BOOK REVIEWS
Image and Reality in Plato’s Sophist. By David Ambuel. Pp. xvii, 279, Las Vegas, Parmenides Publishing,April 2009, $32.00.
After introductory matter, this book consistsof a thorough commentary on Plato’s Sophist, atranslation of the dialogue, and then end matter,including a useful appendix in which he arguesin more detail against a common view of thedialogue. The commentary is divided into threeparts (roughly, on the divisions or the attem-pted definition of the sophist; on the problem ofnon-being; and on its solution), and the readeris also helped by frequent section breaks withsubheadings. I will say no more about thetranslation: it is useful to have it in the book, torefer to, but it is plain and literal almost to thepoint where on occasion it hardly reads likeEnglish.Ambuel wants to make two main points.
First, contrary to a strong trend in scholarshipover the last fifty years, he sees the dialogue asmetaphysical rather than logical; that is, it is notmerely an exercise in logical division followedby a disambiguation of senses of the verb ‘tobe’, but primarily an exploration of forms, entitieswith real ontological status, and their relation-ship to the everyday world of particulars. Thisthesis of Ambuel’s is attractive, but it standsor falls with the success or failure of the restof the book, in which he applies and justifiesthis insight. I can see no reason why the bookcannot be both logical and metaphysical; thetwo are often hard to distinguish in Plato’sdialogues.Ambuel’s second main thesis is that, despite
appearances, the dialogue is aporetic. Even thoughit appears to end in certain firm conclusionsabout ‘to be’ (or about being), Ambuel arguesthat these conclusions are undermined becausethe method used to reach them has been patentlyinadequate. This seems to me to be a hazard-ous and implausible thesis. Interpretations ofPlato’s dialogues that promise a revolution arerarely successful; good academic work is morecommonly cumulative, building on careful priorwork.Ambuel’s thesis means, as he freely admits,
that, contrary to what all scholars have thought,
the Eleatic Stranger does not speak for Plato.In that case, what is the point of the dialogue?Ambuel believes that Plato is asking us to pickup on certain clues, never spotted before byanyone, that show that the dialogue does nothave the function it purports to have. Theseclues are (1) that the method of division prac-tised in the dialogue does not conform to theoryand practice of division in other dialogues,specifically because there is no prior collec-tion and because division proceeds only bydichotomy; (2) the sophist is consistently allowedto be a practitioner of a skill, even thoughelsewhere Plato denies that sophists haveskills; (3) that in certain respects the metaphysicsof the dialogue does not square with someof Plato’s earlier ideas – specifically, in thatforms are said to relate to one another (whichdestroys their singularity), and that imagesand paradigms are not kept as radically distinctas before. It would take too long to argueagainst these points in detail; suffice it to saythat only strong unitarians would think that Platocould not have changed his mind on any or all ofthese three points.But if the dialogue does not, then, have the
purpose it appears to have, what is its purpose?Ambuel believes it shows that Parmenideanlogical tools fail to cope with the subtletiesof Platonic metaphysics, particularly becauseit is bound to blur the distinction betweenimage and paradigm; therefore, the dialogueshows, in this indirect way, the necessity of afirm ontological distinction between image andparadigm.Even though I disagree fundamentally with
almost everything Ambuel says, there are thingsto be grateful for in this book; above all, it is wellargued and clearly written. And, just because of itsdifficulties, Sophist is studied less than manyPlatonic dialogues: it is good to have a newtranslation and a thought-provoking book-lengthcommentary.
Lakonia, Greece Robin Waterfield
r The author 2009. Journal compilation r Trustees for Roman Catholic Purposes Registered 2009. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 9600Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.
HeyJ L (2009), pp. 697–752
