Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:22:08.559Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Importance of Δianoia in Plato's Theory of Forms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Neil Cooper
Neil Cooper
Affiliation:
Queen's College, Dundee, University of St. Andrews
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Plato in his discussion of the Divided Line (Republic 6) introduces a distinction between knowledge of the Forms in and by themselves () and . The first distinguishing characteristic of is that it ‘is compelled to employ assumptions, while knowledge of the Forms tries to advance to a certain first principle’ (510 b 4–9). The second distinguishing characteristic of is that it employs the ordinary objects of sense-perception as images (510 d 5–511 a 1). The geometer, in order to find out about ‘the Square’ and ‘theDiagonal’, draws diagrams and makes models.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , May 1966 , pp. 65 - 69
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1966

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

page 68 note 1 Ferguson, John in ‘Sun, Line and Cave Again’, C.Q. N.S. xiii (1963), 188–93)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, reviving Henry Jackson's interpretation, emphasizes both the close correspondence between the Line and the Cave and the indirect nature of . However, his interpretation differs from that above in that (a) seems to be identified with my ‘shadow-belief’, (b) the objects of are said to be ‘general notions’, and (c) the logical consequences of Plato's proportions are not worked out.