trans.) 1996. Ammonius, On Aristotle’s On Interpretation 1–8. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Bluck, R. S. 1957. “False Statement in the Sophist.” Journal of Hellenic Studies 77: 181–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bluck, R. S. 1975. Plato’s Sophist: A Commentary. Neal, G. C. (ed.). Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Bogen, J. and McGuire, J. E. (eds.) 1985. How Things Are: Studies in Predication and the History of Philosophy and Science. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolton, R. 1975. “This Distinction between Being and Becoming.” Review of Metaphysics 29: 66–95.Google Scholar
Bolton, R. 1976. “Essentialism and Semantic Theory in Aristotle: Posterior Analytics II 7–10.” Philosophical Review 85: 514–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolton, R. 1985. “Aristotle on the Signification of Names,” in Language and Reality in Greek Philosophy. Proceedings of the Greek Philosophical Society (Athens): 153–62.Google Scholar
Bondeson, W. 1974. “Plato’s Sophist and the Significance and Truth-Value of Statements.” Apeiron 8: 41–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bostock, D. 1984. “Plato on ‘Is Not’.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 2: 89–119.Google Scholar
Bostock, D. (trans. and comm.) 1994. Aristotle, Metaphysics: Books and H. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Brentano, F. 1966. “On the Concept of Truth,” in Brentano, , The True and the Evident. London: Routledge University Press (1966), 3–25.Google Scholar
Brown, L. 1986. “Being in the Sophist.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 4: 49–70.Google Scholar
Brown, L. 1993. “Understanding the Theaetetus: A Discussion of David Bostock’s Plato’s Theaetetus and Myles Burnyeat’s The Theaetetus of Plato.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy vol. 11: 199–224.Google Scholar
Brown, L. 1994. “The Verb ‘to be’ in Greek Philosophy: Some Remarks,” in Everson, (1994), 212–36.Google Scholar
Brown, L. 1998. “Innovation and Continuity: The Battle of Gods and Giants, Sophist 245–249,” in Gentzler, (1998), 181–207.Google Scholar
Brown, L. 2008. “The Sophist on Statements, Predication, and Falsehood,” in Fine, (2008), 437–462.Google Scholar
Burnet, J. (ed.) 1900–07. Platonis Opera, 5 vols. Oxford Classical Texts. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Burnet, J. (ed. and comm.) 1924. Plato’s Euthyphro, Apology of Socrates and Crito. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Reprinted 1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnyeat, M. F. 1970. “The Material and Sources of Plato’s Dream.” Phronesis 15: 101–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnyeat, M. F. 1976. “Plato on the Grammar of Perceiving.” Classical Quarterly 26: 29–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnyeat, M. F. 1990. The Theaetetus of Plato. Trans. Levett, M. J., rev. by Burnyeat, M. F.. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Butler, T. and Rubenstein, E. 2002. “How Simple Are Plato’s Forms?” Ancient Philosophy 22: 277–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, L. (ed. text, with intro. and notes) 1867/1988. The Sophistes and Politicus of Plato. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Reprinted by Ayer Company Publishers (1988).Google Scholar
Canto-Sperber, M. and Pellegrin, P. (eds.) 2002. Le style de la pensée: Recueil de textes en hommage à J. Brunschwig. Paris.Google Scholar
Carson, S. 2003. “Aristotle on Meaning and Reference.” History of Philosophy Quarterly 20: 319–37.Google Scholar
Castagnoli, L. 2010. Ancient Self-Refutation: The Logic and History of the Self- Refutation Argument from Democritus to Augustine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Charles, D. 1994. “Aristotle on Names and Their Signification,” in Everson, (1994), 37–73.Google Scholar
Charles, D. (ed.) 2010. Definition in Greek Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cherniss, H. 1944. Aristotle’s Criticism of Plato and the Academy, vol. I. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
Cherniss, H. 1957. “The Relation of the Timaeus to Plato’s Later Dialogues.” American Journal of Philology 78: 225–66.Google Scholar
Code, A. 1985. “On the Origins of Some Aristotelian Theses about Predication,” in Bogen, and McGuire, (1985), 101–31.Google Scholar
Code, A. 1986. “Aristotle: Essence and Accident,” in Warner, and Grandy, (1986), 411–39.Google Scholar
Corcoran, J. (ed.) 1974. Ancient Logic and Its Modern Interpretations. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornford, F. M. 1935/1957. Plato’s Theory of Knowledge: The Theaetetus and Sophist of Plato. Reprinted. Indianapolis/New York: Bobbs Merrill (1957).Google Scholar
Cornford, F. M. (trans. with notes and intro.) 1945. The Republic of Plato. New York and London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Crivelli, P. 1990. “Il Sophista di Platone: non essere, negazione e falsità.” Atti e Memorie dell’ Accademia Toscana di Scienze e Lettre ‘La Colombaria’ 55: 9–104.Google Scholar
Crivelli, P. 2012. Plato’s Account of Falsehood: A Study of the Sophist. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Crombie, I. M. 1963. An Examination of Plato’s Doctrines, vol. II. New York: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
Curd, P. and McKirahan, R. 2012. A Presocratics Reader: Selected Fragments and Testimonia, 2nd edn. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub. Co.Google Scholar
Dancy, R. M. 1975. Sense and Contradiction: A Study in Aristotle. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dancy, R. M. 1987. ‘Theaetetus’ First Baby: Theaetetus 151e–160e,” Philosophical Topics 15: 61–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dancy, R. M. 1991. “Critical Discussion of Aristotle’s First Principles.” Ancient Philosophy 11: 447–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dancy, R. M. 1999. “The Categories of Being in Plato’s Sophist.” Ancient Philosophy 19: 45–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dancy, R. M. 2004. Plato’s Introduction of Forms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dancy, R. M. 2006. “Hintikka, Aristotle, and Existence,” in Auxier, and Hahn, (2006), 311–28.Google Scholar
David, M. 1994. Correspondence and Disquotation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
David, M. 2009a. “Truth-making and Correspondence,” in Lowe, and Rami, (2009), 137–57.Google Scholar
David, M. 2009b. “The Correspondence Theory of Truth.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Online: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth-correspondence/Google Scholar
Davidson, D. 1996 “The Folly of Trying to Define Truth.” Journal of Philosophy 93: 263–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D. 2005. Truth and Predication. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Day, J. 1997. “The Theory of Perception in Plato’s Theaetetus 152–83.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 15: 65–80.Google Scholar
Devereux, D. 1994. “Separation and Immanence in Plato’s Theory of Forms.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 12: 63–90. Reprinted in Fine, (1999), 192–242.Google Scholar
Diès, A. 1909/1932. La definition de l’etra et la nature des idées dans le Sophiste de Platon, second edn. Paris: Librarie Philosophique J. Vrin.Google Scholar
di Mattei, S. 2006 “Rereading Aristotle’s De interpretatione 16a3–8: Verbal Propositions as Symbols of the Process of Reasoning.” Ancient Philosophy 26: 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duerlinger, J. (trans. and comm.) 2005. Plato’s Sophist: A Translation with a Detailed Account of its Theses and Arguments. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Duke, E. A., Hicken, W. F., Nicoll, W. S. M., Robinson, D. B., and Strachan, J. C. C. 1995. Platonis Opera. Vol. 1. Oxford Classical Texts. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Duncombe, M. 2012. “Absolute and Relative Categories at Sophist 255c14.” Ancient Philosophy 31: 77–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Düring, I. and Owen, G. E. L. (eds.) 1960. Aristotle and Plato in the Mid-Fourth Century. Göteborg: Elanders Boktryckeri Aktiebolag.Google Scholar
Ebrey, D. In press. “Forms and the Origin of Self-Predication.”Google Scholar
Eck, J. 1995. “Falsity without Negative Predication: On Sophistes 255e–263d.” Phronesis 40: 20–47.Google Scholar
Eck, J. 2000. “Plato’s Logical Insights: On Sophist 254d–257a.” Ancient Philosophy 20: 53–79.Google Scholar
Edwards, D. 2013. “Truth as a Substantive Property.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 91: 279–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enders, M. and Szaif, J. (eds.) 2006. Die Geschichte des philosophischen Begriffs der Wahrheit. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, M. 2011. “Plato on the Norms of Speech and Thought.” Phronesis 56: 322–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Everson, S. (ed.) 1990. Companions to Ancient Thought 1: Epistemology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Everson, S. (ed.) 1994. Companions to Ancient Thought 3: Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ferejohn, M. 1989. “Plato and Aristotle on Negative Predication and Semantic Fragmentation.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 71: 257–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferg, S. 1976. “Plato on False Statement: Relative Being, a Part of Being, and Not-Being in the Sophist.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 14: 336–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fine, G. 1977. “Plato on Naming.” Philosophical Quarterly 27: 289–301. Reprinted in Fine, (2003), 117–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fine, G. 1978. “Knowledge and Belief in Republic V.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 60: 121–39. Reprinted in Fine, (2003), 66–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fine, G. 1979. “Knowledge and Logos in the Theaetetus.” Philosophical Review 88: 366–97. Reprinted in Fine, (2003), 225–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fine, G. 1984. “Separation.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 2: 31–87. Reprinted in Fine, (2003), 252–300.Google Scholar
Fine, G. 1986. “Immanence.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 4: 71–97. Reprinted in Fine, (2003), 301–25.Google Scholar
Fine, G. 1993. On Ideas: Aristotle’s Criticisms of Plato Theory of Forms. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Fine, G. 1994. “Protagorean Relativisms.” Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 10: 211–43. Reprinted in Fine, (2003), 132–59.Google Scholar
Fine, G. (ed.) 1999. Plato 1: Metaphysics and Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fine, G. 2003. Plato on Knowledge and Forms: Selected Essays. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fine, G. (ed.) 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Plato. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, H. N. (ed. and trans.) 1921. Plato, Theaetetus, Sophist. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Frede, D. 1992. “The Cognitive Role of Phantasia in Aristotle,” in Nussbaum, and Rorty, Oksenberg (1992), 279–96.Google Scholar
Frede, M. 1967. Prädikation und Existenzaussage: Platons Gebrauch von ‘… ist …’ und ‘… ist nicht …’ im Sophistes. Hypomnemata 18. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Frede, M. 1988. “Being and Becoming in Plato.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, supp. vol. 37–52.Google Scholar
Frede, M. 1987a. Essays in Ancient Philosophy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Frede, M. 1987b. “The Unity of General and Special Metaphysics: Aristotle’s Conception of Metaphysics,” in Frede, (1987a), 81–95.Google Scholar
Frege, G. 1979. Posthumous Writings. Hermes, H., Kambartel, F., and Kaulbach, (eds), Long, P. and White, R. (trans.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Frege, G. 1984. “On Concept and Object,” in Collected Papers on Mathematics, Logic, and Philosophy, McGuinness, B. (ed.), Geach, P. (trans). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Freidländer, P. 1954. Platon: Seinswahrheit und Lebenswirklichkeit, second edn. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaskin, R. 1995. “Bradley’s Regress, the Copula, and the Unity of the Proposition.” Philosophical Quarterly 45: 161–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaskin, R. 2008. The Unity of the Proposition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerson, L. 1986. “A Distinction in Plato’s Sophist.” The Modern Schoolman 63: 251–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerson, L. 2002. “Plato’s Development and the Development of the Theory of Forms,” in Welton, (2002): 85–109.Google Scholar
Gerson, L. 2004a. “Plato on Identity, Sameness, and Difference.” Review of Metaphysics 58: 305–32.Google Scholar
Gerson, L. 2004b. “Platonism and the Invention of the Problem of Universals.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 86: 233–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gill, M. L. 2009. “Method and Metaphysics in Plato’s Sophist and Statesman.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Online: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-sophstate/Google Scholar
Gill, M. L. 2012. Philosophos: Plato’s Missing Dialogue. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gill, M. L. and Ryan, P. (trans. with intro. by Gill) 1996. Plato, Parmenides. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Gillespie, C. M. 1913. “The Logic of Antisthenes.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 26: 479–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glanzberg, M. (ed.) In press. The Oxford Handbook of Truth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, W. 1890/1992. Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of the Greek Verbs. Philadelphia: William H. Allen.Google Scholar
Gottlieb, P. 1994. “The Principle of Non-Contradiction and Protagoras.” Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 8: 183–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffith, T. (trans.) and Ferrari, G.R.F. (ed.) 2000. Plato, The Republic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Grover, D. 1992. A Prosentential Theory of Truth. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grover, D., Camp, J., and Belnap, N. 1975. “A Prosentential Theory of Truth.” Reprinted in Grover, (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grube, G. M. A. (trans.), Reeve, C. D. C. (rev. trans.) 1992. Plato, Republic. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Haack, S. 2008. “The Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 32: 20–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halper, E. 1989. One and Many in Aristotle’s Metaphysics: The Central Books. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Halper, E. 2009. One and Many in Aristotle’s Metaphysics: Books Alpha–Delta. Las Vegas/Zurich/Athens: Parmenides Publishing.Google Scholar
Hamlyn, D. W. (trans. and comm.) 1993. Aristotle, De Anima: Books II and III. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hankinson, R. J. 1998. Cause and Explanation in Ancient Greek Thought. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Harte, V. 2002. Plato on Parts and Wholes: The Metaphysics of Structure. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heidegger, M. 1924/25. Platon: Sophistes, vol. 19 of Gesamtausgabe. Schussler, Ingeborg (ed.). Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann. Translated as Plato’s Sophist. Rojcewicz, R. and Schuwer, A. (trans.). Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University Press (1997).Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. 1967/1998. Wegmarken, revised and expanded 1976. Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann. Translated as Pathmarks, McNeill, W. (ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Heinaman, R. 1982–83. “Communion of Forms.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 83: 175–90.Google Scholar
Heinaman, R. 1983. “Being in the Sophist.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 65: 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinaman, R. 1986. “Once More: Being in the Sophist.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 68: 121–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinaman, R. 1989. “Self-predication in Plato’s Middle Dialogues.” Phronesis 34: 56–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hestir, B. 2000. “A Conception of Truth in Republic V.” History of Philosophy Quarterly 17: 311–32.Google Scholar
Hestir, B. 2003. “A ‘Conception’ of Truth in Plato’s Sophist.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 4: 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hestir, B. 2004. “Plato and the Split Personality of Ontological Alêtheia.” Apeiron 37: 109–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hestir, B. 2013. “Aristotle’s Conception of Truth: An Alternative View.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 51: 193–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoekstra, M. and Sheppers, F. 2003. “Ὄνομα, ῥῆμα, et λόγος dans le Cratyle et le Sophiste de Platon: Analyse du lexique et analyse du discours.” L’Antiquité Classique 72: 55–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hintikka, J. 1986. “The Varieties of Being in Aristotle,” in Knuuttila, and Hintikka, (1986), 81–114.Google Scholar
Hylton, P. 1984. “The Nature of the Proposition and the Revolt against Idealism,” in Rorty, , Schneewind, , and Skinner, (1984), 375–97.Google Scholar
Hylton, P. 1990. Russell, Idealism and the Emergence of Analytic Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Ilting, K. H. 1965. “Aristoteles über Platons philosophische Entwicklung.” Zeitschrift für philosophische Entwicklung 19.Google Scholar
Irwin, T. 1982. “Aristotle’s Conception of Signification,” in Schofield, and Nussbaum, (1982), 241–66.Google Scholar
Jaeger, W. 1923/1967. Aristotle: Fundamentals of the History of His Development. Reprint by Oxford: Clarendon Press (1967).Google Scholar
Jordan, R. 1984. Plato’s Arguments for Forms. Cambridge: Cambridge Philosophical Society.Google Scholar
Kahn, C. 1966. “The Greek Verb ‘To Be’ and the Concept of Being.” Foundations of Language 2: 245–65. Reprinted in Kahn, (2009), 16–40.Google Scholar
Kahn, C. 1973b. “Language and Ontology in the Cratylus,” in Lee, , Mourelatos, , and Rorty, (1973), 152–76.Google Scholar
Kahn, C. 1978. “Linguistic Relativism and the Greek Project of Ontology,” in Sprung, (1978).Google Scholar
Kahn, C. 1981a. “Did Plato Write Socratic Dialogues?” Classical Quarterly 31: 305–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, C. 1981b. “Some Philosophical Uses of ‘to be’ in Plato.” Phronesis 26: 105–34. Reprinted in Kahn, (2009), 75–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, C. 1996. Plato and the Socratic Dialogue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
Kahn, C. 2002a. “Flux and Forms in the Timaeus,” in Canto-Sperber, and Pelligrin, P. (2002), 113–31.Google Scholar
Kahn, C. 2004. “A Return to the Theory of the Verb be and the Concept of Being.” Ancient Philosophy 24: 381–405. Reprinted in Kahn, (2009), 109–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, C. 2007. “Why is the Sophist a Sequel to the Theaetetus?” Phronesis 52.1: 33–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, C. 2013. Plato and the Post-Socratic Dialogue: The Return to the Philosophy of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, J. 1990. The Metaphysics of Meaning. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, W. (ed. and trans.) 1982. The Portable Nietzsche. New York, NY: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Keyt, D. 1969. “Plato’s Paradox that the Immutable is Unknowable.” Philosophical Quarterly 19: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, J. 2007. The Nature and Structure of Content. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirk, G. S. 1951. “The Problem of the Cratylus.” American Journal of Philology 72: 225–53.Google Scholar
Kirk, G. S., Raven, J. E., and Schofield, M. 1983. The Presocratic Philosophers, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirwan, C. (trans. and comm.) 1993. Aristotle, Metaphysics: Books, 2nd edn. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Knuuttila, S. and Hintikka, J. (eds.) 1986. The Logic of Being: Historical Studies. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kostman, J. P. 1973. “False Logos and Not-Being in Plato’s Sophist,” in Moravcsik, (1973), 192–212.Google Scholar
Kraut, R. (ed.) 1992. The Cambridge Companion to Plato. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kretzmann, N. 1974. “Aristotle on Spoken Sound Conventional by Nature,” in Corcoran, (1974), 3–21.Google Scholar
Lee, E. N. 1972. “Plato on Negation and Not-Being in the Sophist.” Philosophical Review 81: 267–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, E. N., Mourelatos, A. P. D., and Rorty, R. M. (eds.) 1973. Exegesis and Argument, Phronesis, supp. vol. I. Assen: Van Gorcum.Google Scholar
Lee, M. 2005. Epistemology after Protagoras: Responses to Relativism in Plato, Aristotle, and Democritus. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leigh, F. 2008. “The Copula and Semantic Continuity in Plato’s Sophist.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy XXXIV: 105–21.Google Scholar
Lepore, E. and Pelletier, F. 2012. “Meaning and Ontology,” in Schantz, (2012), 399–433.Google Scholar
Lewis, F. 1976. “Plato on ‘Not’.” California Studies in Classical Antiquity 9:89–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, F. 2011. “Predication, Things, and Kinds in Aristotle’s Metaphysics.” Phronesis 56: 350–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levett, M. J. (trans.) 1990. Plato, Theaetetus. Burnyeat, M. (rev. trans. and intro.) Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Lloyd, A. C. 1976. “The Principle that the Cause Is Greater than the Effect.” Phronesis 21: 146–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lorenz, K. and Mittelstrass, J. 1966. “Theaitetos Fleigt: Zur Theorie wahrer under falscher Sätze bei Platon.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 48: 113–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowe, E. J. and Rami, A. (eds.) 2009. Truth and Truth-Making. McGill-Queens University Press.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, M. M. 1986. “Putting the Cratylus in its Place.” Classical Quarterly 36: 125–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malcolm, J. 1967. “Plato’s analysis of ‘τὸ ὄν’ and ‘τὸ μὴ ὄν’ in the Sophist,” Phronesis 12: 130–46.Google Scholar
Malcolm, J. 1991. Plato on the Self-Predication of the Forms. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malcolm, J. 2006. “A Way Back for Sophist 255c12–13.” Ancient Philosophy 26: 275–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthen, M. 1983. “Greek Ontology and the ‘Is’ of Truth.” Phronesis 28: 113–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthen, M. 1985. “Perception, Relativism, and Truth: Reflections on Plato’s Theaetetus 152–60.” Dialogue 24: 33–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCabe, M. M. 1994. Plato’s Individuals. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCabe, M. M. 2000. Plato and His Predecessors. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, J. (trans. with notes) 1973. Plato, Theaetetus. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, J. (trans. with notes) 1982. “Falsehood and not-being in Plato’s Sophist,” in Schofield, and Nussbaum, (1982), 115–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meinong, A. (ed.) 1904a. Untersuchungen zur Gegenstandstheorie und Psychologie. Leipzig: J. A. Barth.Google Scholar
Meinong, A. (ed.) 1904b. “Über Gegenstandstheorie,” in Meinong, (1904a), 1–51. Translated as “The Theory of Objects,” in Chisholm, R. M. (ed.), Realism and the Background of Phenomenology. Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1960.Google Scholar
Meinwald, C. 1991. Plato’s Parmenides. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meinwald, C. 1998. “Prometheus’s Bounds: Peras and Apeiron in Plato’s Philebus,” in Gentzler, (1998), 165–80.Google Scholar
Menn, S. P. 1995. Plato on God as Nous. Journal of the History of Philosophy Monograph Series. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, D. 2004. “Fast and Loose about Being: Criticism of Competing Ontologies in Plato’s Sophist.” Ancient Philosophy 24: 339–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, M. 1986. Parmenides: The Conversion of the Soul. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millikan, R. 2000. On Clear and Confused Ideas: An Essay about Substance Concepts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minio-Paluello, L. (ed.) 1949. Aristotelis Categoriae et Liber de lnterpretatione. Oxford Classical Texts. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Modrak, D. 2001. Aristotle’s Theory of Language and Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Modrak, D. 2012. “Meaning and Cognition in Plato’s Cratylus and Theaetetus.” Topoi 31: 167–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Modrak, D. 2013. “Plato on Words, Parts of Words, and Meaning.” Philosophical Inquiry 37: 105–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, J. M. E. 1960. “Συμπλοκή Εἰδῶν and the genesis of Λόγος.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 42: 117–29.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, J. M. E. 1962. “Being and Meaning in Plato’s Sophist.” Acta Philosophica Fennica 14: 23–78.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, J. M. E. 1982. “Forms and dialectic in the second half of the Parmenides,” in Schofield, and Nussbaum, (1982), 135–54.Google Scholar
Morrow, G. and Dillon, J. (trans. with intro. and notes by Dillon) 1987. Proclus, Commentary on Plato’s Parmenides. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Moss, J. 2014. “Plato’s Appearance/Assent Account of Belief.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 114: 213–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Motte, A., Rutten, C., and Somville, P. 2003. Philosophie de la Forme: Eidos, Idea, Morphê dans la Philosophie Grecque des Origines à Aristote. Louvain-La-Veuve: Éditions Peeters.Google Scholar
Mourelatos, A. P. D. 2008. The Route of Parmenides, 2nd edn. Las Vegas, Zurich, Athens: Parmenides Pub.Google Scholar
Nehamas, A. 1979. “Self-Predication and Plato’s Theory of Forms.” American Philosophical Quarterly 16: 93–103. Reprinted in Nehamas, (1999), 176–95.Google Scholar
Nehamas, A. 1982. “Participation and Predication in Plato’s Later Thought.” Review of Metaphysics 36: 343–74. Reprinted in Nehamas, (1999), 196–23.Google Scholar
Nehamas, A. and Woodruff, P. (trans.) 1989. Plato, Symposium. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Notomi, N. 1999. The Unity of Plato’s Sophist: Between the Sophist and the Philosopher. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nussbaum, M. and Oksenberg Rorty, A. (eds.) 1992. Essays on Aristotle’s De Anima. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Owen, G. E. L. 1953. “The Place of the Timaeus in Plato’s Later Dialogues.” Classical Quarterly 3: 79–95. Reprinted in Owen, (1986), 65–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, G. E. L. 1957. “A Proof in the Peri Ideon.” Journal of Hellenic Studies 77: 103–11. Reprinted in Owen, (1986), 165–79.Google Scholar
Owen, G. E. L. 1960. “Logic and Metaphysics in Some Earlier Works of Aristotle,” in Düring, and Owen, (1960), 163–90. Reprinted in Owen, (1986), 180–99.Google Scholar
Owen, G. E. L. 1965a. “Aristotle on the Snares of Ontology,” in Bambrough, (1965), 69–95. Reprinted in Owen, (1986), 259–78.Google Scholar
Owen, G. E. L. 1965b. “Inherence.” Phronesis 10: 97–105. Reprinted in Owen, (1986), 252–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, G. E. L. 1966. “Plato and Parmenides on the Timeless Present.” The Monist 50: 317–40. Reprinted in Owen, (1986), 27–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, G. E. L. 1968a. “Dialectic and Eristic in the Treatment of the Forms,” in Owen, (1968b), 103–25. Reprinted in Owen, (1986), 221–38.Google Scholar
Owen, G. E. L. (ed.) 1968b. Aristotle on Dialectic: the Topics. Papers of the Third Aristotelicum. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Owen, G. E. L. 1970. “Notes on Ryle’s Plato,” in Wood, and Pitcher, (1970), 341–72. Reprinted in Owen, (1986), 85–103.Google Scholar
Owen, G. E. L. 1971. “Plato on Not-Being,” in Vlastos, (1971), 223–67. Reprinted in Owen, (1986), 104–37.Google Scholar
Owen, G. E. L. 1986. Logic, Science, and Dialectic. Nussbaum, M. (ed.). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Patterson, D. 2010. “Truth as Conceptually Primitive,” in Wright, and Pederson, (2010), 13–29.Google Scholar
Pelletier, F. J. 1990. Parmenides, Plato, and the Semantics of Not-Being. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Penner, T. 1987. Ascent from Nominalism: Some Existence Arguments in Plato’s Middle Dialogues. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pépin, J. 1985. “Σύμβολα, Σημεῖα, Ὁμοιώματα: A propos de De Interpretatione I, 16a3–8 et Politique VIII 5, 1340a6–39,” in Weisner, (1985), 22–44.Google Scholar
Peterson, S. 1973. “A Reasonable Self-Predication Premise for the Third Man Argument.” Philosophical Review 107: 451–70.Google Scholar
Peterson, S. 2000. “The Language Game in Plato’s Parmenides.” Ancient Philosophy 20: 19–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polansky, R. 2007. Aristotle’s De Anima. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polansky, R. and Kuczewsky, M. 1990. “Speech and Thought, Symbol and Likeness: Aristotle’s De Interpretatione 16a3–9.” Apeiron 23: 51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prior, W. 1985. Unity and Development in Plato’s Metaphysics. London and Syndey: Croom Helm. Reprinted New York: Routledge (2013).Google Scholar
Pritzl, K. 1998. “Being True in Aristotle’s Thinking.” Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 14: 177–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rami, A. 2009. “Introduction: truth and truth-making,” in Lowe, and Rami, (2009), 1–36.Google Scholar
Reeve, C. D. C. 1985. “Motion, Rest, and Dialectic in the Sophist.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 67: 47–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rickless, S. 1998. “How Parmenides Saved the Theory of Forms.” Philosophical Review 107: 501–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rickless, S. 2007. Plato’s Forms in Transition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rijk, L. M. 1986. Plato’s Sophist: A Philosophical Commentary. Amsterdam/Oxford/New York: North-Holland Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Rijk, L. M. 2002. Aristotle: Semantics and Ontology, vol. 1. Leiden/Boston/Köln: Brill.Google Scholar
Ritter, C. 1923. Platon: Sein Leben, Seine Schriften, Seine Lehre, vol. II. München: C. H. Beck.Google Scholar
Robinson, D. B. 1999. “Textual Notes on Plato’s Sophist.” Classical Quarterly 49: 139–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, R. 1950. “Forms and Error in Plato’s Theaetetus.” Philosophical Review 59: 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodriguez-Pereyra, G. 2009. “Why Truth-Makers,” in Lowe, and Rami, (2009): 227–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rorty, R., Schneewind, J.B., and Skinner, Q. 1984. Philosophy in History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, W. D. (ed. and comm.) 1924. Aristotle, Metaphysics, 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Reprinted 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, W. D. (ed. and comm.)1949. Aristotle, Prior and Posterior Analytics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, W. D. (ed. and comm.) 1951. Plato’s Theory of Ideas. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ross, W. D. (ed.) 1957. Aristotelis Politica. Oxford Classical Texts. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Ross, W. D. (ed.) 1958. Aristotelis Topica et Sophistici Elenchi. Oxford Classical Texts. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, W. D. (ed. and comm.) 1961. Aristotle, De Anima. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, W. D. (ed. and comm.) 1966. “The Development of Aristotle’s Thought,” in Düring, and Owen, (1966), 1–14.Google Scholar
Rudebusch, G. 1990. “Does Plato Think False Speech is Speech?” Noûs 24: 599–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runciman, W. G. 1959. “Plato’s Parmenides.” Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 64: 89–120. Reprinted in Allen, (1965), 149–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, B. 1903. The Principles of Mathematics, 2nd edn. New York and London: W. W. Norton and Co. Reprinted W. W. Norton and Co. (1996).Google Scholar
Santas, G. 1979. Socrates: Philosophy in Plato’s Early Dialogues. London, Boston and Henley: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Santas, G. 1980. “The Form of the Good in Plato’s Republic.” Philosophical Inquiry: 374–403. Reprinted in Fine, (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santas, G. (ed.) 2006. Blackwell Guide to Plato’s Republic. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sayre, K. 1983. Plato’s Late Ontology: A Riddle Resolved. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sayre, K. (trans. with comm.) 1996. Parmenides’ Lesson. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Schantz, R. 2012. “From Truth Conditions to Structured Propositions,” in Schantz, (2012), 259–86.Google Scholar
Schantz, R. (ed.) 2012. Prospects for Meaning, vol. 3. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schofield, M. and Nussbaum, M. (eds.) 1982. Language and Logos. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, D. 2007. Maieusis: Essays in Ancient Philosophy in Honour of Myles Burnyeat. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seligman, P. 1974. Being and Not-Being: An Introduction to Plato’s Sophist. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shields, C. 1999. Order in Multiplicity: Homonomy in the Philosophy of Aristotle. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Shields, C. 2013. “The Grounds of Logos,” in Anagnostopoulos, and Miller, (2013), 211–30.Google Scholar
Shorey, P. (trans.), 1903. The Unity of Plato’s Thought. Reprinted Chicago: The University of Chicago Press (1960).Google Scholar
Shorey, P. (trans.), 1937. Plato, Republic, two vols. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Silverman, A. 1990. “Plato on Perception and the Commons.” Classical Quarterly 40: 145–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverman, A. 2000. “Flux and Language in Plato’s Theaetetus.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 18: 109–52.Google Scholar
Silverman, A. 2001.“The End of the Cratylus: Limning the World.” Ancient Philosophy 21: 25–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Robin (trans. and comm.) 1997. Aristotle, Topics: Books I and VIII. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Sorabji, R. 1982. “Myths about Non-propositional Thought,” in Schofield, and Nussbaum, (1982), 295–314.Google Scholar
Sprung, M. (ed.) 1978. The Question of Being. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Stern, R. 1999. Transcendental Arguments: Problems and Prospects. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Stough, C. 1990. “Two Kinds of Naming in the Sophist.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 20: 355–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swiggers, P. 1984. “Théorie grammaticale et definition du discourse dans le Sophiste de Platon.” Les etudes classique 52: 15–17.Google Scholar
Szaif, J. 1998. Platons Begriff der Wahrheit. Revised. Freiberg-im-Breisgau: Verlag Karl Abner.Google Scholar
Szaif, J. 2006. “Die Geschichte des Wahrheitsbegriffs in der klassischen Antike,” in Enders, and Szaif, (2006), 1–32.Google Scholar
Tarski, A. 1944. “The Semantic Conception of Truth.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 4: 342–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, A. E. 1961. Plato. The Sophist and the Statesman. Klibansky, R. and Anscombe, G. E. M. (eds.). London: Nelson.Google Scholar
Teloh, H. 1981. The Development of Plato’s Metaphysics. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Thaler, N. 2013. “Plato on the Importance of ‘This’ and ‘That’: The Theory of Flux and Its Refutation in the Theaetetus.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 45: 1–42.Google Scholar
Thomas, C. 2008a. “Speaking of Something: Plato’s Sophist and Plato’s Beard.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 38: 631–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, C. 2008b. “Inquiry without Names in Plato’s Cratylus.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 46: 341–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turnbull, R. 1998. The Parmenides and Plato’s Late Philosophy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Vlastos, G. 1954. “The Third Man Argument in the Parmenides.” Philosophical Review 63: 319–49. Reprinted in Allen, (1965), 231–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vlastos, G. 1956. “Postscript to the Third Man: A Reply to Mr. Geach,” in Allen, (1965), 279–91.Google Scholar
Vlastos, G. 1969. “Self-Predication and Self-Participation in Plato’s Later Period.” Philosophical Review 78: 74–78. Reprinted in Vlastos, (1981), 335–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vlastos, G. (ed.) 1971. Plato I: Metaphysics and Epistemology. Garden City: Doubleday and Company, Inc.Google Scholar
Vlastos, G. 1973/1981a. Platonic Studies, second printing, corrected, enlarged. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Vlastos, G. 1973/1981b. “An Ambiguity in the Sophist.” in Vlastos, (1973/1981), 270–317.Google Scholar
Vlastos, G. 1981. “On a Proposed Redefinition of ‘Self-Predication’ in Plato.” Phronesis 26: 76–79. Reprinted in Vlastos, (1995), 215–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vlastos, G. 1987. “Separation in Plato.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 5: 187–96.Google Scholar
Vlastos, G. 1991. Socrates: Ironist and Moral Philosopher. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vlastos, G. 1995. Studies in Greek Philosophy, vol. II. Graham, D. (ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Vogt, K. M. 2012. Belief and Truth: A Skeptic Reading of Plato. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walz, M. 2006. “The Opening of On Interpretation: Toward a More Literal Interpretation.” Phronesis 51: 230–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warner, R. (trans.) 1972. Thucydides: History of the Peloponnesian War. Penguin Classics.Google Scholar
Warner, R. and Grandy, R. (eds.) 1986. Philosophical Grounds of Rationality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Welton, W. 2002. Plato’s Forms: Varieties of Interpretation. Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Wheeler, M. 1999. “Semantics in Aristotle’s Organon.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 37: 191–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, M. 2011. “A Deflationary Reading of Aristotle’s Definitions of Truth and Falsehood at Metaphysics 1011b26–7.” Apeiron 44: 67–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitaker, C.W.A. 1996. Aristotle’s De Interpretatione: Contradiction and Dialectic. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Wiggins, D. 1971. “Sentence Meaning, Negation, and Plato’s Problem of Non-Being,” in Vlastos, (1971), 268–303.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 1969. On Certainty. Anscombe, G. E. M. and von Wright, G. H. (eds.). Paul, D. and Anscombe, G. E. M. (trans.). New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 1984. Notebooks, 1914–1916. 2nd edn. von Wright, G. H. (ed.). Anscombe, G. E. M. (trans.)Google Scholar
Wolfsdorf, D. 2002. “Διακαιοσύνη and Ὁσιοτης at Protagoras 330–1.” Apeiron 35: 181–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, O.P. and Pitcher, G. (eds.) 1970. Ryle: A Collection of Critical Essays. Garden City: Doubleday.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, C. D. and Pederson, N. J. L. L (eds.) 2010. New Waves in Truth. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
Wyatt, J. 2013. “Domains, Plural Truth, and Mixed Atomic Propositions.” Philosophical Studies 166: 225–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar