Affiliation:
1. Department of Philosophy, King’s College London , London WC2R 2LS , UK
Abstract
AbstractThe neglected Platonic dialogue Euthydemus is peculiar in many ways. It is, apparently, an extensive catalogue of bad arguments by disgraceful sophists; but its complex composition suggests that this focuses attention on the shape and nature of argument—attention that some think Plato is incapable of giving. He uses the idiom of games, and of seriousness and play, to provoke reflection on logical and syntactic structure and their normative features; but to see how he does so we need to consider the complex background of the fiction of a Platonic dialogue, and its use of surprise and humour. Comparison with the bbc Radio 4 game ‘Mornington Crescent’ might help.
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Reference23 articles.
1. ‘Megaric Metaphysics’;Bailey;Ancient Philosophy,2012
2. ‘The Sophistic Movement’.;Barney,2006
3. ‘Deinos (Wicked Good) at Interpretation (Protagoras 334–48)’.;Brittain,2017
4. ‘The Verb “To Be” in Greek Philosophy’.;Brown,1994
5. ‘Plato on how not to speak of what is not: Euthydemus 283a-288a’.;Burnyeat,2002