Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T21:42:57.315Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The “Many” in Republic 475a - 480a

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

F. C. White
F. C. White*
Affiliation:
University of Tasmania
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In this paper I wish to argue for a view that, despite its traditional standing, has not yet in any detail been defended. The view is briefly that in the Republic, at the point where Plato is engaged in contrasting the true philosopher with the “lover of sights and sounds”, he characterises sensible particulars — referred to as “the many” — as being bearers of opposite properties in so radical a manner that they can be said neither to be nor not to be: they lie somewhere between being and utter non-being.

There are two related reasons why this traditional view should now be closely scrutinised. The first is that, whatever the outcome, the passage of the Republic in question — 475a-480a — is quite crucial to our understanding of the development of Plato's thought about sensible particulars. The second’ is that it has been suggested recently, and ably argued, that Plato is not in fact talking about particulars at all; rather about types or sorts of particulars.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , June 1977 , pp. 291 - 306
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1] Adam, J. The Republic of Plato, 2 vols., Cambridge, 1902.Google Scholar
[2] Allen, R.E. “The Argument from Opposites in Republic V”, Review of Metaphysics 15 (1961), pp. 325-35.Google Scholar
[3] Allen, R.E. “Participation and Predication in Plato's Middle Dialogues,” Philosophical Review 69 (1960), reprinted in Plato, ed. Vlastos, (Macmillan, 1971), pp. 167-83.Google Scholar
[4] Athenaeus, The Deipnosophists, Heinemann, W. London and Cambridge, Mass., 1930.Google Scholar
[5] Bosanquet, B. A Companion to Plato's Republic, London and New York, 1895.Google Scholar
[6] Brentlinger, John A. “Particulars in Plato's Middle Dialogues”, Archiv fur Geschichte der Philosophie 54 (1972), pp. 116-52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7] Chambry, E. Platon, Oeuvres Complètes, tome VI, La République, Paris, 1959.Google Scholar
[8] Crombie, I.M. An Examination of Plato's Doctrines, Vol. II: Plato on Knowledge and Reality, London, 1963.Google Scholar
[9] Cross, R.C. and Woozley, A.D. Plato's Republic: A Philosophical Commentary, London and New York, 1964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10] Dies, A. Platon, Oeuvres Complètes, tome VI, La République Livres I-III, Paris. 1959. Introduction.Google Scholar
[11] G.C., Field The Philosophy of Plato, London, 1949.Google Scholar
[12] Findlay, J.N. Plato, The Written and Unwritten Doctrines, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1974.Google Scholar
[13] D., Gallop Plato, Phaedo, Oxford, 1975.Google Scholar
[14] Gosling, J.C.B. “Republic, Book V: etc.,” Phronesis 5 (1960), pp. 116-28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15] Gosling, J.C.B. Plato, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1973.Google Scholar
[16] G., Grote Plato, and the other Campanions of Socrates, 4 vols. London, 1885.Google Scholar
[17] Gulley, N. The Philosophy of Socrates, London, 1968.Google Scholar
[18] W.K.C., Guthrie A History of Greek Philosophy, Plato, Vol. 4, Cambridge, 1975.Google Scholar
[19] Kirwan, Christopher “Plato and Relativity”, Phronesis 19 (1974), pp. 112-29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[20] Murphy, N.R. “Plato, Parmenides 129 and Republic 475-480”, Classical Quarterly, 31 (1937), pp. 71-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[21] Murphy, N.R. An Interpretation of Plato's Republic, Oxford, 1951.Google Scholar
[22] Nehamas, A. “Predication and Forms of Opposites in the Phaedo”, The Review of Metaphysics 26 (1973), pp. 461-91.Google Scholar
[23] Nehamas, A. “Plato on the Imperfection of the Sensible World”, American Philosophical Quarterly 12 (1975), pp. 105-17.Google Scholar
[24] Nettleship, R.L. Lectures on the Republic of Plato, Macmillan, London, 1962. (Originally: Philosophical Lectures and Remains, 1897.)Google Scholar
[25] Owen, G.E.L. “A Proof in peri ideon”, Journal of Hellenic Studies, 77 (1957), Part I, pp. 103-11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[26] Ross, W.D. Plato's Theory of Ideas, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1951.Google Scholar
[27] Seligman, P. Being and Not-Being, Martinus Nijhoff, 1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[28] Shorey, P. Plato: The Republic, Vols. I and II, London and Cambridge, Mass., 1930 and 1935.Google Scholar
[29] Vlastos, G. “Degrees of Reality in Plato”, New Essays on Plato and Aristotle, edited by Bambrough, R. London and New York, 1965, pp. 1–19.Google Scholar
[30] Vlastos, G. “A Metaphysical Paradox”, Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 39 (1966), pp. 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[31] White, F.C. “The Physical World in the Theaetetus,” Philosophical Papers, Vol. III, May 1974, pp. 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[32] White, F.C. “Particulars in Phaedo 95e-107a”, Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Supplementary Volume II, New Essays in Plato and the Presocratics, ed. Shiner, Roger A. and King-Farlow, John (Guelph, 1976).Google Scholar
[33] Wolterstorff, N. “On the Nature of Universals”, in Universals and Particulars, ed. Loux, M. Anchor Books, New York, 1970, pp. 159-85.Google Scholar