Plato’s Forms as Functions and Structures
In: History of Philosophy & Logical AnalysisSearch for other papers by Dorothea Frede in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
Despite the fact that the theory of Forms is regarded as the hallmark of Plato’s philosophy, it has remained remarkably elusive, because it is more hinted at than explained in his dialogues. Given the uncertainty concerning the nature and extension of the Forms, this article makes no pretense to coming up with solutions to all problems that have occupied scholars since antiquity. It aims to elucidate only two aspects of that theory: the indication in certain dialogues that the Forms are what in modern parlance are called functions or purposes, and the indication in other dialogues that such functions rely on harmonious structures.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
Kant, I. Critique of Pure Reason. Kemp-Smith, N. (tr.), 1929. London: Palgrave Macmillan. (Original: Kant, I. 1781. Kritik der Reinen Vernunft. Riga: J. H. Hartknoch).
-
[Plato.] Meno. Grube, G. M. A. (tr.), Cooper, J. M. & Hutchinson, D. S. (eds.), 1997. Indianapolis – Cambridge: Hackett Publishing.
-
[Plato.] Parmenides. Gill, M. L. & Ryan, P. (trs.), Cooper, J. M. & Hutchinson, D. S. (eds.), 1997. Indianapolis – Cambridge: Hackett Publishing.
-
[Plato.] Phaedo. Grube, G. M. A. (tr.), Cooper, J. M. & Hutchinson, D. S. (eds.), 1997. Indianapolis – Cambridge: Hackett Publishing. (Phd.)
-
[Plato.] Philebus. Frede, D. (tr.), Cooper, J. M. & Hutchinson, D. S. (eds.), 1997. Indianapolis – Cambridge: Hackett Publishing.
-
[Plato.] Protagoras. Lombardo, S. & Bell, K. (trs.), Cooper, J. M. & Hutchinson, D. S. (eds.), 1997. Indianapolis – Cambridge: Hackett Publishing.
-
[Plato.] Republic. Grube, G. M. A. & Reeve, C. D. C. (trs.), Cooper, J. M. & Hutchinson, D. S. (eds.), 1997. Indianapolis – Cambridge: Hackett Publishing. (Resp.)
-
[Plato.] Sophist. White, N. P. (tr.), Cooper, J. M. & Hutchinson, D. S. (eds.), 1997. Indianapolis – Cambridge: Hackett Publishing.
-
[Plato.] Timaeus. Zeyl, D. (tr.), Cooper, J. M. & Hutchinson, D. S. (eds.), 1997. Indianapolis – Cambridge: Hackett Publishing. (Ti.)
-
Annas, J. & Rowe, C. (eds.). 2002. New Perspectives on Plato, Modern and Ancient. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
-
Barnes, J. 2008. Review of Sedley, D. 2007. Creationism and Its Critics in Antiquity. London Review of Books 30(11), 30–31.
-
Betegh, G. 2010. What Makes a Myth Eikos, In: Mohr, R., Sanders, K. & Sattler, B. (eds.), One Book, the Whole Universe, Plato’s Timaeus Today. Las Vegas: Parmenides Press, 213–226.
-
Broadie, S. 2007. Why no Platonistic Forms of Artefacts? In: Scott, D. (ed.), Maieusis. Essays in Ancient Philosophy in Honour of Myles Burnyeat. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 232–253.
-
Burnyeat, M. F. 1997–1998. Culture and Society in Plato’s Republic, The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, 20. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 215–324.
-
Burnyeat, M. F. 2000. Plato on Why Mathematics is Good for the Soul. In: Smiley, T. (ed.), Mathematics and Necessity. Proceedings of the British Academy 103, 1–81.
-
Burnyeat, M. F. 2005. ΕΙΚΩΣ ΜΥΘΟΣ. Rhizai 2, 143–165. (Reprinted in Partenie, C. (ed.). 2008. Plato’s Myths. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 167–186).
-
Cherniss, H. 1958. The Relation of the Timaeus to Plato’s Later Dialogues. American Journal of Philology 78, 225–266. (Reprinted in Allen, R. E. (ed.). 1965. Studies in Plato’s Metaphysics, New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 339–378).
-
Cooper, J. M. (ed.) 1997. Plato. Complete Works. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
-
Dancy, R. 2004. Plato’s Introduction of Forms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Fine, G. 1984. Separation. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 2, 31–87. (Reprinted in Fine, G. (ed.). 2003. Plato on Knowledge and Forms. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 152–200).
-
Frede, D. 1999. Plato on What the Body’s Eye Tells the Mind’s Eye. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 99, 191–209.
-
Frede, D. 2012. The Doctrine of Forms under Critique I. In: Steel, C. (ed.), Aristotle’s Metaphysics Alpha, Symposium Aristotelicum, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 265–296.
-
Gadamer, H.-G. (ed.). 1978. Texte zur Ideenlehre. Frankfurt: Klostermann.
-
Harte, V. 2002. Plato on Parts and Wholes. The Metaphysics of Structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-
Hermann, F.-G. 2007. Words & Ideas: the Roots of Plato’s Philosophy. Swansea: University of Wales Press.
-
Huffman, C. 2005. Archytas of Tarentum. Pythagorean, Philosopher and Mathematician King. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Kahn, C. H. 1996. Plato and the Socratic Dialogue: The Philosophical Use of a Literary Form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Kahn, C. H. 2014. Plato and the Post-Socratic Dialogues: The Return to the Philosophy of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Lienemann, B. 2017. Platonische Ideen als hybride Gegenstände. Deutsche Zeitsch1rift für Philosophie 65, 1031–1056.
-
Meinwald, C. 2016. Plato. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-
Owen, G. E. L. 1953: The Place of the Timaeus in Plato’s Dialogues. Classical Quarterly 3(12), 79–95. (Reprinted in Allen, R. E. (ed.). 1965. Studies in Plato’s Metaphysics, New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 331–338).
-
Ross, W. D. 1951. Plato’s Theory of Ideas. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-
Sedley, D. 2007. Creationism and its Critics in Antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press.
-
Silverman, A. 2002. The Dialectic of Essence: A Study of Plato’s Metaphysics, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
-
Taylor, C. C. W. 1991. Plato, Protagoras. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
-
Vlastos, G. 1975. Plato’s Universe. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
-
Vlastos, G. 1988. Elenchus and Mathematics: A Turning Point in Plato’s Philosophical Development. American Journal of Philology 109, 362–396.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1263 | 532 | 98 |
| Full Text Views | 337 | 37 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 1287 | 283 | 3 |
Plato’s Forms as Functions and Structures
In: History of Philosophy & Logical AnalysisSearch for other papers by Dorothea Frede in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
Despite the fact that the theory of Forms is regarded as the hallmark of Plato’s philosophy, it has remained remarkably elusive, because it is more hinted at than explained in his dialogues. Given the uncertainty concerning the nature and extension of the Forms, this article makes no pretense to coming up with solutions to all problems that have occupied scholars since antiquity. It aims to elucidate only two aspects of that theory: the indication in certain dialogues that the Forms are what in modern parlance are called functions or purposes, and the indication in other dialogues that such functions rely on harmonious structures.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1263 | 532 | 98 |
| Full Text Views | 337 | 37 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 1287 | 283 | 3 |