Staff View
Socratic dialectic and the resolution of fallacy in Plato's Euthydemus

Descriptive

TitleInfo
Title
Socratic dialectic and the resolution of fallacy in Plato's Euthydemus
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Swanson
NamePart (type = given)
Carrie Elizabeth
DisplayForm
Carrie Swanson
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
author
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Code
NamePart (type = given)
Alan
DisplayForm
Alan Code
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
chair
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Bolton
NamePart (type = given)
Robert
DisplayForm
Robert Bolton
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
co-chair
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
King
NamePart (type = given)
Jeffrey
DisplayForm
Jeffrey King
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
internal member
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Loewer
NamePart (type = given)
Barry
DisplayForm
Barry Loewer
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
internal member
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Morison
NamePart (type = given)
Benjamin
DisplayForm
Benjamin Morison
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
outside member
Name (type = corporate)
NamePart
Rutgers University
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
degree grantor
Name (type = corporate)
NamePart
Graduate School - New Brunswick
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
school
TypeOfResource
Text
Genre (authority = marcgt)
theses
OriginInfo
DateCreated (qualifier = exact)
2011
DateOther (qualifier = exact); (type = degree)
2011-05
Place
PlaceTerm (type = code)
xx
Language
LanguageTerm (authority = ISO639-2b); (type = code)
eng
Abstract (type = abstract)
My dissertation is devoted to an examination of the resolution of fallacy in Plato's Euthydemus. It is a familiar claim that the Euthydemus champions Socratic argumentation over sophistical or eristic reasoning. No consensus however exists regarding either the nature or philosophical significance of Socrates’ treatment of the fallacies he confronts. I argue that a careful reading of the dialogue reveals that the Socratic response to fallacious reasoning is conducted at two different levels of philosophical sophistication. Socrates relies upon the resources of Socratic dialectic in responding to sophisms due to ignorance of refutation. Insofar as Socratic dialectic is grounded in a grasp of the nature of genuine refutation, the objections it raises to false refutation are fully explanatory. On the other hand, Socrates employs various self-refutation arguments against theses which depend on false assumptions regarding the nature of predication---for example, the thesis that false speaking is impossible. It is however characteristic of Socratic dialectic that this method of examination cannot explain why the sophists’ theses are false. The Socratic response to fallacy in these cases is non-explanatory in this sense. On the other hand, these limitations on Socratic expertise are overcome in other passages in the dialogue which are replete with clues to the reader that point to a genuine explanation and resolution of the sophists’ arguments for their various theses. In particular, the reader is invited at every turn to modify, clarify, or reject various assumptions made by the brothers regarding the nature of predication. Here Plato implicitly relies on the results of what I call higher dialectic. This theory, which receives explicit formulation in the Sophist, is conceptually rich enough to expose and dispose of the various false assumptions upon which the sophists’ theses rest. I conclude that the Euthydemus is concerned to identify Socratic dialectic as only a part of philosophy, and to locate and strictly delimit its epistemological status as lying above eristic and the rhetorical arts, but below that of dialectic as that is conceived in the Republic and even later dialogues---thus anticipating the Sophist’s conception of Socrates as the practitioner of a ‘noble sophistry’, (gennaia sophistike, 231b3-8) and the elenchus as a propaedeutic to philosophy, which purges the soul of false beliefs.
Subject (authority = RUETD)
Topic
Philosophy
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Rutgers University Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = RULIB)
ETD
Identifier
ETD_3245
PhysicalDescription
Form (authority = gmd)
electronic resource
InternetMediaType
application/pdf
InternetMediaType
text/xml
Extent
iv, 381 p.
Note (type = degree)
Ph.D.
Note (type = bibliography)
Includes bibliographical references
Note (type = statement of responsibility)
by Carrie Elizabeth Swanson
Subject
Name (authority = LC-NAF)
NamePart (type = personal)
Plato. Euthydemus
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Questioning
Subject
Name (authority = LC-NAF)
NamePart (type = personal)
Socrates--Influence
Identifier (type = hdl)
http://hdl.rutgers.edu/1782.1/rucore10001600001.ETD.000061530
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Graduate School - New Brunswick Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = local)
rucore19991600001
Location
PhysicalLocation (authority = marcorg); (displayLabel = Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey)
NjNbRU
Identifier (type = doi)
doi:10.7282/T3K64HC3
Genre (authority = ExL-Esploro)
ETD doctoral
Back to the top

Rights

RightsDeclaration (ID = rulibRdec0006)
The author owns the copyright to this work.
RightsHolder (type = personal)
Name
FamilyName
Swanson
GivenName
Carrie
Role
Copyright Holder
RightsEvent
Type
Permission or license
DateTime (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact); (point = start)
2011-04-12 12:43:31
AssociatedEntity
Name
Carrie Swanson
Role
Copyright holder
Affiliation
Rutgers University. Graduate School - New Brunswick
AssociatedObject
Type
License
Name
Author Agreement License
Detail
I hereby grant to the Rutgers University Libraries and to my school the non-exclusive right to archive, reproduce and distribute my thesis or dissertation, in whole or in part, and/or my abstract, in whole or in part, in and from an electronic format, subject to the release date subsequently stipulated in this submittal form and approved by my school. I represent and stipulate that the thesis or dissertation and its abstract are my original work, that they do not infringe or violate any rights of others, and that I make these grants as the sole owner of the rights to my thesis or dissertation and its abstract. I represent that I have obtained written permissions, when necessary, from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis or dissertation and will supply copies of such upon request by my school. I acknowledge that RU ETD and my school will not distribute my thesis or dissertation or its abstract if, in their reasonable judgment, they believe all such rights have not been secured. I acknowledge that I retain ownership rights to the copyright of my work. I also retain the right to use all or part of this thesis or dissertation in future works, such as articles or books.
RightsEvent
DateTime (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact); (point = start)
2011-05-31
DateTime (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact); (point = end)
2016-05-29
Type
Embargo
Detail
Access to this PDF has been restricted at the author's request. It will be publicly available after May 29th, 2016.
Copyright
Status
Copyright protected
Availability
Status
Open
Reason
Permission or license
Back to the top

Technical

FileSize (UNIT = bytes)
1920512
OperatingSystem (VERSION = 5.1)
windows xp
ContentModel
ETD
MimeType (TYPE = file)
application/pdf
MimeType (TYPE = container)
application/x-tar
FileSize (UNIT = bytes)
1925120
Checksum (METHOD = SHA1)
15570724279d5429dc4ed2ede986907983a1bbd1
Back to the top
Version 8.5.5
Rutgers University Libraries - Copyright ©2024