Socrates, the ‘What is F-ness?’ Question, and the Priority of Definition

IF 0.5 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Justin C. Clark
{"title":"Socrates, the ‘What is F-ness?’ Question, and the Priority of Definition","authors":"Justin C. Clark","doi":"10.1515/agph-2020-0125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In the so-called ‘dialogues of definition,’ Socrates appears to endorse the ‘priority of definition.’ This principle states that an agent cannot know anything about F-ness (its instances, examples, properties, etc.) without knowing what F-ness is (the definition of F-ness). Not only is this principle implausible, it is also difficult to square with Socrates’ method. In employing his method, Socrates appeals to truths about the instances and properties of F-ness, even while pursuing definitional knowledge; meanwhile, he holds that one cannot know those truths without already knowing the definition. Thus, there is a tension between Socrates’ principle and his method. Commentators have tried to resolve this problem in various ways, though typically without a careful examination of his ‘What is F-ness?’ question. I argue that Socrates employs the ‘What is F-ness?’ question as a way of introducing two distinct types of investigation into F-ness (conceptual and causal). With this established, the relationship between Socrates’ principle and his method comes to light, and the tension is resolved.","PeriodicalId":44741,"journal":{"name":"ARCHIV FUR GESCHICHTE DER PHILOSOPHIE","volume":"104 1","pages":"597 - 632"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/agph-2020-0125","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ARCHIV FUR GESCHICHTE DER PHILOSOPHIE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/agph-2020-0125","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract In the so-called ‘dialogues of definition,’ Socrates appears to endorse the ‘priority of definition.’ This principle states that an agent cannot know anything about F-ness (its instances, examples, properties, etc.) without knowing what F-ness is (the definition of F-ness). Not only is this principle implausible, it is also difficult to square with Socrates’ method. In employing his method, Socrates appeals to truths about the instances and properties of F-ness, even while pursuing definitional knowledge; meanwhile, he holds that one cannot know those truths without already knowing the definition. Thus, there is a tension between Socrates’ principle and his method. Commentators have tried to resolve this problem in various ways, though typically without a careful examination of his ‘What is F-ness?’ question. I argue that Socrates employs the ‘What is F-ness?’ question as a way of introducing two distinct types of investigation into F-ness (conceptual and causal). With this established, the relationship between Socrates’ principle and his method comes to light, and the tension is resolved.
苏格拉底,“什么是F-ness?”问题和定义的优先级
摘要在所谓的“定义对话”中,苏格拉底似乎赞同“定义的优先性”该原理指出,如果不知道F-ness是什么(F-ness的定义),代理就无法了解F-ness(其实例、示例、属性等)。这个原则不仅难以置信,而且很难与苏格拉底的方法相一致。在运用他的方法时,苏格拉底甚至在追求定义知识的同时,也诉诸于关于F-ness的实例和性质的真理;同时,他认为,如果不知道定义,就不可能知道这些真理。因此,苏格拉底的原则和方法之间存在着紧张关系。评论家们试图以各种方式解决这个问题,尽管通常没有仔细检查他的“什么是F-ness?”问题我认为苏格拉底使用了“什么是F-ness?”问题作为一种将两种不同类型的调查引入F性(概念性和因果性)的方式。有了这一点,苏格拉底的原则和方法之间的关系就暴露了出来,紧张关系也得到了解决。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
25.00%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie [Archive for the History of Philosophy] is one of the world"s leading academic journals specializing in the history of philosophy. The Archiv publishes exceptional scholarship in all areas of western philosophy from antiquity through the twentieth century. The journal insists on the highest scholarly standards and values precise argumentation and lucid prose. Articles should reflect the current state of the best international research while advancing the field"s understanding of a historical author, school, problem, or concept. The journal has a broad international readership and a rich history.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信