Scan barcode
A review by emmanuelbg
Theaetetus by Robin Waterfield, Plato
3.0
Thaetetus is an inquiry into epistemology, how knowledge ought be defined and based on what conditions. One interesting thing about the work is the digression Socrates makes in the middle of it to discuss whether nature is of a changing nature (Becoming) or if there's a permanent unity behind (Being).
Apart from that, however, I found the dialogue lacking in substance. It seems to embroil itself in a technical analysis of correct judgements and when they are possible, but this doesn't lead to anywhere. It ends up giving a definition of knowledge that is convincing and seems to hold up to close scrutinity, but I feel like the dialogue could have been more concise without losing essence.
Nietzsche's critique of Plato's dialogues as "self-congratulatory, childish pieces of writing" makes more sense every time I read him. I fail to see the brilliance which makes Plato such a distinguished figure in philosophical discourse.
Apart from that, however, I found the dialogue lacking in substance. It seems to embroil itself in a technical analysis of correct judgements and when they are possible, but this doesn't lead to anywhere. It ends up giving a definition of knowledge that is convincing and seems to hold up to close scrutinity, but I feel like the dialogue could have been more concise without losing essence.
Nietzsche's critique of Plato's dialogues as "self-congratulatory, childish pieces of writing" makes more sense every time I read him. I fail to see the brilliance which makes Plato such a distinguished figure in philosophical discourse.