Plato’s Parmenides and The Knowable Many: Cosmos as Discursive Order in Hypothesis 3

In this paper, I argue that hypothesis 3 of Plato’s Parmenides presents a kind of cosmological lesson that shows why the “one” needs to be understood as an essential principle of order when examining what the “others” to the “one” would be like. At face value, the “others” are defined as opposite to...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Darren Gardner
Format: Article
Language:deu
Published: Société d’Études Platoniciennes 2019-05-01
Series:Études Platoniciennes
Subjects:
one
Online Access:http://journals.openedition.org/etudesplatoniciennes/1626
id doaj-1e84bbe1d1aa4c8fb01f6a534c36335c
record_format Article
spelling doaj-1e84bbe1d1aa4c8fb01f6a534c36335c2020-11-25T01:21:40ZdeuSociété d’Études PlatoniciennesÉtudes Platoniciennes2275-17852019-05-011510.4000/etudesplatoniciennes.1626Plato’s Parmenides and The Knowable Many: Cosmos as Discursive Order in Hypothesis 3Darren GardnerIn this paper, I argue that hypothesis 3 of Plato’s Parmenides presents a kind of cosmological lesson that shows why the “one” needs to be understood as an essential principle of order when examining what the “others” to the “one” would be like. At face value, the “others” are defined as opposite to the “one,” and so they cannot be “one.” Nevertheless, Parmenides claims that the “others” must not be entirely devoid of the “one.” This is because the kind of “one” in question, a form-like principle rather than a unit, is responsible for the “others” to be a discursive “many” which is required for them to be considered as “others” in the first place. I argue against the view that pairing of hypothesis 3 and 4 is merely aporetic, and propose that the lessons of hypothesis 3 can be sustained in light of hypothesis 4. The benefit of this reading is that Parmenides’ claim that denying forms would destroy the power of dialogue at 135c2 can be seen as upheld. And it contributes to the task of learning to think through the relationship of forms and participants by examining the way that discursive “others” are different from, but essentially dependent upon on a form-like principle of order.http://journals.openedition.org/etudesplatoniciennes/1626Parmenidescosmologyoneothersorder
collection DOAJ
language deu
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Darren Gardner
spellingShingle Darren Gardner
Plato’s Parmenides and The Knowable Many: Cosmos as Discursive Order in Hypothesis 3
Études Platoniciennes
Parmenides
cosmology
one
others
order
author_facet Darren Gardner
author_sort Darren Gardner
title Plato’s Parmenides and The Knowable Many: Cosmos as Discursive Order in Hypothesis 3
title_short Plato’s Parmenides and The Knowable Many: Cosmos as Discursive Order in Hypothesis 3
title_full Plato’s Parmenides and The Knowable Many: Cosmos as Discursive Order in Hypothesis 3
title_fullStr Plato’s Parmenides and The Knowable Many: Cosmos as Discursive Order in Hypothesis 3
title_full_unstemmed Plato’s Parmenides and The Knowable Many: Cosmos as Discursive Order in Hypothesis 3
title_sort plato’s parmenides and the knowable many: cosmos as discursive order in hypothesis 3
publisher Société d’Études Platoniciennes
series Études Platoniciennes
issn 2275-1785
publishDate 2019-05-01
description In this paper, I argue that hypothesis 3 of Plato’s Parmenides presents a kind of cosmological lesson that shows why the “one” needs to be understood as an essential principle of order when examining what the “others” to the “one” would be like. At face value, the “others” are defined as opposite to the “one,” and so they cannot be “one.” Nevertheless, Parmenides claims that the “others” must not be entirely devoid of the “one.” This is because the kind of “one” in question, a form-like principle rather than a unit, is responsible for the “others” to be a discursive “many” which is required for them to be considered as “others” in the first place. I argue against the view that pairing of hypothesis 3 and 4 is merely aporetic, and propose that the lessons of hypothesis 3 can be sustained in light of hypothesis 4. The benefit of this reading is that Parmenides’ claim that denying forms would destroy the power of dialogue at 135c2 can be seen as upheld. And it contributes to the task of learning to think through the relationship of forms and participants by examining the way that discursive “others” are different from, but essentially dependent upon on a form-like principle of order.
topic Parmenides
cosmology
one
others
order
url http://journals.openedition.org/etudesplatoniciennes/1626
work_keys_str_mv AT darrengardner platosparmenidesandtheknowablemanycosmosasdiscursiveorderinhypothesis3
_version_ 1725129145225052160