Critical discussion of Alan Code's paper "Aristotle's Investigation of a Basic Logical Principle: Which Science Investigates the Principle of Non-Contradiction?".

In the Theaetetus, Plato looks afresh at a problem to which, he now realizes, he had earlier given an inadequate answer: the problem of the nature of knowledge. What Plato has to say on this question is of great interest and importance, not only to scholars of Plato, but also to philosophers with wholly contemporary interests. This book is a sustained philosophical analysis and critique of the Theaetetus. David Bostock provides a detailed examination of Plato's arguments and the issues that (...) they raise. He adjudicates on rival interpretations of the text, and looks at the relations between this and other works of Plato. The book does not presuppose any knowledge of Greek. (shrink)

This volume deals with Epistemology. The period from the sixth century BC to the second and third centuries AD was one of the most fertile for the theory of knowledge, and the range of 'epistemic states' explored in the ancient texts is much wider than those to be found in contemporary discussions of epistemology or cognition. Greek philosophers approached these problems in a great variety of ways, from the extreme relativism of Protagoras to the scepticism of the Pyrrhonists, and the (...) contributors demonstrate both the familiarity and novelty of this range of views in their critical essays. (shrink)

Why should Aristotle reject his own criteria for a science to admit this puzzling science of being? Or does he really reject them? Perhaps the science of being is not intended to be a universal science of the type rejected elsewhere. The Metaphysics and the Organon are not concerned with exactly the same questions; and verbal differences may not reflect real or important doctrinal conflicts.