The aim of this paper is to examine the implications of Plato’s use of the term stoicheion, since his awareness of stoicheion’s polysemy reveals his view of the origin, the complexity and, at the same time, the order of reality. Moreover, his use of stoicheion allowed him both to inherit and to detach himself from his predecessors. I begin by presenting the history of the notion of stoicheion; then, since one of the meanings of stoicheion is ‘letter of the alphabet’, (...) I focus on the Cratylus, which contains the first of several passages where Plato employs the alphabet as a paradigm for the structure of a complex system. Finally, I turn to the Theaetetus, where Plato, for the first time, uses stoicheion in the sense of ‘element’ and where, through the relation letters/syllables, Plato clarifies that enumeration and juxtaposition are not sufficient to attain the real knowledge. I will argue that only thanks to these steps can we understand the occurrences of stoicheion in the Timaeus, where Plato first states that air, earth, fire and water are not stoicheia tou pantos, and then reveals that, instead, the basic triangles are ‘the elements of the universe’. (shrink)

L’adjectif eoikos apparaît dans trois passages cruciaux de la pensée grecque (Xénophane, fr. B35 ; Parménide, fr. B8, 60 ; Platon, Timée, 29b3-c3), caractérisant une certaine « ressemblance » à la vérité qui se veut constitutive du discours du savant. En fait, le long de cet examen on découvre que les trois usages du terme ne peuvent pas être disposés le long d’une ligne continue, vu la difficulté de comprendre à quelle notion de vérité, sous quel point de vue, et (...) avec quel degré d’évidence, ce discours se veut « ressemblant » selon l’occasion. Dans le cas de Parménide, cet aspect passe même au second plan, puisqu’on assiste à la prédominance d’une autre connotation qui accompagne le terme eoikos à partir de l’usage homérique, à savoir celle de la « convenance » à un contexte communicatif. L’article cherche dans l’ensemble à éclairer les déplacements que subit la logique de la similitude (et des procédés analogiques qui s’y greffent) en passant par des cadres ontologiques et épistémologiques aussi différents que le sont ceux de Xénophane, Parménide et Platon. (shrink)

The paper argues that the arguments from probability so popular in early Greek rhetoric and oratory essentially operate by appealing to common positions shared by both speaker and audience. Particularly in controversial debate provoked by fundamental dissensus they make their claim acceptable to the audience by pointing out a basic coherence or congruence of the speaker’s narrative with the audience’s own pre-established standards or standards of knowledge.