论《克拉提洛斯》中对律法师的两种理解

Chryssi Sidiropoulou
{"title":"论《克拉提洛斯》中对律法师的两种理解","authors":"Chryssi Sidiropoulou","doi":"10.31577/filozofia.2024.79.4.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ιn this paper, I compare the two conceptions of the “lawgiver” in the Platonic dialogue Cratylus . I present both the idea that words constitute imitations of things (resemblance naturalism) and the claim that names are tools which “separate” and “teach” being (the tool analogy). Then I examine the respective figures of the lawgiver ( nomothetes ) appearing in each of them. These are the lawgiver of the tool analogy (one who makes names on the model of a craftsman producing tools), and that of the lawgiver who introduces names constituting phonetic imitations of things. I argue that with respect to name giving, the former is in a much better position than the latter, and that mimetic naturalism faces the insuperable “paradox of institution.” My main claim is that, read in conjunction with the tool analogy, the notion of ἒθος introduced in 434e, offers a helpful framework for successfully overcoming the challenge of establishing the first names. Furthermore, the adoption of this perspective by Socrates allows him to navigate a complex position. This is a position that steers clear of both Cratylus’s “resemblance naturalism” and Hermogenes’s unadulterated conventionalism.","PeriodicalId":502748,"journal":{"name":"Filozofia","volume":"4 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the Two Conceptions of the Lawgiver in the Cratylus\",\"authors\":\"Chryssi Sidiropoulou\",\"doi\":\"10.31577/filozofia.2024.79.4.4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Ιn this paper, I compare the two conceptions of the “lawgiver” in the Platonic dialogue Cratylus . I present both the idea that words constitute imitations of things (resemblance naturalism) and the claim that names are tools which “separate” and “teach” being (the tool analogy). Then I examine the respective figures of the lawgiver ( nomothetes ) appearing in each of them. These are the lawgiver of the tool analogy (one who makes names on the model of a craftsman producing tools), and that of the lawgiver who introduces names constituting phonetic imitations of things. I argue that with respect to name giving, the former is in a much better position than the latter, and that mimetic naturalism faces the insuperable “paradox of institution.” My main claim is that, read in conjunction with the tool analogy, the notion of ἒθος introduced in 434e, offers a helpful framework for successfully overcoming the challenge of establishing the first names. Furthermore, the adoption of this perspective by Socrates allows him to navigate a complex position. This is a position that steers clear of both Cratylus’s “resemblance naturalism” and Hermogenes’s unadulterated conventionalism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":502748,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Filozofia\",\"volume\":\"4 7\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Filozofia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31577/filozofia.2024.79.4.4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Filozofia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31577/filozofia.2024.79.4.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在本文中,我比较了柏拉图对话《克拉提洛斯》中关于 "立法者 "的两种概念。我提出了词语是对事物的模仿(相似自然主义)和名称是 "分离 "和 "教导 "存在的工具(工具类比)这两种观点。然后,我分别考察了这两种观点中出现的立法者(nomothetes)的形象。他们分别是工具类比中的立法者(以制作工具的工匠为模型制作名称的人),以及引入构成事物语音模仿的名称的立法者。我认为,在命名方面,前者的处境要比后者好得多,模仿自然主义面临着无法克服的 "制度悖论"。我的主要主张是,结合工具类比,434e 中引入的ἒθος 概念为成功克服建立第一名称的挑战提供了一个有用的框架。此外,苏格拉底采用这一视角使他能够驾驭复杂的立场。这一立场既避开了克拉提洛斯的 "相似自然主义",也避开了赫摩杰尼斯的纯粹传统主义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On the Two Conceptions of the Lawgiver in the Cratylus
Ιn this paper, I compare the two conceptions of the “lawgiver” in the Platonic dialogue Cratylus . I present both the idea that words constitute imitations of things (resemblance naturalism) and the claim that names are tools which “separate” and “teach” being (the tool analogy). Then I examine the respective figures of the lawgiver ( nomothetes ) appearing in each of them. These are the lawgiver of the tool analogy (one who makes names on the model of a craftsman producing tools), and that of the lawgiver who introduces names constituting phonetic imitations of things. I argue that with respect to name giving, the former is in a much better position than the latter, and that mimetic naturalism faces the insuperable “paradox of institution.” My main claim is that, read in conjunction with the tool analogy, the notion of ἒθος introduced in 434e, offers a helpful framework for successfully overcoming the challenge of establishing the first names. Furthermore, the adoption of this perspective by Socrates allows him to navigate a complex position. This is a position that steers clear of both Cratylus’s “resemblance naturalism” and Hermogenes’s unadulterated conventionalism.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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