Royal Institute of Philosophy
Plato: Theaetetus by John McDowell Review by: J. D. G. Evans Philosophy, Vol. 49, No. 189 (Jul., 1974), pp. 328-330 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Institute of Philosophy Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3750127 . Accessed: 12/06/2013 09:23
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact email@example.com.
Cambridge University Press and Royal Institute of Philosophy are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy.
This content downloaded from 126.96.36.199 on Wed, 12 Jun 2013 09:23:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Second. of course. Yet did notPlatoin his great setpieceargument fortheimmorof the soul as the Form of Life maintain tality something verylikewhat'no to this argument one in his senseswould affirm'? referred Teichmanearlier 'In any eventit is clearthatthereis some (Phaedo I05C-Io7A). What a pitythat introduction. collapses menalism. For to saythatit is a sufficient condition of myhaving suchand such Cartesian thoughts thatmycentral nervous system shouldstand thusand thus. John with thesameaudience
Series.apropossome remarks by J. 25).57 on Wed.linkswhich we have to noticeif we are to understand but mostimportant thismisguided passage.133. Giffords-is on secondary or eventertiary including Ayerin his recent relying For Gosse.Teichman remarks: 'no one in his senseswouldaffirm thata man's lifecouldsurvive his death. 12 Jun 2013 09:23:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
. The Clarendon Oxford: Li.but manyhavebelieved thatthe Soul can survive death'(p. It suggests that she-like many others. 264 pp-. Thereis a deal of good stuff in thisbookincisively put. 4. a sortof Epiphenomenalism.First.
This content downloaded from 200.appealedto whathe and mostof his contemsources.??.?5. Smart.The aim is to theAristotle sibling of its excellent thepattern to follow clearto Greekoftheargument willmakethecourse which translations provide fully of interpretation problems withnoteswhichexamine less philosophers. I05). . there regrettable thatshe saysnothing of such etymological linksas thosebetweenOvXy and c'pbvXosg. Quitecertainly itprecludes bothDualismand Behaviourism. it also appearsto be wrongto state:'Epipheno. Two scholarly points. therefore.especially about who of philosophy Behavariourism and Materialism.1973. anima and animatus. is. 22).. work to appearin theClarendon This is thefirst Series. Contemporaries who almostall acceptedthe specialcreation of biologicalspecieshad no businessto ridiculea man who clearlyand honestly thenecessary proclaimed consequences ofsuchdoctrines. 86). whileinsisting that thesethoughts areand can be onlyattributes of the physical organism whichI am. Indeed between is. No doubtmany'students in what muchprofit have been studying thesubjectfora yearor so' willfind the dust-jacket also calls 'an introduction withteethin it'. It is. or into a kind of Behaviourism' (p. concluding: sortofconnection theidea of Soul and theidea oflife' (p.New Books
In thisperspective 2(C). the wellfor McDowell'sTheaetetus augurs in mind. eitherinto a kind of Dualism. This is unfair. surely. J. . 3. But Gosse saw clearly thatthe specialcreation of anything mustinvolve theproduction of some 'traces'of a past whichthe objectsthus createdhad not had-hence the titleOmphalos (Navel).26. Teichman says: 'Gosse's theory asserts without giving grounds thatthings are notas they seem'(p.go which is evidently PlatoSeries. no one tookthatlittle extra trouble to makeit a so muchbetter
Plato: Theaetetus McDowell withNotesby John Translated Paperback Press. C. poraries tookto be documents of revelation..
I92-I93). notesabouttheinconclusive examination offalsebelief. McDowell's translation is clearand accurate.
This content downloaded from 200.57 on Wed. McDowell'sgeneral approach to thework putshimfirmly in thecampofthose who findrich epistemological interest in the detailedaporetic texture of the discussions despite their negative outcome. which to be ofsubject-predicate shows identity-sentences form. This accommodating leadshimto minimize theory themore ofit-the fragmentaparadoxical aspects tion of persisting on objectsinto object-stages (the accountof this matter pp. 235-236.but makesvery little of. i96-i97). fragmentation withthe earlier of truth relativization are essential to the together by persons.133.and his notesalwaysprovide usefulhelp. epistemological theory. argument against in indicating theverycandour whichhe displays thecross(p. He carefully notes thecontinuities of interests and arguments betweenthe Theaetetus and workswritten by Plato before and after it. rather thana fragment ofa complete absurdum. as providing a suggestion fortheresolution oftheTheaetetus difficulties.theintentionality whichcan arisehere:equallyone might use the approachsuggested by Aristotle's distinction and betweenessential accidental attributes.the laterworkhas moreto contribute to the resolution of the difficulties of the earlierone than McDowell allows The longest section of the Theaetetus is thedevelopment and examination of an accountof perception to provide the bestdefence of the whichis designed claimthat is knowledge. knowledge viewof theperception (see especially pp. McDowellmentions (p. seemsover-elaborate) and the less emphasized ofpersons intoperson-stages. Equallythepreceding analysis ofthemixing ofkinds.New Books
The Theaetetus examines and rejects three proposed definitions ofknowledge. 12 Jun 2013 09:23:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
. 226). notableare his handling which needsimplicit in mostofitsoccurrences in the completion bya predicate and his appraisal of the peritropic relative truth Theaetetus.26. But he is unimpressed by thetypeof argument whichsees thetheory of Forms. Whatis moreimportant of Plato is that forstudents the Sophist makesan advanceon the Theaetetus whichMcDowell onlypartially recognizes. savoir. Moreover
(p. McDowellthinks that muchofthetheory of perception can be regarded withknowledge fails perception as Platonic:theidentification because. But it is notclearin howmuchignorance a person can be abouta thing and yetknowit. I71). undermines the Theaetetus' as misidentification. Thus he relies heavily. on thedistinction between knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge of propositions (connaitre. Yet thesefeatures. 249). 123-128. It might be felt. thatin concentrating on epistemological considerationshis perspective in his suffers from somedistortion. thesis thatevery wouldfounder on is true. through an assimilation of knowledge of naturesto propositional is notof objects in thesamesimplewayas perception is knowledge.forexample. habitoftreating all error Thus despite thenon-epistemological in theSophist character ofthediscussion of theproblem of thinking whatis not. see especially pp. 204). though. Particularly of the Greekverb 'to be'. He notesthattheSophist's analysis ofsentences intoa subject and a predicate element is a decisiveimprovement on the Theaetetus' tendency to them regard as listsofnames(pp. heavily relied uponin whatfollows. i i8.Without themthethesis perception the application of the principle of non-contradiction to combinations of perThe natural is thattheaccount ofperception is a reductio ad inference ceptions.
and Anthony Kennyand D. J. Locke. another actions arecausally freedom is inconsistent with theassumption that determined. Davidsonobjects on other ofaction to another grounds: thatno analysis of 'can' or 'could' or 'freeto' mayrefer action(such as choosing or deciding to or willing to) as the causal antecedent of the actionconcerned. G.andwhile that itwouldbe foolhardy to deny fications maylie behindthe workings of some of our institutions. Moore. article in thisvolume willbe ofinterest every to in itstitle. objections analysis of'A couldhavedoneotherwise'. and oftheseas a sourceofobjections to thisanalysis to causaltheories in general. The latter Davidsonbrushesaside: 'Hobbes. then'deliberation thinks itself mustinvolve somekindofillusion'.26. Viii+
pp. Schlick. that Wiggins 'all sortsofthings and all sortsof in our social.butthedifficulties in thewayofanysuchanalysis aremade does notshowthatfreemanifest. Stevenson' havedoneall that canorneedbe doneto remove lying behindthis and Ted attack. 12 Jun 2013 09:23:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
. ?3. judicialand penalinstitutions. andthat which they doesnotrecognize feel this willallowfor 'what menat present bywayofremorse I canfind no argument attheir ownactions orbywayofanger atthose ofothers'.133. another account of how the sincethiswouldrequire is free agent to do theaction to. 1973. failure domto actis nota causalpower oftheagent. to find suchan analysis Nevertheless. Evans
Essays on Freedom of Action Editedby Ted Honderich London: Routledge & KeganPaul. Wiggins ('Towardsa Reasonable condition thesisthatit is a necessary of tarianism') arguesforthe libertarian or actions or mental thisbeingthecase thatthere are at leastsomemovements events their immediate or nottheycompletely determine sucwhich.New Books
connexions his variousdiscussions cannotbut be appreciated between by one who finds difficulties in someof them. C. show thattheyare presupposed commonsense in such matters. in Wiggins' exist which one can meet paperto showthattheseincompatibilities libertarian ideasormystihead-on. beliefs oftheagent.in thisvolumeDavid Wiggins seekto renew to repelit. minism actionsor mental eventsis true-if thereare no such movements. whether If detercessors. particularly in their wouldneedto be said to more perhaps a great dealmore savageaspects. To showthiswouldbe onewayof wouldbe to showthat attacking theviewthatactions are not caused. DonaldDavidson('Freedom thoseconcerned thetopicindicated with of Austin's to Moore's to Act') disposes. to mymindconvincingly.Anysatisfactory wouldhave so referred analysis such as thewantsor to refer to causeswhichare notsubject to thisobjection.. D.57 on Wed. Honderich it. in our relations things withhumanbeings'are based 'on the supposition that ofresponsibility mencando otherwise no notion than do do'. Hume. All thesame.00
Unlikemany suchcollections. Dennett ifhe couldsomeorfree Everyone wouldagree thata manis responsible only timesdo otherwise Liberthanhe does do. theconfusion Ayer. by refined Honderich ('One Determinism') also claimsthata denialof determinism (at 330
This content downloaded from 200. are notthemselves entirely determined by somepredecessor.