An impossible choice: knowing and not knowing in the Aviary (Theaetetus196c7-d2)

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Edgar González-Varela
Data de Publicação: 2022
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: spa
Título da fonte: Revista Archai (Online)
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/archai/article/view/47826
Resumo: In this work I examine the "impossible choice" that Socrates poses to Theaetetus: to choose between accepting (a) that false judgment is impossible, or (b) that it is possible to know and not to know the same object (Theaetetus196c7-d2). According to the traditional interpretation, Socrates states that it is necessary to accept one of the two options: (b). Consequently, Plato would develop the Aviary as a model of explanation of error in which it is possible to know and not to know the same thing. Here I argueagainst this reading. I claim that Socrates says that the two options (a) and (b) must be rejected, and, therefore, that the Aviary presents a model in which false judgment is possible without accepting that it is possible to know and not to know the samething.
id UNB-18_7c04ae2f89a28fc3ef2ddaed96c97283
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/47826
network_acronym_str UNB-18
network_name_str Revista Archai (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling An impossible choice: knowing and not knowing in the Aviary (Theaetetus196c7-d2)Una elección imposible: conocer y no conocer en el Aviario (Teeteto196c7-d2)contradictionerrorfalsityjudgementknowledgeconocimientocontradicciónerrorfalsedadjuicioIn this work I examine the "impossible choice" that Socrates poses to Theaetetus: to choose between accepting (a) that false judgment is impossible, or (b) that it is possible to know and not to know the same object (Theaetetus196c7-d2). According to the traditional interpretation, Socrates states that it is necessary to accept one of the two options: (b). Consequently, Plato would develop the Aviary as a model of explanation of error in which it is possible to know and not to know the same thing. Here I argueagainst this reading. I claim that Socrates says that the two options (a) and (b) must be rejected, and, therefore, that the Aviary presents a model in which false judgment is possible without accepting that it is possible to know and not to know the samething.En este trabajo examino la “elección imposible” que Sócrates le plantea a Teeteto: elegir entre aceptar (a) que el juicio falso es imposible, o (b) que es posible conocer y no conocer el mismo objeto (Teeteto196c7-d2). De acuerdo con la interpretación tradicional, Sócrates afirma que es necesario aceptar una de las dos opciones: (b). En consecuencia, Platóndesarrollaría el Aviario como un modelo de explicación del error en el que es posible conocer y no conocer lo mismo. Aquí argumento en contra de esta lectura. Sostengo que Sócratesafirmaque se deben rechazar las dos opciones(a) y (b), y, por ende, el Aviario presenta un modelo en dondeel juicio falso es posible sin aceptar que es posible conocer y no conocer lo mismo.Cátedra UNESCO Archai (Universidade de Brasília); Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra, Portugal; Annablume Editora, São Paulo, Brasil2022-10-17info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionArticlesArtigosapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/archai/article/view/4782610.14195/1984-249X_32_26Revista Archai; No. 32 (2022): Archai 32 (2022); e-03226Archai Journal; n. 32 (2022): Archai 32 (2022); e-032261984-249X2179-4960reponame:Revista Archai (Online)instname:Universidade de Brasília (UnB)instacron:UNBspahttps://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/archai/article/view/47826/36698Copyright (c) 2022 Edgar González-Varelahttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessEdgar González-Varela2023-04-18T15:51:27Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/47826Revistahttps://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/archaiPUBhttps://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/archai/oai||archaijournal@unb.br|| cornelli@unb.br1984-249X1984-249Xopendoar:2023-04-18T15:51:27Revista Archai (Online) - Universidade de Brasília (UnB)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv An impossible choice: knowing and not knowing in the Aviary (Theaetetus196c7-d2)
Una elección imposible: conocer y no conocer en el Aviario (Teeteto196c7-d2)
title An impossible choice: knowing and not knowing in the Aviary (Theaetetus196c7-d2)
spellingShingle An impossible choice: knowing and not knowing in the Aviary (Theaetetus196c7-d2)
Edgar González-Varela
contradiction
error
falsity
judgement
knowledge
conocimiento
contradicción
error
falsedad
juicio
title_short An impossible choice: knowing and not knowing in the Aviary (Theaetetus196c7-d2)
title_full An impossible choice: knowing and not knowing in the Aviary (Theaetetus196c7-d2)
title_fullStr An impossible choice: knowing and not knowing in the Aviary (Theaetetus196c7-d2)
title_full_unstemmed An impossible choice: knowing and not knowing in the Aviary (Theaetetus196c7-d2)
title_sort An impossible choice: knowing and not knowing in the Aviary (Theaetetus196c7-d2)
author Edgar González-Varela
author_facet Edgar González-Varela
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Edgar González-Varela
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv contradiction
error
falsity
judgement
knowledge
conocimiento
contradicción
error
falsedad
juicio
topic contradiction
error
falsity
judgement
knowledge
conocimiento
contradicción
error
falsedad
juicio
description In this work I examine the "impossible choice" that Socrates poses to Theaetetus: to choose between accepting (a) that false judgment is impossible, or (b) that it is possible to know and not to know the same object (Theaetetus196c7-d2). According to the traditional interpretation, Socrates states that it is necessary to accept one of the two options: (b). Consequently, Plato would develop the Aviary as a model of explanation of error in which it is possible to know and not to know the same thing. Here I argueagainst this reading. I claim that Socrates says that the two options (a) and (b) must be rejected, and, therefore, that the Aviary presents a model in which false judgment is possible without accepting that it is possible to know and not to know the samething.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-10-17
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Articles
Artigos
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/archai/article/view/47826
10.14195/1984-249X_32_26
url https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/archai/article/view/47826
identifier_str_mv 10.14195/1984-249X_32_26
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv spa
language spa
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/archai/article/view/47826/36698
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2022 Edgar González-Varela
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2022 Edgar González-Varela
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cátedra UNESCO Archai (Universidade de Brasília); Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra, Portugal; Annablume Editora, São Paulo, Brasil
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cátedra UNESCO Archai (Universidade de Brasília); Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra, Portugal; Annablume Editora, São Paulo, Brasil
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista Archai; No. 32 (2022): Archai 32 (2022); e-03226
Archai Journal; n. 32 (2022): Archai 32 (2022); e-03226
1984-249X
2179-4960
reponame:Revista Archai (Online)
instname:Universidade de Brasília (UnB)
instacron:UNB
instname_str Universidade de Brasília (UnB)
instacron_str UNB
institution UNB
reponame_str Revista Archai (Online)
collection Revista Archai (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista Archai (Online) - Universidade de Brasília (UnB)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||archaijournal@unb.br|| cornelli@unb.br
_version_ 1798319942855032832

Registros relacionados