Sophist A fluent and accurate new translation of the dialogue that of all Plato s works has seemed to speak most directly to the interests of contemporary and analytical philosophers White s extensive intro

  • Title: Sophist
  • Author: Plato Nicholas P. White
  • ISBN: 9780872202023
  • Page: 236
  • Format: Paperback
  • A fluent and accurate new translation of the dialogue that, of all Plato s works, has seemed to speak most directly to the interests of contemporary and analytical philosophers White s extensive introduction explores the dialogue s central themes, its connection with related discussions in other dialogues, and its implicaiton for the interpretation of Plato s metaphysics.
    • Free Download [Contemporary Book] ð Sophist - by Plato Nicholas P. White ↠
      236 Plato Nicholas P. White
    • thumbnail Title: Free Download [Contemporary Book] ð Sophist - by Plato Nicholas P. White ↠
      Posted by:Plato Nicholas P. White
      Published :2019-02-02T04:16:13+00:00

    127 Comment

    • Foad says:

      مكالمه ى سوفيست، به شناخت ماهيت سوفيست مى پردازد. سقراط در اين گفتگو ساكت است و بيگانه اى الئايى صحبت مى كند. خلاصه ى مباحث(view spoiler)[افلاطون ابتدا مى گويد عدم مضاف غير از عدم مطلق است، و عدم مضاف در حقيقت موجود است. سپس بيان مى دارد كه "معرفت خلاف واقع" و "استدلال نادرست" قسمى از عد [...]

    • Timothy Warnock says:

      By the middle of the book here's what I really wanted to see happen:---STRANGER: There are some who imitate, knowing what they imitate, andsome who do not know. And what line of distinction can there possibly be greater than that which divides ignorance from knowledge?THEAETETUS: There can be no greaterRANGER: Was not the sort of imitation of which we spoke just now theimitation of those who know? For he who would imitate you would surelyknow you and your figure?THEAETETUS: NaturallyRANGER: And [...]

    • Luís C. says:

      Being and Non-BeingPlato begins his dialogue with the purpose of defining what is the sophist. In its various partial investigations, I believe that all of the most important is that the accounts of the nature of the "non-being".Contrary to what we can intuit the "non-being" is not necessarily the opposite of "being", but only something other than "being". In my view, this is the central argument that allows the philosopher continue and correctly complete their investigation into the being of th [...]

    • Bülent Çallı says:

      “Bilmek ve bilinmek sizce etki midir, etkilenme midir; yoksa her ikisi birden midir?” Platon, Sofist.s.80Antik Çağ’ın lanetli biraderleri olan sofistler, ilk başta, bilgiyi sorgulayarak ve şüpheyi düşünceye sokarak felsefe sahnesine nefis bir giriş yapmışlardı. Pek kısa bir zaman içerisinde bu sorgulama ve şüphe tehlikeli bir akıl yürütmeye ve sonra da kullanışlı, kaypak bir ilkeye dönüştü: Düşünmek, var olan bir şeyi düşünmektir. Yanlış düşünmek ise [...]

    • Tim says:

      Sophist is one of the few Platonic dialogues which don’t have Socrates as the main character (all are from the late period). This seems to offer Plato some advantages, especially for this book’s purposes. Using the Eleatic Visitor as the main speaker allows Plato to make sustained arguments consisting of series of positive statements as opposed to the Socratic character’s standard approach, claiming to know nothing and play the midwife of others’ thoughts – asking questions, testing an [...]

    • Seth says:

      A Sophist is a hunter of young boys by the way.

    • Curtainthief says:

      Leave it to Plato to ask a simple question - Who is the sophist? - and create an entire ontology as a bi-product.

    • Barış Özgür says:

      birkaç ay yatıp kalkıp bunu okumadıktan sonra bana fesleğenle, pardon felsefeyle gelmeyin.

    • Vatroslav Herceg says:

      Naprijed, ZGB. 1975.Preveo Milivoj Sironić. Sironić je super dopunio prijevod fusnotama u kojima je ukazao na dvosmislenosti i problematici određenih mjesta u tekstu. Primjerice; "Teetet- Uistinu se, stranče, čini da je istinito ono u početku rečeno o sofisti da je to vrsta ljudi koju je teško uloviti. Čini se da je on pun zaklona"Riječ "zaklona" u matičnom jeziku posjeduje duhovitu crtu dvosmislenosti,"problema" na starogrčkom označava i "zaklon", "zid", "barijera" ali također i " [...]

    • Jeenar ژینەر says:

      من لە بەینی هێز و توانای ئەفڵاتوون سەرم سووڕماوە پرسی سەرەکی ئەفڵاتون وەکو ناوی دەمەتەقێکە بریتیە لە دیاریکردنی سۆفیستچ جۆرە کەسێکە ؟ کاری چییە ؟ چییە ؟کە ئەگاتە ئەو قەناعەتەی سۆفیست بریتیە لە " لاساییکردنەوەی دروستکردنی ئاخاوتنی ناکۆک، چەشنێکی ناذڵسۆز و نەزانی سەر بە چەش [...]

    • Jesse says:

      This is the best example of dialectic reasoning. Heidegger masturbated over his copy; you should too.

    • Thompson says:

      This dialogue is the companion diaglogue to Theatetus. Plato continues his thoughts on his theory of knowledge.

    • JJ says:

      I've just finished reading what I can only assume is one of the earliest extant hit pieces from the Western literary canon. Plato did not like sophists - that much is clear from many of his dialogues, but this one really ramps the sophist-loathing up to eleven.Two little interesting things that caught my eye in this text:One) They discuss the topic of essentially atheism very casually. It's strange, because I recently read Apology and Phaedo, in which Socrates faces the death penalty for, amongs [...]

    • Sah Angoluan says:

      Sophist dialogue was primarily for explaining the nature of Sophist is, after Socrates asked the Stranger, whose name weren’t even mentioned, about whether in his place (Elea), Sophist, statemen and philosophers are one or three different names. At first, I presupposed that the dialogue will tackle primarily on those three, but after reading it, understand it with all my might. The dialogue was all about the Sophist, maybe thats the reason why does this dialogoue was named after it.The strange [...]

    • Jairo Fraga says:

      O diálogo começa bem na busca "conjunta" do Estrangeiro com Teeteto para definir o Sofista, no entanto se torna maçante e altamente entediante com rodeios e discussões sobre o não-ser. Como outro usuário comentou, talvez fosse melhor simplesmente ter excluído as afirmações de Teeteto ("Certo", "Sem dúvida", "Como assim?", etc), e deixar o Estrangeiro fazer seu discurso sem interrupções.

    • Benjamintl says:

      Ikke lest denne versjonen men har lest dialogen. Det telles

    • Jim says:

      On the one hand, I'm finding Plato/Socrates much easier to read and understand. On the other hand, I'm finding it easier to understand why Socrates was asked to kill himself.

    • Thomas says:

      Sophist is not the most beautiful dialogue in the canon, but it is important, and this is an excellent translation. Sophist follows on the heels of Theaetetus, which explores how error occurs when the categories of thought are confused. Sophist examines how those categories interact with each other in an effort to locate where the Sophist hides: in non-being. But first the Stranger has to resolve a logical obstacle: how can the Sophist hide in non-being, when on the face of it non-being simply i [...]

    • Bob Nichols says:

      Socrates hands off the lead for this dialogue to a "visitor from Elea” who is a member of “the group who gather around Parmenides and Zeno.” The visitor serves as a mouthpiece for a perspective on the Sophists that is shared by Socrates. Sophists, referred to as a “tribe,” have “expertise in persuasion” or “expertise in pleasing people,” using pleasure as “bait” in a “money-making branch of expertise in debating, disputation, controversy, fighting, combat, and acquisition [...]

    • Bruce says:

      Plato’s Sophist is the first of three linked dialogues, the second being Statesman, and the third, never written, presumably being Philosopher. The events of the dialogue purportedly take place on the day following Theaetetus. Socrates plays no role in this dialogue, the questioner being the Visitor (in Nicholas P. White’s translation), called by some other translators the Stranger or the Eleatic Stranger. The young Theaetetus again is the naïve foil.The quest seems to be to define what a s [...]

    • Garrett Cash says:

      You see, one of the problems with the dialogues I'm now reading of Plato's is that they were composed during his so called "late" period, also synonymous for when he became a garrulous geezer. A genius garrulous geezer, but an unbearably dull one. In this dialogue, Socrates has been tossed out for a "Stranger" who takes Socrates's place as the dude who claims to not know anything but constantly talks as if he does. According to a passage in Statesmen, it seems like Plato's contemporary critics c [...]

    • LindaH says:

      Don't you love a book with an original publication date of -360? (This fatuous opening should warn the reader that this review is written by one who is NOT a philosophy student.)Sophist is the title of one of Plato's dialogues. In this highly readable text there are two speakers: Stranger, a philosopher, and Theaetetus, a student. The issue that triggers their Q&A is, What is a sophist? It is not a "spoiler" to tell you that a sophist in Plato's time was a person who claimed to know everythi [...]

    • Draco3seven Crawdady says:

      The concept of the sophist is one of the most important concepts in at least Western academia and maybe all human thinking. Plato’s dialogue The Sophist is concerned with defining what the sophist is or more precisely defining what the sophist does and in so doing giving meaning to the term. So Plato’s goal here is to explain actions that define the term, and so explain the methods that define the sophist. Roughly the sophist is some one who is not concerned with truth and genuine knowledge [...]

    • Catherine says:

      Although the Sophist is not my favorite of Plato's dialogues, I have to give it points for keeping me awake in the dark for several hours. I just could not stop thinking long enough to get to sleep. I actually ended up having to get up in the middle of the night and jot down a few thoughts!While part of that was due to the dialogue itself, I think that an equal, if not greater, force behind my preoccupation was that I could hear the individual voices of Mr. Kalkavage, Mr. Salem and Ms. Brann. I [...]

    • Genni says:

      To be or not to be? That is (almost) the question. Until Plato shows that being and not-being are not so much opposite as they are just different. Ha.Really. I am still swirling around in this one. We are supposed to discover the difference between a sophist, a philosopher, and a stateman, but somewhere in the middle we begin a discussion on abstract opposites, most specifically being and not-being. This was really reminiscent of the argument from contraries in Phaedo, but again, he deals with a [...]

    • Eric says:

      Socrates takes a back seat in Plato’s Sophist, which primarily features Theaetetus and the “stranger,” a philosopher from Elea who Theaetetus has invited to participate in the day’s discussion. Their dialogue is an attempt to track down the nature of the sophist. Their primary methodology is pursuing a series of classifications based on binary divisions. Following a practice round focusing on the angler, they start hunting the sophist. They—though mostly the Stranger—come up with a v [...]

    • Colin says:

      Working through the Sophist as an introduction to a Seminar I am taking on Aristotle.Read this Dialogue a few times from "Plato: Complete works" Edited by John Cooper and found this to be a much easier translation to follow, especially if it is a close and careful reading.The downside is that at times there are words which are clearly translated into more colloquial and modern English. This serves the reader well for having a better sense of what is happening within the dialogue, but from a lite [...]

    • Аndrei says:

      How is this a dialogue when all THEAETETUS is saying is "true", "yes", "indeed", "i agree" etc. ? It was more of a distraction from the Stranger's arguments, but whatever: I learned about fishing, trading, where the Divide et Impera algorithm may come from, beings and non-beings (which was 80% of the book and that somehow lost me with all the states, movements, identity and differences), finishes with an introduction to verbs and nouns and from all those concludes that there are people who know [...]

    • Hakan İlker says:

      Platon'un (ya da Sokrates'in) diyalog şeklinde çürütmeye dayalı Metinlerini okumayı pek sevmezdim. Fakat her ne kadar orijinalin değil, çeviriden çevrilse de gayet güzel bir çeviri, yerinde dipnotlar, güzel baskı ile Sofist kitabı gerçekten beni kendisine hayran bıraktı. Retorik ustası sofistlere ben biraz sevgili besliyorum ve kinci Platon sofistleri bir yabancıyı konuşturarak alaşağı ediyor. Varlık felsefesi hakkında gerçekten sağlam şeyler var kitapta. İletişim' [...]

    • Nedloha says:

      While i am not big fan of this dialogue, find it boring, i also think i got what he was trying to convey. Sophist means a master of discussion but foremost - intelectual kind of fraud, and i think its finely conveyed by long monotonous and meaningless categorizations. It seems kinda meta and ironic. I almost thoughts that it may be Herman Melville's favourite dialogue, i bet>Sophist is a man who sell a knowledge. While there is no man who knows everything, he must be fraud, to make believe th [...]

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *