To be or not to be a Name

Tertium non datur. Cratylus’ Prophecy in Plato’s Cratylus

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14195/1984-249X_24_9

Keywords:

Plato, Cratylus, Name, Rightness, Sense

Abstract

The name tells the thing if it's a name. If it doesn’t tell the thing, it isn’t a name. This is the puzzling and enigmatic theory proposed by Cratilo in the homonymous Plato’s dialogue. The thesis in Hermogenes already sounds hermetic, an "oracle" (manteia) which requires the presence of an interpreter to clarify what remains hidden in the terms of the sentence. According to the disciple of Heraclitus, the names are by nature guaranteed to impart pure truths, that is, they are all right (orthous), at least as many as are real names (Cra. 429b11). An imperfectly fitting name isn’t an inappropriate name. It would not be a name at all. In this text we would like to examine the Platonic Cratylus with respect to the meaning that lies behind the words of Cratylus and clarify his position in face of Socrates's refutation. We will therefore concentrate our attention on the last section of the dialogue devoted to the exchange between Cratylus and Socrates, especially pages 427e-440e.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

ACKRILL, J. L. (1997). Language and Reality in Plato’s Cratylus. In: ALBERTI, A. (ed.). Realtà e Ragione. Oxford, Oxford University Press, p. 33-52.
ADEMOLLO, F. (2011). The Cratylus of Plato. A Commentary. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
ADKINS, A. W. H. (1970). From the Many to the One. A Study of Personality and Views of Human Nature in the Context of Ancient Greek Society. Values and Beliefs. London, Constable.
ALLAN, D. J. (1954). The problem of Cratylus. American Journal of Philology 75, p. 271-287.
BAXTER, T. M. S. (1992). The Cratylus: Plato’s Critique of Naming. Leiden, E. G. Brill.
BLONDELL, R. (2002). The play of character in Plato’s Dialogues. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
CALOGERO, G. (1987). Storia della logica antica. Volume I. Roma-Bari, Laterza.
CANDIOTTO, L. (2009-2010). Platone e la scrittura dei dialoghi socratici: strategie, interlocutori, finalità. Tesi di Dottorato difesa all’università Ca’ Foscari (Venezia) sotto la direzione di C. Natali.
CAPRA, A. (2001). Agon Logon. Il Protagora di Platone. Fra eristica e commedia. Milano, Il Filarete.
CASERTANO, G. (ed.) (2002). Il Teeteto di Platone: struttura e problematiche. Napoli, Loffredo.
CASERTANO, G. (ed.) (2005). Il Cratilo di Platone. Struttura e problematiche. Napoli: Loffredo.
DE PINA, M. da G. G. (2005). L’interpretazione dell’oracolo di Cratilo. In: CASERTANO, G. (ed.). Il Cratilo di Platone. Struttura e problematiche. Napoli, Loffredo, p. 52-65.
DALIMIER, C. (1998). Platon. Cratyle. Paris, Flammarion.
DI CESARE, D. (1987). Linguaggio e dialettica in Platone. Annali dell’Istituto filosofico di Urbino 1987, p. 337-371.
DIONIGI, R. (1994). Nomi, Forme, Cose. Intorno al Cratilo di Platone. Bologna, Fuori Tema.
DONELLAN, K. (1997). Reference and definite Descriptions. Philosophical Review 75, p. 281-304. (Reprinted In: LUDLOW, P. (ed.). Readings in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge, MIT Press, p. 436-379.)
ECO, U. (1993). La ricerca della lingua perfetta nella cultura europea. Bari-Roma, Laterza.
ERLER, M. (1991). Der Sinn der Aporien in den Dialogen Platons. Ubungsstucke zur Anteitung im philosophischen Denken. Berlin, W. De Gruyter. (Trad. It. MAZZARELLI, C. (1991). Il senso delle aporie nei dialoghi di Platone. Esercizi di avviamento al pensiero filosofico. Milano, Vita e Pensiero.)
ERLER, M. (2006). Platon. München, Verlag. (Trad. It. RANOCCHIA, G. (2008). Platone. Una introduzione. Torino, Einaudi.)
FATTAL, M. (2002). Vérité et fausseté de l’onoma et du logos dans le Cratyle. In: CORDERO, N. Ontologie et Dialogue. Paris, Vrin, p. 13-31.
FERRARI, F. (2005). L’accenno alle idee alla fine del Cratilo. In: CASERTANO, G. (ed.) Il Cratilo di Platone. Struttura e problematiche. Napoli, Loffredo, p. 115-124.
FERRO, A. (2011). Il problema della predicazione fra antichi e moderni. Bologna, CLUEB.
FOCAULT, M. (1966). Les mots et les choses. Paris, Gallimard.
GADAMER, H-G. (1960). Wahrheit und Methode. Tübingen. (Trad. It. G. VATTIMO (1994) (a cura di). Milano, Bompiani.)
GOLDSCHMIDT, V. (1940). Essai sur le Cratyle. Paris, Vrin.
HJELMSLEV, L. (1968). Prolegomena to a Theory of Language. (Trad. It. I fondamenti della teoria del linguaggio. Torino, Einaudi.)
IRWIN, T. (1977). Plato’s Heracliteanism. Philosophical Quarterly 27, p. 1-13.
KAHN, C. H. (1996). Plato and the Socratic Dialogue. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
LICATA, G. (2007). Teoria platonica del Linguaggio. Genova, Il Melangolo.
LO PIPARO, F. (2005). Platone e Aristotele sui nomi: dall’orthotes al symbolon. In: CASERTANO, G. (ed.) Il Cratilo di Platone. Struttura e problematiche, Napoli, Loffredo, p. 201-215.
LO PIPARO, F. (2003). Aristotele e il linguaggio. Cosa fa di una lingua una lingua. Roma & Bari, Laterza.
MARTINI, E. (2012). Platone. Cratilo. Traduzione e Note. Milano, BUR.
PALUMBO, L. (2014). Verba manent. Su Platone e il Linguaggio. Napoli, Loffredo.
PALUMBO, L. (2005). La spola e l’ousia. In: CASERTANO, G. (ed.). Il Cratilo di Platone. Struttura e problematiche. Napoli, Loffredro, p. 65-95.
RICCARDO, A. (2005). Il Colore dei nomi. In: CASERTANO, G. (ed.). Il Cratilo di Platone. Struttura e problematiche. Napoli, Loffredo, p. 95-115.
ROBINSON, R. (1969). A Criticism of Plato’s Cratyus. Essays in Greek Philosophy. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
SCOTT, S. (1986). Platon et la démythification du language. Atene e Roma 31, p. 105-134.
SEDLEY, D. (2003). Plato’s Cratylus. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
TRABATTONI, F. (1996). Scrivere nell’anima. Elenchos 17, n. 1, p. 111-119.
TRABATTONI, F. (2003). Il dialogo come portavoce dell’opinione di Platone. In: TRABATTONI, F. e BONAZZI, M. Platone e la Tradizione Platonica. Studi di filosofia antica. Milano, Cisalpino.
TRINDADE SANTOS, J. (1994). Platão e a escolha do diálogo como meio de criação filosófica. Humanitas 46, p. 163-176.
TRINDADE SANTOS, J. (2002). Conoscenza e sapere in Platone. In: VIDAL-NAQUET, P. (1990). La Démocratie grecque vue d’ailleurs. Paris, Flammarion.
TRINDADE SANTOS, J. (2005). Districando il Cratilo. In: CASERTANO, G. (ed.). Il Cratilo di Platone. Struttura e problematiche. Napoli, Loffredo, p. 182-201.
TRINDADE SANTOS, J. (2014). Para uma leitura aporetica do Cratilo. Anais de Filosofia Clássica 8, n. 15, p. 1-23.
VLASTOS, G. (2003). L’elenchos socratico: il metodo è tutto. In: VLASTOS, G. (ed.). Studi socratici. Milano, Vita e Pensiero, p. 2-15.
Archai Journal nº24 (September, 2018)

Downloads

Published

2018-09-01

How to Cite

Botter, B. (2018). To be or not to be a Name: Tertium non datur. Cratylus’ Prophecy in Plato’s Cratylus. Revista Archai, (24), 265. https://doi.org/10.14195/1984-249X_24_9

Issue

No. 24 (2018): Archai Journal nº24 (September, 2018)

Section

Articles

License

Given the public access policy of the journal, the use of the published texts is free, with the obligation of recognizing the original authorship and the first publication in this journal. The authors of the published contributions are entirely and exclusively responsible for their contents.

1. The authors authorize the publication of the article in this journal.
2. The authors guarantee that the contribution is original, and take full responsibility for its content in case of impugnation by third parties.
3. The authors guarantee that the contribution is not under evaluation in another journal.
4. The authors keep the copyright and convey to the journal the right of first publication, the work being licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License-BY.
5. The authors are allowed and stimulated to publicize and distribute their work on-line after the publication in the journal.
6. The authors of the approved works authorize the journal to distribute their content, after publication, for reproduction in content indexes, virtual libraries and similars.
7. The editors reserve the right to make adjustments to the text and to adequate the article to the editorial rules of the journal.