Parmenides’ First Attack on the Forms
Proclus and the Logical Structure of Parmenides 130b–e
In: History of Philosophy & Logical AnalysisSearch for other papers by Pieter d’Hoine in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
This paper provides a case study for the use of syllogistic reconstructions in the commentaries on Plato by the fifth-century commentator Proclus. The paper discusses Proclus’ reconstruction of the argument about the range of the Forms in Plato’s Parmenides (130b–e). In his commentary on this dialogue, Proclus reports a syllogistic reconstruction of the argument proposed by some of his predecessors. In this reconstruction, the argument as a whole is interpreted as a straightforward attack on the existence of Forms, while the different premises of the hypothetical syllogism represent the respective positions of Parmenides and Socrates in the discussion. For Proclus, however, the argument about the range of Forms is not meant to be critical of the Forms, but rather provides a positive instruction about their range of application. I argue that while Proclus finds the syllogism a useful tool to reconstruct the different positions in the exegetical history of the argument, he does not accept it as an adequate reconstruction on his own account. The argument can be traced back most likely to the so-called ‘logical’ interpretations of the Parmenides that Proclus discusses – and dismisses – in the prologue to his commentary.
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
-
[Plato.] Platonis Opera. Vol. 2: Parmenides, Philebos, Symposium, Phaidros, Alcibiades, Alcibiades II, Hipparchus, Lovers. Burnet, J. (ed.), 1901. Oxford: Clarendon Press. (= Parm.)
-
[Plato.] Parmenides. Gill. M. L. & Ryan, P. (trs.). In: J. M. Cooper (ed.), Plato: Complete Works, 1997. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett, 359–397.
-
[Proclus.] Commentary on Plato’s Parmenides. Morrow, G. R. & Dillon, J. M. (trs.), 1987. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
-
[Proclus.] Procli in Platonis Parmenidem commentaria. Steel, C. et al. (eds.), 2007–2009. 3 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press. (= In Parm.)
-
d’Hoine, P. 2004. Four Problems Concerning the Theory of Ideas: Proclus, Syrianus and the Ancient Commentaries on the Parmenides. In: Van Riel, G. & Macé, C. (eds.), Platonic Ideas and Concept Formation in Ancient and Medieval Thought. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 9–29.
-
d’Hoine, P. 2010. “Ceux qui acceptent des Idées de toutes choses”. Sur l’interprétation de Parm. 130b3–e4 dans l’antiquité tardive. Philosophie antique 10, 227–252.
-
Del Forno, D. 2018. Proclus on the Hypothetical Method and the Concept of ἰδιότης. Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale 29, 45–58.
-
Dillon, J. 1987. Proclus and the Parmenidean Dialectic. In: Pépin, J. & Saffrey, H. D. (eds.), Proclus, lecteur et interprète des anciens. Actes du Colloque international du CNRS, Paris, 2–4 Octobre 1985. Paris: CNRS Éditions, 265–275.
-
Dillon, J. 1993. Alcinous. The Handbook of Platonism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
-
Hankinson, R. J. 2007. Self-Refutation and the “Sorites”. In: Scott, D. (ed.), Maieusis: Essays on Ancient Philosophy in Honour of Myles Burnyeat. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 351–373.
-
Ierodiakonou, K. 2016. A Note on Reductio ad impossibile in Post-Aristotelian Logic. In: Gourinat, J.-B. & Lemaire, J. (eds.), Logique et dialectique dans l’Antiquité. Paris: Vrin, 347–361.
-
Segonds, A.-P. & Luna, C. (eds., trs.). 2007–2017. Proclus. Commentaire sur le Parménide de Platon, 6 vols. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.
-
Steel, C. 1987. L’anagogie par les apories. In: Boss, G. & Seel, G. (eds.), Proclus et son influence. Zürich: Éditions du Grand Midi, 101–128.
-
Steel, C. 1997. Proclus et l’interprétation ‘logique’ du Parménide. In: Benakis, L. G. (ed.), Néoplatonisme et philosophie médiévale. Turnhout: Brepols, 67–92.
-
Steel, C. 2002. Une histoire de l’interprétation du Parménide dans l’Antiquité. In: Barbanti, M. & Romano, F. (eds.), Il Parmenide di Platone e la sua tradizione. Catania: CUECM, 11–40.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 361 | 0 | 0 |
| Full Text Views | 130 | 57 | 2 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 203 | 44 | 0 |
Parmenides’ First Attack on the Forms
Proclus and the Logical Structure of Parmenides 130b–e
In: History of Philosophy & Logical AnalysisSearch for other papers by Pieter d’Hoine in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
This paper provides a case study for the use of syllogistic reconstructions in the commentaries on Plato by the fifth-century commentator Proclus. The paper discusses Proclus’ reconstruction of the argument about the range of the Forms in Plato’s Parmenides (130b–e). In his commentary on this dialogue, Proclus reports a syllogistic reconstruction of the argument proposed by some of his predecessors. In this reconstruction, the argument as a whole is interpreted as a straightforward attack on the existence of Forms, while the different premises of the hypothetical syllogism represent the respective positions of Parmenides and Socrates in the discussion. For Proclus, however, the argument about the range of Forms is not meant to be critical of the Forms, but rather provides a positive instruction about their range of application. I argue that while Proclus finds the syllogism a useful tool to reconstruct the different positions in the exegetical history of the argument, he does not accept it as an adequate reconstruction on his own account. The argument can be traced back most likely to the so-called ‘logical’ interpretations of the Parmenides that Proclus discusses – and dismisses – in the prologue to his commentary.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 361 | 0 | 0 |
| Full Text Views | 130 | 57 | 2 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 203 | 44 | 0 |
