1985-05-14 NSFRI - Plato - Theaetetus - 200d-201b,149e,206d,147d-148d,172c - Using a Model for Unde
Channel: Pierre Grimes and the Noetic Society
Date: 06/03/2018

This material is posted under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. 
See https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
 Pierre Grimes and the Noetic Society -- 1985-05-14 NSFRI - Plato - Theaetetus - 200d-201b,149e,206d,147d-148d,172c - Using a Model for Understanding; Puzzles Are Presented
Dialogue(s): theaetetus Sections: 200d-201b,149e,206d,147d-148d,172c This talk assumes the participant has read the dialogue in full and Pierre takes the group to various places in the dialogue to thread some ideas. This talk is excellent for the student already somewhat familiar with this dialogue and/or Pierre Grimes' work with Philosophical Midwifery. "What kind of questions does Socrates make when he rejects a position? What kind of criticism does Socrates make when he rejects a position?" The group reads from 200d to 201b where the notion that knowledge is true belief is quashed. The group reads the Cornford translation and then the Loeb. There is a detailed discussion of how Socrates shows that there is a difference between knowledge and true belief, that if there is a profession where persuasion can result in true belief (orator or lawyer) and there is no direct perception and if knowledge is perception (the basic belief behind the view that knowledge is true belief), then true belief can exist without knowledge. And Theatetus and Socrates still don't know what knowledge is. (Good screenshot might be captured at 30 minutes in) Now, Pierre begins a list of all the positions which are rejected in the dialogue and begins a discussion about seeing the rejected positions with analogy. He uses the seed imagery and the the farmer's art from the dialogue at 149e. Pierre wonders if we can use this model each time a position is rejected to see if knowledge is present. Pierre takes us to 206d but the group does not read the section; even though the farmer can distinguish good seeds from bad and good soil, the distinctions alone are inadequate for establishing knowledge. There is something missing. Then Pierre takes us to 147d - 148d (again, not read out loud) to discuss incommensurables! The mathematical model presented here shows that there are incommensurables, theories that are incommensurate with one another and with knowledge. The math model and the farmer model both point to something in common, something we might be able to use to shed light on knowledge. Pierre suggests using the Farmer, Midwifery, and Philosophical Midwifery to list their differences and especially their samenesses which might pull them into a unity, But the group returns to a question of a participant at 149e and Barbara works on the Greek for precision (something she does regularly in these talks). "Have this in the better part of your mind," Pierre suggests. Pierre wants the group to talk about what is called "the digression" at 172c at some other time. Rhetoric and philosophy - what kinds of concerns does the philosopher have? What if the question, what is knowledge, is not among those concerns? We need to see where the word knowledge is in the Greek. This whole discussion is a preparation for further insights. They discuss what it means for something to be incommensurate and that there might be a "unit of measure" in common to the Farmer, the midwife and the philosophical midwife! Screenshot from 1 hour, 9 minutes is included here. Future talks will address these points. Enjoy! [Thanks to BillD for videotaping, and to JulieP for title, stephanus pages, and above notes.] More info: http://noeticsociety.org