Book contents
- The structure of enquiry in Plato's early dialogues
- The structure of enquiry in Plato's early dialogues
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Book part
- Introduction
- Part I The Issue of the Justification of Plato's Essentialism
- Part II The Role ofAporiaand the Root of Plato's Essentialism
- Bibliography
- General index
- Index of passages cited
- References
Bibliography
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2015
Book contents
- The structure of enquiry in Plato's early dialogues
- The structure of enquiry in Plato's early dialogues
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Book part
- Introduction
- Part I The Issue of the Justification of Plato's Essentialism
- Part II The Role ofAporiaand the Root of Plato's Essentialism
- Bibliography
- General index
- Index of passages cited
- 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
- The Structure of Enquiry in Plato's Early Dialogues , pp. 241 - 247Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2015
References
Adam, J. and Adam, A. M. (1893) Platonis Protagoras, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Allen, J. (2006) ‘Dialectic and Virtue in Plato's Protagoras’, in Reis, B. (ed.), The Virtuous Life in Greek Ethics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 6–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, R. E. (1970) Plato's Euthyphro and the Earlier Theory of Forms, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Annas, J. (1992) ‘Plato the Sceptic’, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy: Methods of Interpreting Plato and his Dialogues, Supplementary Volume: 43–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benson, H. H. (1990) ‘The Priority of Definition and the Socratic Elenchus’, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 8: 19–65.Google Scholar
Benson, H. H. (2000) Socratic Wisdom: The Model of Knowledge in Plato's Early Dialogues, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beversluis, J. (2000) Cross-Examining Socrates: A Defense of the Interlocutors in Plato's Early Dialogues, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bluck, R. S. (1956) ‘Logos and Forms in Plato: A Reply to Professor Cross’, Mind 65: 522–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonitz, H. (1886) ‘Zur Erklärung des Dialogs Protagoras’, in his Platonische Studien, Berlin: Franz VahlenGoogle Scholar
Brickhouse, T. C. and Smith, N. D. (2000) The Philosophy of Socrates, Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Burnyeat, M. F. (1977a) ‘Socratic Midwifery, Platonic Inspiration’, Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies in London 24: 7–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnyeat, M. F. (1977b) ‘Examples in Epistemology: Socrates, Theaetetus and G. E. Moore’, Philosophy 52: 381–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnyeat, M. F. (1984) ‘The Sceptic in his Place and Time’, in Rorty, R., Schneewind, J. B. and Skinner, Q. (eds.), Philosophy in History, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 225–54.Google Scholar
Burnyeat, M. F. (2012) ‘Dissoi Logoi’, in his Explorations in Ancient and Modern Philosophy, Vol. 1, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 346–8.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. (2010) ‘Introduction’, in Charles, D. (ed.), Definition in Greek Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, M. H. (1962) ‘The Aporias in Plato's Early Dialogues’, Journal of the History of Ideas 23: 163–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, J. M. (2007) ‘Socrates and Philosophy as a Way of Life’, in Scott, D. (ed.), Maieusis: Essays in Ancient Philosophy in Honour of Myles Burnyeat, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 20–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crombie, I. M. (1976) An Examination of Plato's Doctrines, Vol. 1, Plato on Man and Society, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dancy, R. M. (2004) Plato's Introduction of Forms, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dancy, R. M. (2006) ‘Platonic Definitions and Forms’, in Benson, H. H. (ed.), A Companion to Plato, Maldon, MA: Blackwell, 70–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D. (1993) ‘Plato's Philosopher’, Apeiron 26: 174–94; reprinted in his Truth, Language and History, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005, 223–40.Google Scholar
Denyer, N. (2008) Plato: Protagoras, Cambridge Greek and Latin Classics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Denyer, N. (2014) Review of J. L. Fink (ed.), The Development of Dialectic from Plato to Aristotle. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. An Electronic Journal, 2014.03.09.Google Scholar
Dillon, J. M. and Polleichtner, W. (2009) Iamblichus of Chalcis: The Letters, Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature.Google Scholar
Dixsaut, M. (2001) Métamorphoses de la dialectique dans les dialogues de Platon, Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
Erler, M. (1987) Der Sinn der Aporien in den Dialogen Platons, Berlin: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, M. (2012) ‘Lessons From Euthyphro 10 A–11 B’, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 42: 1–38.Google Scholar
Fine, G. (1992) ‘Inquiry in the Meno’, in Kraut, R. (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Plato, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 200–26.Google Scholar
Fine, G. (1993) On Ideas: Aristotle's Criticism of Plato's Theory of Forms, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fine, G. (2008) ‘Does Socrates Claim to Know that He Knows Nothing?’, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 35: 49–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forster, M. N. (2006) ‘Socrates’ Demand for Definitions’, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 31: 1–47.Google Scholar
Forster, M. N. (2007) ‘Socrates’ Profession of Ignorance’, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 32: 1–35.Google Scholar
Frede, M. (1992a) ‘Introduction to the Protagoras’, in Lombardo, S. and Bell, K. Plato: Protagoras, Indianapolis, IN: Hackett, vii–xxxiv.Google Scholar
Frede, M. (1992b) ‘Plato's Argument and the Dialogue Form’, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy: Methods of Interpreting Plato and his Dialogues Supplementary Volume: 201–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujisawa, N. (1974) ‘Ἔχειν, Μετέχειν and Idioms of “Paradeigmatism” in Plato's Theory of Forms’, Phronesis 19: 30–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gagarin, M. (1969) ‘The Purpose of Plato's Protagoras’, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 100: 133–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geach, P. T. (1966) ‘Plato's Euthyphro: An Analysis and Commentary’, Monist 50: 369–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerson, L. P. (2004) ‘The Possibility of Knowledge According to Plato’, Plato: Internet Journal of the International Plato Society 4.Google Scholar
Gerson, L. P. (2009) Ancient Epistemology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glucker, J. (1997) ‘Socrates in the Academic Books and other Ciceronian Works’, in Inwood, B. and Mansfeld, J. (eds.), Assent and Argument: Studies in Cicero's Academic Books, Leiden: Brill, 58–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldschmidt, V. (1947a) Le paradigme dans la dialectique platonicienne, Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Goldschmidt, V. (1947b) Les dialogues de Platon: structure et méthode dialectique, Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Gonzalez, F. J. (1998) Dialectic and Dialogue: Plato's Practice of Philosophical Inquiry, Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Görler, W. (1997) ‘Cicero's Philosophical Stance in the Lucullus’, in Inwood, B.and Mansfeld, J. (eds.), Assent and Argument: Studies in Cicero's Academic Books, Leiden: Brill, 36–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guthrie, W. K. C. (1961) ‘Plato. Protagoras’ in Hamilton, E. and Cairns, H. (eds.), The Collected Dialogues of Plato, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 308–52.Google Scholar
Herrmann, F.-G. (2007) Words and Ideas: The Roots of Plato's Philosophy, Swansea: Classical Press of Wales.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubbard, B. A. F. and Karnofsky, E. S. (1982) Plato's Protagoras: A Socratic Commentary, London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Irwin, T. H. (1977) Plato's Moral Theory: The Early and Middle Dialogues, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Irwin, T. H. (1993) ‘Say What You Believe’, in Irwin, T. H. and Nussbaum, M. (eds.), Virtue, Love, and Form: Essays in Memory of Gregory Vlastos, Edmonton: Academic Printing (Special Issue of Apeiron 26): 1–17.Google Scholar
Irwin, T. H. (1998) ‘Common Sense and Socratic Method’ in Gentzler, J. (ed.), Method in Ancient Philosophy, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 29–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judson, L. (2010) ‘Carried Away in the Euthyphro’, in Charles, D. (ed.), Definition in Greek Philosophy Oxford: Oxford University Press, 31–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, C. H. (1995) ‘The Place of the Statesman in Plato's Later Work’, in Rowe, C. (ed.), Reading the Statesman: Proceedings of the III. Symposium Platonicum, Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag, 49–60.Google Scholar
Kahn, C. H. (1996) Plato and the Socratic Dialogue: The Philosophical Use of a Literary Form, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kahn, C. H. (2002) ‘On Platonic Chronology’, in Annas, J. and Rowe, C. (eds.), New Perspectives on Plato, Modern and Ancient, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 93–127.Google Scholar
Kapp, E. (1942) Greek Foundations of Traditional Logic, New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerferd, G. B. (1953) ‘Protagoras’ Doctrine of Justice and Virtue in the Protagoras of Plato’, Journal of Hellenic Studies 73: 42–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klosko, G. (1979) ‘Toward a Consistent Interpretation of the Protagoras’, Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 61: 125–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraut, R. (1984) Socrates and the State, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lane, M. (2011) ‘Reconsidering Socratic Irony’, in Morrison, D. R., The Cambridge Companion to Socrates, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 237–59.Google Scholar
Lee, D. C. (2010) ‘Dialectic and Disagreement in the Hippias Major’, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 39: 1–36.Google Scholar
Lee, D. C. (2013) ‘Drama, Dogmatism and the “Equals” Argument in Plato's Phaedo’, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 44: 1–40.Google Scholar
Lesher, J. H. (1987) ‘Socrates’ Disavowal of Knowledge’, Journal of the History of Philosophy 25: 275–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lesher, J. H. (2002) ‘Parmenidean Elenchos’, in Scott, G. A. (ed.), Does Socrates Have a Method? Rethinking the Elenchus in Plato's Dialogues and Beyond, University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 19–35.Google Scholar
Longo, A. (2000) La tecnica della domanda e le interrogazioni fittizie in Platone, Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore.Google Scholar
Marion, M. and Castelnérac, B. (2009) ‘Arguing for Inconsistency: Dialectical Games in the Academy’, in Primiero, G. and Rahman, S. (eds.), Acts of Knowledge: History, Philosophy and Logic, London: College Publications.Google Scholar
Matthews, G. B. (1999) Socratic Perplexity and the Nature of Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, G. B. (2006) ‘Socratic Ignorance’, in Benson, H. H. (ed.), A Companion to Plato, Maldon, MA: Blackwell, 103–18.Google Scholar
McPherran, M. L. (1985) ‘Socratic Piety in the Euthyphro’, Journal of the History of Philosophy 23: 283–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, M. (2006) ‘Akrasia in the Protagoras and Republic’, Phronesis 51: 195–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Natorp, Paul (1903/1921) Platos Ideenlehre. Eine Einführung in den Idealismus, Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag.Google Scholar
Nehamas, A. (1975a) ‘Confusing Universals and Particulars in Plato's Early Dialogues’, Review of Metaphysics 29: 287–306.Google Scholar
Nehamas, A. (1975b) ‘Plato on the Imperfection of the Sensible World’, American Philosophical Quarterly 12: 105–17.Google Scholar
Nehamas, A. (1990) ‘Eristic, Antilogic, Sophistic, Dialectic’, History of Philosophy Quarterly 7: 3–16.Google Scholar
Nehamas, A. (1998) The Art of Living: Socratic Reflections from Plato to Foucault, Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nightingale, A. W. (2004) Spectacles of Truth in Classical Greek Philosophy: Theoria in its Cultural Context, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Brien, D. (2003) ‘Socrates and Protagoras on Virtue’, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 24: 59–131.Google Scholar
Opsomer, J. (2001). ‘Platon. Aporía, euporía et les mots étymologiquement apparentes: Hippias mineur, Alcibiade I, Apologie, Euthyphron, Criton, Hippias majeur, Lysis, Charmide, Lachès, Protagoras, Gorgias, Ménon, Ion, Ménéxène, Euthydème, Cratyle’, in Motte, A. and Rutten, C. (eds), Aporia dans la philosophie grecque: des origines à Aristote, Louvain-la- Neuve: Peeters, 37–60.Google Scholar
Osborne, C. (1999) ‘“No Means Yes”: The Seduction of the Word in Plato's Phaedrus’, in Cleary, J. J. and Gurtler, G. M. (eds.), Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 15: 263–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, G. E. L. (1957) ‘A Proof in the ΠΕΡΙ ΙΔΕΩΝ’, Journal of Hellenic Studies 77: 103–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, S. (2011) Socrates and Philosophy in the Dialogues of Plato, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Politis, V. (2004) Paul Natorp. Plato's Theory of Ideas: An Introduction to Idealism, ed. with intro. by Politis, Vasilis, trans. Politis, Vasilis and Connolly, John, postscript Laks, André, Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag.Google Scholar
Politis, V. (2006) ‘Aporia and Searching in the Early Plato’, in Judson, L. and Karasmanis, V. (eds.), Remembering Socrates, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 88–109.Google Scholar
Politis, V. (2007) ‘Is Socrates Paralyzed by his State of Aporia? Meno 79e7–80d4’, in Brisson, L. and Erler, M. (eds.), Gorgias – Menon, Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag, 268–72.Google Scholar
Politis, V. (2008) ‘The Place of Aporia in Plato's Charmides’, Phronesis 53: 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Politis, V. (2010) ‘Explanation and Essence in Plato's Phaedo’, in Charles, D. (ed.), Definition in Greek Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 62–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Politis, V. (2012a) ‘What Do the Arguments in the Protagoras Amount to?’, Phronesis 57: 209–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Politis, V. (2012b) ‘What Is behind the ti esti Question?’, in Fink, J. L. (ed.), The Development of Dialectic from Plato to Aristotle, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 199–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rickless, S. C. (2007) Plato's Forms in Transition: A Reading of the Parmenides, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Robinson, T. M. (1984) Contrasting Arguments: An Edition of the Dissoi Logoi, Salem, NH: Ayer Company.Google Scholar
Rowe, C. (2007) Plato and the Art of Philosophical Writing, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowett, C. (2015) Knowledge and Truth in Plato, Oxford: Oxford University Press, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Ryle, G. (1965) ‘Dialectic in the Academy’, in Bambrough, R. (ed.), New Essays on Plato and Aristotle, Oxford: Routledge, 39–68.Google Scholar
Santas, G. X. (1972) ‘The Socratic Fallacy’, Journal of the History of Philosophy 10: 127–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santas, G. X. (1979) Socrates: Philosophy in Plato's Early Dialogues, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schofield, M. (1992) ‘Socrates versus Protagoras’, in Gower, B. S. and Stokes, M. C. (eds.), Socratic Questions: New Essays on the Philosophy of Socrates and its Significance, London: Routledge, 122–36.Google Scholar
Sedley, D. (1989) ‘Is the Lysis a Dialogue of Definition?’, Phronesis 34: 107–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, D. (2002) ‘Socratic Irony in the Platonist Commentators’, in Annas, J. and Rowe, C. (eds.), New Perspectives on Plato, Modern and Ancient, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 37–57.Google Scholar
Sedley, D. (2009) ‘Myth, Punishment and Politics in the Gorgias’, in Partenie, C. (ed.), Plato's Myths, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 51–76.Google Scholar
Taylor, A. E. (1911) ‘The Words, eidos, idea, in Pre-Platonic Literature’, in his Varia Socratica, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 178–267.Google Scholar
Taylor, A. E. (1937) Plato: The Man and his Work, London: Methuen (revised fourth edition).Google Scholar
Vasiliou, I. (2008) Aiming at Virtue in Plato, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vlastos, G. (1956) ‘Introduction to the Protagoras’, in his edition of the Protagoras, Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
Vlastos, G. (1972) ‘The Unity of the Virtues in the “Protagoras”’, Review of Metaphysics 25: 415–58.Google Scholar
Vlastos, G. (1983) ‘The Socratic Elenchus’, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 1: 1–26.Google Scholar
Vlastos, G. (1991) Socrates: Ironist and Moral Philosopher, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vlastos, G. (1994a). ‘The Socratic Elenchus: Method Is All’, in his Socratic Studies, ed. Burnyeat, M., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–38.Google Scholar
Vlastos, G. (1994b) ‘Socrates’ Disavowal of Knowledge’, in his Socratic Studies, ed. Burnyeat, M., Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 39–66.Google Scholar
Vlastos, G. (1994c) ‘Is the “Socratic Fallacy” Socratic?’, in his Socratic Studies, ed. Burnyeat, M., Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 67–86.Google Scholar
Vogt, K. M. (2012) Belief and Truth: A Skeptic Reading of Plato, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfsdorf, D. (2003) ‘Socrates’ Pursuit of Definitions’, Phronesis 48: 271–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfsdorf, D. (2004b) ‘Interpreting Plato's Early Dialogues’, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 27: 15–40.Google Scholar
Wolfsdorf, D. (2004c) ‘The Socratic Fallacy and the Epistemological Priority of Definitional Knowledge’, Apeiron 37: 35–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfsdorf, D. (2008a)Trials of Reason: Plato and the Crafting of Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfsdorf, D. (2008b) ‘The Method ex hupotheseōs at Meno 86e1–87d8’, Phronesis 53: 35–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodruff, P. (1986) ‘The Skeptical Side of Plato's Method’, Revue Internationale de Philosophie 156–7: 22–37.Google Scholar
Woodruff, P. (1990) ‘Plato's Earlier Epistemology’, in Everson, S. (ed.), Companions to Ancient Thought: Epistemology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 60–84.Google Scholar
Wright, C. (1992) ‘The Euthyphro Contrast: Order of Determination and Response Dependence’, in Wright, C. (ed.), Truth and Objectivity, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 108–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, C. M. (2006) ‘The Socratic Elenchus’, in Benson, H. H. (ed.), A Companion to Plato, Malden, MA: Blackwell, 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeller, E. (1922; originally 1888) Die Philosophie der Griechen in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung: II.1. Sokrates und die Sokratiker – Plato und die alte Akademie. Leipzig.Google Scholar