Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

read book* *Different edition

Theaetetus (Verzameld werk - Plato)

by Plato

4.11 of 5 stars 4.11 · rating details · 1,132 ratings · 39 reviews

Plato (428/427 BC-348/347 BC), whose original name was Aristocles, was an ancient Greek philosopher, the second of the great trio of ancient Greeks - succeeding Socrates and preceding Aristotle - who between them laid the philosophical foundations of Western culture. Plato was also a mathematician, writer of philosophical dialogues, and founder of the Academy in Athens, th...more

Paperback, 180 pages

Published August 1st 2007 by Dodo Press (first published January 1st 1949)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

Friend Reviews

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

Lists with This Book

This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Add this book to your favorite list »

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 1,802)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Mar 23, 2012 Matthieu rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Next to Parmenides, this is probably the most rigourous/'difficult' Platonic dialogue. It might also be the most frustrating, mainly due to the fact that the intellectual bandying-about does not yield any clear, definitive conclusion. The dialogue asks: What is knowledge?, Is knowledge perception? (T.'s response), and, Can one have knowledge of knowledge? In a forest of ideas and assertions (along with some brilliant metaphors on the part of Socrates (midwifery)), no answer is to be found.

This...more

3 likes · like · see review

Nov 26, 2011 hirtho added it · review of another edition

Recommended to hirtho 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 seem to them, and they o...more 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 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)

like · see review

Jan 23, 2013 Matt Smith rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: classical, greek, epistemology, philosophy

Over and over I've heard that Theaetetus is the source of the "traditional" definition of knowledge as justified true belief, but the closest thing to that definition is what Socrates ends up rejecting at the end. I have to remind myself when I read Plato that these works were popular and that his "real" philosophy was done through lecturing - he comes to know answers here, and instead roams around in circles espousing a philosophical method.

There is some merit in "negative" philosophy, by which...more

1 like · like · see review

May 09, 2012 Victoria rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: st-john-s-reads

This is another of my favorite Platonic dialogues not because of the discussion on perception and knowledge but because of the poetic language and imagery used throughout. Here's one of my favorite passages about the importance of a philosophic life:

"This is the way that belongs to each, Theodorus, one of them nurtured in his very being in freedom and leisure, the one whom you call a philosopher, who's blameless for seeming to be naive and of no account whenever he stumbles into slavish services...more

like · see review

Jul 08, 2011 Tim rated it 5 of 5 stars · 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 (in...more 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 (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)

like · see review

Feb 11, 2013 Roxanne Russell rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: edu, non-fiction, lit-canon

So if I write down everything my teacher says and publish it, I get to be the author?

Is knowledge perception? 1) Theaterus' claim
2) Protagorus' doctrine that man is the measure of all things 3) Heraclitus' theory of flux

---> supports Platonic doctrine that true reality is a non sensible realm of changeless being "The Forms"

Critique of three theses
1) each man is the measure of his own wisdom
2) everyone is equally wise
3) there is no such thing as wisdom
4) no one is wiser than anyone else

------...more

like · see review

Feb 20, 2012 Catherine rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: 2012

This is one of my favorite Platonic dialogues, and it was a joy to reread it for an SJC alumni seminar. The different images for how we store knowledge in our souls are beautiful, and I am somewhat sorry that they ultimately get discarded. I still think that the best definition offered is that it is "right judgment with an account", but in order to maintain it, I will need to figure out of what sort the requisite account is.
Moreover, at the end of the dialogue, the question which haunts me is "w...more

like · see review

Jan 22, 2009 Robby rated it 3 of 5 stars · 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 inconclusive) Socrate...more

like · see review

May 29, 2011 Chris Byron rated it 5 of 5 stars · 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 in a moment...more

like · see review

Dec 03, 2012 Brandon rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: Jeff Beebe

Shelves: philosophy, st-john-s, owned-books

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 explana...more

like · see review

Oct 18, 2008 Trevor rated it 4 of 5 stars · 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.

I got half...more 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.

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)

like · see review

Dec 19, 2012 Jacob Stubbs rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy, partial-reads

So, I used this in my Ancient philosophy paper over (unsurprisingly) Plato's _Theaetetus_. I specifically focused on the Protagorean and Heraclitean themes within the first definition of knowledge as "perception." Burnyeat's commentary on the _Theaetetus_ was extremely helpful. That being said, I was very sad to see that he had not addressed Sarah Waterlow's commentary on the "dialectical nothingness" that is the Protagorean position. That criticism aside, Burnyeat's commentary was great.

Overal...more

like · see review

Nov 27, 2011 Marks54 rated it 3 of 5 stars · 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.

like · 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.

like · see review

Apr 30, 2013 Richard Newton rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy

This is a great translation of one of Plato's most complex and interesting books. This is never going to be the easiest of reads, but the translator makes a great attempt to make it accessible, and bar one or two areas which require really close attention this is a fairly straightforward read. He has an extensive essay at the end of the book, which is helpful, but not perfect.

like · see review

Mar 02, 2010 Mike Moore rated it 4 of 5 stars · 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.

like · see review

May 17, 2013 Khaleel rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: greek-philosophy, philosophy

I think its the best of all Plato`s Dialogs it discuss epistemology , character of philosopher, being and becoming , thing in it self , and existing in relation to other things , I have got this argument from Schopenhauer before but getting the source is always more pleasurable .

like · see review

Dec 26, 2011 Marie-aimée rated it 3 of 5 stars · 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.

like · see review

Sep 29, 2012 Benjamin Plaggenborg rated it 1 of 5 stars · review of another edition

This crap book is of no use today. It beggars belief that we've spent a month on it in our introductory epistemology course. I have not the time or the patience to collect and pick apart Plato's ceaseless leaps of logic, and I don't think it will do you good to try for yourself.

like · see review

Oct 18, 2010 Jesse Lopes rated it 5 of 5 stars · 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 some incredi...more

like · see review

Jan 14, 2012 Ibis3 rated it 3 of 5 stars · 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.

like · see review

Mar 27, 2011 Derek Kern rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

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

like · see review

Aug 24, 2011 Maiz Lulkin rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Best epistemology work ever.

like · see review

Oct 17, 2007 Shaun rated it 3 of 5 stars · 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 with an accou...more

like · see review

Apr 06, 2011 Rob Roy rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy, 1000-bucket-list

What is knowledge?

like · see review

May 19, 2012 Elena added it · review of another edition

Shelves: someday-i-will-defeat-you

Why can't Plato just say what he has to say without hammering our brains with made-up conversations between people who possibly never even met?
WHY?

And why do I have to read it in school? Tell me why, why, why..

like · see review

Sep 14, 2011 David Williamson rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: essential-philosophy, philosophy

His best book that I have read so far.

like · see review

Sep 04, 2011 Yann rated it 3 of 5 stars · 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.

like · see review

Jul 05, 2012 Riley rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Nothing like a Socratic dialogue to remind you of how stupid you really are.

like · see review

May 06, 2008 Eric rated it 4 of 5 stars · 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.

like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 60 61 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 (47)

More editions...

Genres

Philosophy

137 users

Classics

15 users

Non Fiction

14 users

Literature > Ancient

3 users

Academic > School

2 users

See top shelves...

Readers also enjoyed similar books

De Anima
by Aristotle
Philosophical Fragments/Johannes Climacus
by Søren Kierkegaard
The Enneads
by Plotinus
The Discourses of Epictetus
by Epictetus
Euclid's Elements
by Euclid

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 philosophy and science.

Pl...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

Trivia About Theaitetos

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from Theaetetus

“For this feeling of wonder shows that you are a philosopher, since wonder is the only beginning of philosophy.” — 54 people liked it

More quotes…

title link	preview: Theaetetus
avg rating	preview: Theaetetus Goodreads rating: 4.11 (1132 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2130666.Theaetetus?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1348906528l/2130666.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2130666.Theaetetus?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Theaetetus by Plato[/url]

Theaetetus (Verzameld werk - Plato)

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website