My rating:

add to my books

read book

Plato: Theatetus

by Plato, Joe Sachs (Editor)

4.00 · rating details · 350 ratings · 27 reviews

This is an English translation of Plato's dialogue concerning the nature of knowledge. In this dialogue, Socrates and Theaetetus discuss three definitions of knowledge: knowledge as nothing but perception, as true judgment and as true judgment with an account.Focus Philosophical Library translations are close to and are non-interpretative of the original text, with the not...more

Paperback, 136 pages

Published March 1st 2004 by Focus Publishing/R. Pullins Co. (first published June 1949)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

There is a good chance some of your friends read this book. Sign in to see!

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

This book is currently not featured on any Listopia lists. Add this book to your favorite list »

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 551)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Nov 26, 2011

Barry added it · review of another edition

Recommended to Barry by: PEL podcast reading suggestions

Shelves: philosophy

tran FM Cornford 1961 73 pages

this copy from the library totally smells like stale cigarette smoke, haha (what lucky borrowers have gone before me! yum!!)

I was much more frustrated with the digressions in the middle about slavery and this Protagorus guy's Truth than I was the ultimate inconclusiveness of their argument about the nature of knowledge. I was fascinated by how limited a definition of knowledge they seem to be wanting to pin down, how fixed and finite it must ...moretran FM Cornford 1961 73 pages

this copy from the library totally smells like stale cigarette smoke, haha (what lucky borrowers have gone before me! yum!!)

I was much more frustrated with the digressions in the middle about slavery and this Protagorus guy's Truth than I was the ultimate inconclusiveness of their argument about the nature of knowledge. I was fascinated by how limited a definition of knowledge they seem to be wanting to pin down, how fixed and finite it must seem to them, and they only hint occasionally at there being degrees ("intensity") of knowledge, which to me seemed like the most basic problem with why they couldn't define it (I mean, don't ask me to either, but I'm not part of the foundation of Western thought). The first part of the argument about perception seems most pertinent, only once it lines up into a mathematical dismissal of its ability to fulfill the scope of their concept, its usefulness for them is exhausted, which I found hilariously shortsighted. The last part where they acquiesce to their discussion being inconclusive brings up some interesting ideas and should've been linked back more to the perception idea. I found it odd that comparison and one-to-one similes were the goal rather than any exploration of attributes or constituent elements. Or is that the deal with the Greeks and I need to get back to my misunderstandings of post-mod/decon/struc/post-struc guys?

I was shocked to see "thing-itself" used here, as well as the references to the earlier texts (Protagorus's Truth) - I thought both of those things were characteristic of much later philosophy. Also, I laughed when he got into the "are we awake or dreaming" question to prove a point, especially after the Descartes I read a few days ago; why are the guys so into this idea? Are they proto-Matrix fans? Hilarious...

Edit: the Matrix crack got me thinking (about how I'd looooove to be in the Matrix; I put my iPod on shuffle the other day and all it played was Morrissey, Paul Simon and blink 182), which Plato has the allegory of the cave and why isn't that an example of the perception-knowledge continuum?(less)

· see review

Jul 08, 2011

Tim rated it

· review of another edition

Knowing that Theaetetus is one dialogue in a trilogy with Sophist and Statesman following it, and with Parmenides prior and linked to the trilogy, and having struggled through the almost impenetrable Parmenides, I was apprehensive about Theaetetus but then pleasantly surprised when I read it. After Parmenides, Theaetetus seems like a hybrid of Plato’s early, middle and late periods (assuming this division). It’s a bit more genuine dialogue as opposed to monologue, it has more humor and irony (...moreKnowing that Theaetetus is one dialogue in a trilogy with Sophist and Statesman following it, and with Parmenides prior and linked to the trilogy, and having struggled through the almost impenetrable Parmenides, I was apprehensive about Theaetetus but then pleasantly surprised when I read it. After Parmenides, Theaetetus seems like a hybrid of Plato’s early, middle and late periods (assuming this division). It’s a bit more genuine dialogue as opposed to monologue, it has more humor and irony (including several thinly veiled and cutting digs at Protagoras, similar treatment of the Heracliteans, and the familiar but always enjoyable abuse of lawyers, orators and Sophists), and has more of the literary artistry of the early and middle works, as well as something more like their topical breadth (and pleasant digressions). Also the metaphors, e.g. of the wax and the aviary, and it touches more on myth (though other late works, e.g. Timaeus and Laws, still deal with myth, sometimes extensively). But then it has the proto-formal logic, more sustained and elaborated arguments, and concerns for precision in use of terms and investigation into language that are characteristically late period. It also doesn’t mention the Theory of Forms, possibly departing from it at least somewhat, and it pretty clearly seems to depart from the earlier conception of learning as recollection of what’s already in the soul.

The primary question is, What is knowledge? and as so often in Plato it ends up inconclusively (“aporia” to ancient Greeks and modern scholars). Of course much is considered, clarified, and much rejected along the way – presumably valuable steps toward a legitimate answer if one’s possible. Plato, in stark contrast to Aristotle, rarely provides a clear and unambiguous doctrine for acceptance or rejection; whether his own beliefs were as qualified and provisional as the dialogues appear to suggest we’ll never know. But he does seem to have believed pretty firmly that a concept given to a mind rather than discovered by it isn’t of much value, either in itself or perhaps more importantly as a way of developing understanding (i.e. of doing philosophy).

This Hackett edition is a nice translation (I’d found Jowett’s unsatisfactory and Cornford’s good, but the constant interruptions of the running commentary unworkable for a first read). It has a good, brief introduction, a useful outline, and few but helpful footnotes. Hackett’s Plato is pretty reliably high quality (Penguin’s is usually good too, and R. E. Allen has been working for years on commentaries and translations of the dialogues which are excellent: he’s done Parmenides; I hope to see Theaetetus and Sophist by him some day. I haven’t used the couple recent single volume modern translation compilations so I can’t comment on them, but I’d also like to get familiar with those). Well, on to Sophist ….
(less)

· see review

Jan 22, 2009

Robby rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: ethic

A good introduction to various epistemological views, even-handed and usually lucid in its attempts to illuminate what "knowledge" is. Or rather, what it isn't. Although the dialogue is basically inconclusive, its characterization and imagery (particularly the "midwife" analogy) and Socrates' feats of philosopher-channeling self-rebuttal are entertaining enough to stave of frustration at Plato apparently treading water. Considering how admirably unbiased (yet not invariably i...more

· see review

May 29, 2011

Chris Byron rated it

· review of another edition

This dialogue stands alone as giving full veracity to the claim that "all philosophers are but a footnote to Plato." Epistemology was not a branch of philosophy when this was written. Within a brisk dialogue, Socrates both provides us the ladder to reach its heights, and makes the reader realize he's merely standing atop a foot stool. Humility quickly follows. Furthermore, the advancement of the dialectic is profound. Socrates warns that if we are to cease seeing things as static and i...more

· see review

Nov 27, 2011

Brandon rated it

· review of another edition

Recommends it for: Jeff Beebe

Shelves: philosophy

When reading Plato, there is always a sense of accomplishment upon nearing the conclusion of any of his dialogues. The same was true here. Theaetetus was very smooth in taking readers from knowledge defined as perception to knowledge as true judgment, and then to knowledge with a rational reason and definition, and finally to knowledge as "right opinion with knowledge of difference or of anything! And so, Theaetetus, knowledge is neither sensation nor true opinion, nor yet definition and ex...more

· see review

Oct 18, 2008

Trevor rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy

This is much harder work than your average Socratic Dialogue by Plato. I found I really had to concentrate on some of the twists in the argument and have to say that I found some of the footnotes quite distracting in this edition. As someone who does not read Ancient Greek – part of the reason I’m reading Plato in translation – it is a little hard to know why my reading needs to be interrupted to be told the translator is reading some word in Ancient Greek as it is in the manuscript.

...moreThis is much harder work than your average Socratic Dialogue by Plato. I found I really had to concentrate on some of the twists in the argument and have to say that I found some of the footnotes quite distracting in this edition. As someone who does not read Ancient Greek – part of the reason I’m reading Plato in translation – it is a little hard to know why my reading needs to be interrupted to be told the translator is reading some word in Ancient Greek as it is in the manuscript.

I got half way through the essay in the back of this and have now have given up. It is basically working its way through the text and like I said, I struggled over the text enough to not feel like I’m really getting much extra out of the essay to justify reading on.

This is perhaps one of the first works in the history of Western Philosophy on Epistemology – or the Theory of Knowledge. It is an explanation and critique of both Heraclitus (all is flux – you can’t step in the same river twice) and mostly Protagoras (Man is the measure of all things). I can’t remember now if in one of the dialogues in The Trial and Death of Socrates we learn there that Socrates considered himself a mid-wife or if this is just one of those things you get taught in introductory philosophy. Either way, there is a long discussion of what Socrates saw as his role in helping – particularly young men come to grips with philosophical ideas. This is a late dialogue of Plato’s and as such is not at all what you might expect of Plato from any intro course you might have done. The world of forms has no place here. In fact, there were repeatedly times while reading this when I expected Plato to just say, “Knowledge is a kind of recollection of the forms we knew before birth”. That he doesn’t say anything remotely like this in this dialogue is fascinating in itself.

What is even more fascinating is that there is no conclusion to what knowledge is in this dialogue. There are some very tentative steps taken towards the idea that knowledge is the production of rational statements – but even this is discarded.

Other alternatives are that knowledge is perception or memory.

What is interesting is that whenever we are truly stuck – we turn to metaphors. In this memory is first described as a kind of wax in which memories are imprinted. Then memories are compared to a collection of birds that one keeps in an aviary. This is my favourite as it is used to explain why we might mistakenly say that seven plus six equals twelve – that is, we have grabbed at and caught the wrong bird in the aviary of our mind. Lovely image.

Like I said, this dialogue was hard work and not the place to start if you haven’t read any Plato before. However, it is quite a remarkable text. I’m fascinated by the fact that it is told long after Socrates is dead. It is told when the young man that Socrates was engaging in this dialogue with is lying dying years later. It is told by two men who are both mathematicians. Mathematics was the most ‘developed’ science of the day and the one that is still closest to ‘the truth’. If anyone should know what ‘truth’ is then surely a mathematician is our best bet.

This doesn’t prove to be the case here. The question what is knowledge remains quite intractable. But what is gobsmackingly interesting here is the fact that we are so far removed from the date that the dialogue was supposed to have occurred and are being told this story through many whispers. This is a play written by Plato from a reading by a Slave of a text written by a friend of Socrates’s just before Socrates died. And then Plato starts asking what is true knowledge and how does memory impact on the reliability of knowledge and it is quite clear someone (perhaps someone nicknamed Plato – or Broad in English due, some speculate, because he had a fat head) is having a rather subtle go at us all.

Like I said, rather hard work – but then epistemology hasn’t gotten too much easier with the aeons.(less)

· see review

Nov 27, 2011

Marks54 rated it

· review of another edition

This is an effort to fill in some blank spots in my adult reading record. I came across some notes on prior reading and wanted to add this and some other books. This book is a statement of Plato's epistemology. I read it for a grad seminar in Plato at CUA in fall 1977. It was a good seminar and I enjoyed working through the text. As I have read more, it would have been good to have gone through a survey on Plato first, although catching up is also exciting.

· see review

Jul 28, 2011

Sjonni added it · review of another edition

Not the most attractive and entertaining dialogue, unfortunately. Socrates asks Theatetus "What is science?" and the two start deconstructing one thesis after the other. They don't arrive at any precise conclusion but they nullify a whole bunch of bullshit at the end. I mean...sure, it's not totally pointless but I didn't really have a good time reading it. The introduction is also quite a fisting session, took me a week to read.

· see review

Mar 02, 2010

Mike Moore rated it

· review of another edition

This is one of the more challenging dialogues. It deals with knowledge itself, and is widely considered the founding document of epistemology. If you get the sense from what I've said that this is a work that is rewarding to study but not a good choice for a casual read, than this review has been successful and I could have quit a sentence earlier.

· see review

Dec 26, 2011

Marie-aimée rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: fr, philosophy

Très intéressante étude des théories de Protagoras et l'homme "mesure de toute chose" et d'Héraclite, qui ne peut néanmoins se faire sans une initiation à Platon et une lecture minutieusement décomposée.

· see review

Oct 18, 2010

Jesse Lopes rated it

· review of another edition

This is, personally speaking, the most challenging of Plato's dialogues merely because it is so rigorous yet does not yield a conclusion. It will make your head spin if you do not have a firm grip on the philosophies of Parmenides, Heraclitus, and Protagoras. However, if you do, and you like postmodernism, this will serve as an antidote. The dialogue asks, "How can you have knowledge of knowledge?" The answer - set theory (of classes) - is not here; meanwhile, Plato blunders through so...more

· see review

Jan 14, 2012

Ibis3 rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: 2005, epistemology, canonical, classic, classical, fourth-century-bce, greek, nonfiction, philosophy

I don't remember specifics and have no notes from the time.

· see review

Mar 27, 2011

Derek Kern rated it

· review of another edition

The place to start for any analysis of knowledge...

· see review

Aug 24, 2011

Maiz Lulkin rated it

· review of another edition

Best epistemology work ever.

· see review

Oct 17, 2007

Shaun rated it

· review of another edition

Recommends it for: Plato enthusiasts

Shelves: philosophy

This five star rating system just doesn't cut it. I enjoyed this much more than the Parmenides, but I can't quite say I "really" liked it. Regardless, this aporetic dialogue focuses on knowledge. As a fan of Platonic myth and metaphor (simply for its beauty and richness,) this dialogue has plenty; the midwife analogy, the aviary, and the wax block. Some interesting issues in knowledge are developed and refuted leaving us to ponder: has Plato truly abandoned knowledge as true belief...more

· see review

Apr 06, 2011

Rob Roy rated it

· review of another edition

What is knowledge?

· see review

Sep 14, 2011

David Williamson rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: essential-philosophy, philosophy

His best book that I have read so far.

· see review

Sep 04, 2011

Yann rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: antiquité, philosophie, a-commenter, grece

Le Théétète n'est pas aussi aussi ardu que Parménide, mais il reste assez exigeant, et il faut rester concentrer pour suivre Socrate dans toutes ses subtilités. Tous les dialogues de Platon ne sont pas faciles d’accès. A son habitude, Socrate perturbe les certitudes de ses amis en les poussant à analyser les conséquences de leurs opinions. On est payé de la perte de ses illusions par celles de ses préjugés.

· see review

May 06, 2008

Eric rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: outside-reading, greece-and-rome

Knowledge is impossible to define, but we can sure talk about it a bunch. But don't worry, we'll define it when we talk tomorrow... I just have to go defend these silly charges that have been brought against me (Socrates). And so we still don't know what knowledge is. Interesting ideas for a dedicated reader/lover of Platonic dialogues.

· see review

Mar 03, 2009

Bryan marked it as to-read-2-perhaps

Shelves: philosophy, non-fiction

This material informed the philosophic threads in Anathem. I'd be interested to dig in, but as someone without a background in classical philosophy, I might be jumping into the deep end of the pool too quickly with this one.

· see review

Aug 13, 2011

Alexander added it · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy, summer-2011

While (in good Socratic fashion) it raises many more questions than it answers, the Theaetetus is a fascinating excursion into difficult questions of epistemology and philosophical method. Burnyeat's introduction is remarkably thorough, and like the dialogue itself, serves as a stimulus to further reflection.

· see review

May 16, 2011

Cevat rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy

the first parts are very interesting one of the questions of the social sciences appear in this book (at least i assume) what would happen if we engage the theories of protagoras and herakleitos.. flux and relativism! it was great!

· see review

Nov 08, 2010

Matt rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy

I read the M. J. Levett translation with a lengthy introduction from Myles Burnyeat for a seminar focusing solely on the Theaetetus.

To be clear: The Theaetetus is five stars. Burnyeat's introduction is either three or four stars.

· see review

Sep 04, 2008

lindsie rated it

· review of another edition

Of all the dialogues, this stand out to me as the most prismatic. There are glimpses of so many of the others here.

· see review

Feb 24, 2008

Rustam rated it

· review of another edition

These dialogues are probably the most accessible philosophy ever written. The midwife-of-ideas analogy was pretty brilliant.

· see review

Jun 04, 2008

Seth rated it

· review of another edition

My favorite Platonic dialogue. The history of Western epistemology starts here.

· see review

Sep 10, 2011

Thompson rated it

· review of another edition

Plato discusses his view of epistomology in this dialogue. See notes on Lysis.

· see review

Feb 09, 2012

Modiglian rated it

· review of another edition

Feb 08, 2012

Justin rated it

· review of another edition

Feb 07, 2012

Gary rated it

· review of another edition

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 18 19 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend it | Stats | Recent status updates

combine
Other Editions (40)

More editions...

Genres

Philosophy

74 users

Classics

10 users

Non Fiction

5 users

See top shelves...

Readers Also Enjoyed

About Plato

Birth c. 428–427 BC, Athens
Death c. 348–347 BC, Athens

Plato was a Classical Greek philosopher, mathematician, student of Socrates, writer of philosophical dialogues, and founder of the Academy in Athens, the first institution of higher learning in the Western world. Along with his mentor, Socrates, and his student, Aristotle, Plato helped to lay the foundations of Western phi...more

More about Plato...

Books by Plato

The Trial and Death of Socrates (Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Phaedo)

Five Dialogues: Euthyphro/Apology/Crito/Meno/Phaedo

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Pin It

last activity 13 minutes ago

shelf: to-read

Classical Self-Education

13 members

last activity Feb 06, 2012 08:15pm

shelf: to-read

title link	preview: Plato: Theatetus
avg rating	preview: Plato: Theatetus Goodreads rating: 4.00 (350 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/145212.Plato?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1172171531m/145212.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/145212.Plato?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Plato: Theatetus by Plato[/url]

Plato: Theatetus

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (40)

Genres

Readers Also Enjoyed

About Plato

Books by Plato

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About Plato: Theatetus

Quotes from Plato: Theatetus

Groups That Shelved Theaetetus - Plato