Interpreting Plato Socratically

  • J. Angelo Corlett
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter provides a taxonomy of approaches to the Platonic Question and articulates the Socratic Anti-Mouthpiece Interpretation of Plato’s dialogues. It then provides in-depth criticisms of the Mouthpiece Interpretation of Plato’s dialogues, exposing various logical errors employed by its supporters. It also seeks to differentiate the Socratic Anti-Mouthpiece Interpretation from other anti-mouthpiece approaches, clarifying that while some objections to the latter might be plausible and render problematic some of the other anti-mouthpiece approaches, they do not render problematic the Socratic Anti-Mouthpiece Interpretation.

References

  1. Brickhouse, Thomas C., and Nicholas D. Smith. 2002. The Socratic Elenchos? In Does Socrates have a method? ed. Gary A. Scott, 145–157. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Cooper, John M., and D.S. Hutchinson, eds. 1997. Plato: Complete works. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  3. Corlett, J. Angelo. 2005. Interpreting Plato’s dialogues. Las Vegas: Parmenides Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. Deane, P. 1973. Stylometrics do not exclude the Seventh Letter. Mind 82: 113–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gill, Christopher. 1996. Afterword: Dialectic and the dialogue form in late Plato. In Form and argument in late Plato, ed. Christopher Gill and Mary Margaret McCabe, 283–311. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Kenny, Anthony. 2006. What I believe. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  7. Lehrer, Keith. 2000. Theory of knowledge. 2nd ed. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  8. McCabe, M.M. 2008. Plato’s ways of writing. In The Oxford handbook of Plato, ed. Gail Fine, 88–113. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Mulhern, J.J. 1971. Two interpretive fallacies. Systematics 9: 168–172.Google Scholar
  10. ———. 2000. Interpreting the platonic dialogues: What can one say? In Who speaks for Plato? ed. Gerald A. Press, 221–234. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  11. Nails, Debra. 1995. Agora, academy, and the conduct of philosophy. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Peterson, Sandra. 2011. Socrates and philosophy in Plato’s dialogues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Vlastos, Gregory. 1991. Socrates: Ironist and moral philosopher. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Woozley, A.D. 1979. Law and obedience: The arguments of Plato’s Crito. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Angelo Corlett
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophySan Diego State UniversitySan DiegoUSA

Personalised recommendations