Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. VII*—The Argument from Knowing and Not Knowing in Plato's Theaetetus (187E5–188C8).Paolo Crivelli - 1996 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 96 (1):177-196.
    Paolo Crivelli; VII*—The Argument from Knowing and Not Knowing in Plato's Theaetetus (187E5–188C8), Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Volume 96, Issue 1.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Plato and the Norms of Thought.R. Woolf - 2013 - Mind 122 (485):171-216.
    This paper argues for the presence in Plato’s work of a conception of thinking central to which is what I call the Transparency View. According to this view, in order for a subject to think of a given object, the subject must represent that object just as it is, without inaccuracy or distortion. I examine the ways in which this conception influences Plato’s epistemology and metaphysics and explore some ramifications for contemporary views about mental content.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Sobre o argumento “saber ou não-saber” em Teeteto 187d-200c.Anderson De Paula Borges - 2013 - Dois Pontos 10 (2).
    Há muita discussão sobre como interpretar o papel do argumento ‘Saber ou não Saber’ em Teeteto 188a-c. Alguns intérpretes supõem que esse papel é dialético e Platão não está comprometido com sua verdade. Outros pensam que o argumento revela a confusão de Platão sobre o tema da opinião falsa à época do Teeteto. Em minha análise, há uma terceira via que faz mais justiça ao que Platão está desenvolvendo em 188a-c. Penso que em 188a-c temos uma versão do princípio platônico (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Puzzle of False Judgement in the Theaetetus.Nathanael Stein - 2016 - Phronesis: A Journal for Ancient Philosophy 61 (3):260–283.
    A puzzle about false judgement is raised in the Theaetetus (187d-200c), but not successfully answered there. On the proposed account, the confusion that explicitly vitiates Theaetetus’ final attempt to define knowledge is already at work implicitly in this puzzle. Theaetetus shares popular assumptions about knowledge (epistēmē), but also accepts that there are cognitive constraints on judgement (doxa): the puzzle arises because he fails to distinguish the one cognitive condition from the other.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark