kolb - pythagoras bound. limit and unlimit in plato´s philebus

8/20/2019 kolb - Pythagoras bound. Limit and unlimit in Plato´s Philebus

1/16

Journal of the History of Philosophy, Volume 21, Number 4, October

1983, pp. 497-511 (Article)

DOI: 10.1353/hph.1983.0093

For additional information about this article

Access provided by Universidad Complutense de Madrid (2 Sep 2015 13:25 GMT)

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v021/21.4kolb.html

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v021/21.4kolb.htmlhttp://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v021/21.4kolb.html


2/16

Pythagoras Bound: Limit and

U nl im ited in Plato s hilebus

D A V I D A . K O L B

W H Y ARE T HIN GS t h e w a y t h e y a r e ? P l a t o a n d D e m o c r i t u s p r e s e n t o p p o s e d

a n s w e r s t o t h i s q u e s t i o n . N o t o n l y i s o n e a m a t e r i a l i s t w h i l e t h e o t h e r i s n o t ,

b u t f u r t h e r , t h e y e m p l o y d i f f e r e n t o n t o l o g i c a l s t r a t e g i e s t o a n s w e r t h e q u e s -

t i o n w h y ? D e m o c r i t u s t r a c e s t h e v is ib le f e a t u r e s o f t h i n g s, t h e i r c o l o r s a n d

s h a p e s a n d h a bi ts o f m o v e m e n t , b a ck to d e t e r m i n a t e f u n d a m e n t a l e n ti ti es ,

t h e a t o m s . A b o u t t h e f e a t u r e s o f t h e a t o m s t h e m s e l v e s t h e r e is n o t h i n g m o r e

t o s a y t h a n t h a t t h e y a r e t h e w a y t h e y a re . W e c a n d i s t i n g u i s h h e r e p h y s i ca l

a t o m i s m f r o m o n t o l o g i c a l a to m i s m . P h y s ic a l a t o m i s m is a d o c t r i n e a b o u t t h e

u l t i m a t e c o n s t i t u e n t s o f m a t t e r . O n t o l o g i c a l a t o m i s m is a d o c t r i n e a b o u t h o w

e n t it i es o f w h a t e v e r k i n d c o m e t o h a v e t h e f e a t u r e s t h e y h a v e , t h e cl a im t h a t

t h e r e a r e b a s ic e n ti t ie s w h i c h j u s t a r e w h a t t h e y a r e a n d w h i c h a r e r e s p o n s i -

b le f o r t h e f e a t u r e s o f o t h e r e n t i ti e s b y s o m e p r o c e s s o f c o m b i n a t i o n . T h e

q u e s t i o n w h y ? c o m e s t o a n e n d a t t h e ba s ic e n t it i es a n d t h e i r f e a t u r e s p lu s

a d e s c r i p t i o n o f th e p r o c e s s o f c o m b i n a t i o n . D e m o c r i t u s is a n a t o m i s t i n b o t h

t h e s e s e n s e s , t h e m a t e r i a l a t o m s p l a y i n g t h e r o l e o f o n t o l o g i c a l l y b a si c u n it s .

T h e s a m e o n t o l o g i c a l a t o m i s t s t r a t e g y c a n b e f o u n d , h o w e v e r , in t h o s e w h o

d e n y t h e e x i s t e n c e o f p h y s i c a l a t o m s . C l as s ic a l po s i ti v is t s a n d e m p i r i c i s t s w h o

p o s t u l a t e s e n s e d a t a d e n y p h y s i c al a to m s b u t k e e p t h e s t r a t e g y of r e g r e s s t o

e n t i t i e s w h o s e f e a t u r e s h a v e n o f u r t h e r e x p l a n a t i o n .

P l at o , a s r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e

Timaeus

w a s a p h y s i c a l a t o m i s t . B u t h e r e j e c t s

t h e o n t o l o g i c a l u l t i m a c y o f p h y si c a l a t o m s , g e n e r a t i n g t h e m o u t o f a f o r m l e s s

e n e r g y - s p a c e a n d b as ic m a t h e m a t i c a l p a t t e r n s . I n th is a r ti c le I a r g u e t h a t

P l a t o i s n o w h e r e a n o n t o l o g i c a l a t o m i s t , n e i t h e r i n t h e p h y s i c a l w o r l d n o r i n

h is p s y c h o l o g y n o r i n t h e r e a h n o f t h e e t e r n a l F o r m s .

P l a to i s o f t e n i n t e r p r e t e d , h o w e v e r , i n w a y s w h i c h i n s e r t o n t o l o g ic a l

a t o m i s m i n t o h is v ie w s. T h e m o s t c o m m o n w a y is t o h o l d t h a t t h e F o r m s a r e

b r u t e l y g iv e n. S o m e D e m o c r i t e a n a t o m s a r e r o u n d a n d o t h e r s h a v e h o o k s

a n d t h e r e is n o t h i n g f u r t h e r t o b e s ai d a b o u t w h y ; s o t h e F o r m s o f c o u r a g e

[497]


3/16

498

JOURN L OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPH Y

i: 4

O C T 983

a n d c o w - n es s j u s t a r e e t e r n a l l y w h a t t h e y a r e . A f t e r c o n t a c t i n g t h e F o r m s w e

s h o u l d h a v e n o m o r e w h y q u e s t i o n s . I n t h e l a t e r P l at o , t h e d o c t r i n e o f t h e

c o m m u n i o n o f t h e F o r m s in o n e a n o t h e r w e a k e n s t h e pl au s ib i li ty o f th is

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , a n d t h e P y t h a g o r e a n g e n e r a t i o n o f t h e F o r m s d e s c r i b e d b y

A r i s t o t l e r e f u t e s i t . '

T h e r e is a s e c o n d w a y o n t o l o g i c a l a t o m i s m c a n b e s m u g g l e d i n t o P la t o.

E m p i r i c i s t n o t i o n s o f t h e r e l a t i o n o f u n i v e r s a l a n d p a r t i c u l a r c a n m a k e u s

r e a d h is d i s c u s s io n s o f c o l le c t i o n a n d d i v is i o n a n d o f t h e l im i t a n d t h e u n -

l i m i t e d a s i f w h a t w a s a t s t a k e w a s t h e c o r r e c t c l a s s if i c at i o n o f a r e a l m o f

a l r e a d y g i v e n a t o m i c p a r t i c u l a r s. G i v e n w h a t P l a to sa ys a b o u t t h e d e r i v e d

s t a t u s o f s e n s ib l e o b j e c t s w e a r e n o t l i k e ly t o r e a d h i m a s a n o n t o l o g i c a l

a t o m i s t o n t h a t l e ve l . H i s p s y c h o l o g i c a l d is c u s s i o n s , h o w e v e r , c a n t e m p t u s t o

r e a d h i m a s b u i l d i n g u p e x p e r i e l l c e f r o m a t o m i c u n i t s o f i n t e ll e c t u al o r

s e n s i b l e p e r c e p t i o n .

T h i s a r t i c l e t a k e s u p t h e

P h i b u s ,

w h e r e o n t o l o g i c a l d i s cu s s io n s o f t h e

m i x t u r e o f li m it a n d u n l i m i t e d a r e a p p l i e d i n e t h ic a l d i s cu s s i o ns o f p l e a s u r e

a n d p a i n . M y a im is t o sh o w t h a t i n t e r p r e t e r s o f t h e d i a l o g u e h a v e b e e n

w r o n g i n a s s u m i n g t h a t P l a to i s d i s c u s s i n g t h e r e c la s s if i ca t io n o f a r e a l m o f

g i v e n a to m i c e x p e r i e n c e s . W h e n t h is p s y c h o l o g ic a l a t o m i s m i s a b a n d o n e d

t h e d i a l o g u e g a in s i n u n i t y a n d c o g e n c y . S t a n d a r d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f t h e

P h i b u s s u g g e s t P l a t o w i s he s u s t o r e c l a ss i fy t h e s e t o f a t o m i c e x p e r i e n c e s o f

p l e a s u r e a n d p a i n . J u d g i n g t h e b e t t e r li fe w o u l d t h e n i n v o l v e f i n d i n g r e l e -

v a n t s u b s e t s a n d c o m p a r i s o n s w e h a d n o t p r e v i o u s l y n o t i c e d . I f , h o w e v e r , w e

a v o i d p s y c h o l o g i c a l a t o m i s m , t h e d i s c u s s i on s o f p l e a s u r e a n d p a i n c a n b e

s e e n i n a n e w l i g h t. P l a t o is a s k i n g u s a l so t o i n d i v i d u a t e p l e a s u r e s a n d p a i n s

i n n e w w a y s, s o t h a t i n s o m e c a s e s w h a t c o u n t s a s a p l e a s u r e c h a n g e s ; a s a

r e s u l t o f t h i s n e w i n d i v i d u a t i o n a n d c l a s s i f i c a t i o n w e w i l l u s e n e w s t a n d a r d s

o f e v a l u a t i o n .

A f t e r c o n s i d e r i n g p s y c h o lo g i c al a t o m i s m w e t u r n t o t h e F o r m s , s h o w i n g

t h a t P l a t o a l s o a v o i d s o n t o l o g i c a l a t o m i s m i n t h i s r e a l m . R e c a l l i n g h i s c l e a r

r e j e c t i o n o f t h e u l t i m a c y o f p h y s i ca l a t o m s , I c o n c l u d e t h a t f o r P l a to t h e r e

a r e n o e n t i ti e s w h o s e d e t e r m i n a t i o n s a r e m e r e l y g iv e n , b e t h e y F o r m s o r

s e n s i b l e p a r t i c u l a r s , i n b e i n g o r i n k n o w l e d g e .

W h e n P l a to t al ks in g e n e r a l t e r m s a b o u t t h e li m i t a n d t h e u n l i m i t e d

(Phi bus 15

a - 1 8 d ) i n t e r p r e t e r s c o m m o n l y s u g g e s t w e a r e f a c e d w i t h a m u l t i -

t u d e o f d i s t i n c t p a r t i c u l a r s w h i c h w e h a v e t o c l a s s i f y . P l a t o i s s a i d t o b e

w a r n i n g u s n o t t o u s e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s w h i c h a r e t o o b i g o r t o o s m a l l , t o o

' This article refe rs to the unwritten doctrines of Plato. Th e relevant passages from

Aristotle. along with many others referring to these doctrines, are translated in J. N. Findlay,

Plato: The Written and Unwritten Doctrines

(New Yor k: Humanities Press, 1974), pp. 4x3-4 54 .


4/16

P Y T H A G O R A S B O U N D 4 9 9

e l a b o r a t e o r t o o s k e tc h y . W h e t h e r w e st a r t w i t h t h e p a r t i c u l a r s , b u i l d s m a l l

c l a ss e s a n d a r r i v e a t t h e g e n e r i c c l as s , o r s t a r t w i t h t h e g e n u s , d i v i d e it i n t o

s p e c i e s a n d a r r i v e a t t h e p a r t i c u l a r s , w e a r e n o t t o r e s t c o n t e n t u n t i l w e h a v e

t h e i n t e r m e d i a t e c l as s es a s w e ll a s t h e e x t r e m e s . F o r i n s t a n c e , H a c k f o r t h

s ay s, a p r o p o s o f P l a to ' s e x a m p l e a b o u t s o u n d , b e t w e e n ' s o u n d ' o r ' u t t e r -

a n c e ' a s a g e n u s a n d t h e i n f in i t y o f p a r t i c u l a r s o u n d s w e m u s t i n t e r p o s e t h e

s p e c i e s , v o w e l s , s o n a n t s , a n d m u t e s . ''2 W e a r e t o a r t i c u l a t e t h e g e n u s - s p e c i e s

s t r u c t u r e o f u n i v e r s a l s t o b e a p p l i e d t o a s e t o f f i x e d i n d i v i d u a l s .

G o s l i n g h a s a r g u e d c o n v i n c i n g l y a g a i n s t t h e m a n y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s w h i c h

t a k e t h e d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e l i m i t a n d u n l i m i t e d a s a d o c t r i n e a b o u t g e n u s -

s p e c i es r e l a t i o n s a m o n g u n i v e r s a l s a l o n e . 3 T h i s d o e s n o t m e a n t h a t w e m u s t

t a k e t h e u n i v e r s a l s a s s im p l y g i v en . C l e a r l y P l at o m e a n s u s to b e w o r k i n g o u t

t h e i r a r t i c u l a t i o n s . I t w o u l d b e a m i s t a k e , h o w e v e r , t o s u p p o s e t h a t w e m u s t

a s s u m e t h a t o n e f a c t o r , e i t h e r u n i v e r s a l o r p a r t i c u l a r , i s f i x e d w h i l e t h e o t h e r

is i n d e f i n i t e a n d a d j u s t a b l e . B o t h a c h i e v e d e f i n i t e n e s s t o g e t h e r . P l a t o ' s e x -

a m p l e s p o i n t t h i s o u t . C o n s i d e r t h e s t o ry o f T h e u t h t h e E g y p t i a n :

W h e n o n e i s f o r c e d t o s t a rt w it h w h a t i s i n d e t e r m i n a t e , o n e s h o u l d n o t i m m e d i a t e l y

l o o k t o t h e u n i t a r y a s p e c t , b u t a g a i n n o t e s o m e n u m b e r e m b r a c i n g e v e r y p l u r a l i t y ,

a n d f r o m a ll t h e s e e n d u p a t t h e o n e . L e t u s t a k e u p t h e p r e s e n t p o i n t a g a i n in

c o n n e c t i o n w i t h l e t t e r s - - H o w d o y o u m e a n ? - - W e l l , o n c e , I s u p p o s e , s o m e g o d , o r

s o m e m a n v e r y li k e a g o d , n o t i c e d t h e i n d e t e r m i n a c y o f v oc a l s o u n d . T h e E g y p t i a n s

h a v e a s to ry t h a t i t w a s s o m e o n e c a l l e d T h e u th w h o f i rs t n o t i c e d th a t i n t h is i n d e t e r -

m in a t e v a r i e ty t h e r e w e re s e v e ra l v o c a b les (v o we l s) , n o t j u s t o n e , a n d th e n th a t t h e r e

w e r e o t h e r s t h a t c o u l d b e s o u n d e d b u t w e r e n o t v o we l s a n d t h a t t h e r e w a s a d e f i n i t e

n u m b e r o f t h e s e , a n d f i n a lly h e d i s t i n g u i s h e d a t h i rd c l a ss o f l e t t e r s t h a t w e n o w c a l l

m u t e s. H e t h e n d i s t i n g u i s h e d t h e s o u n d l e s s o n e s o r m u t e s d o w n t o s i n gl e l e t te r s , a n d

d id t h e s a m e w i th th e v o w e l s a n d s e m iv o w e l s . W h e n h e h a d th e fu l l c o u n t h e g a v e

t h e m , i n d i v i d u a l l y a n d c o l le c t iv e l y, t h e n a m e ' e l e m e n t . ' A s h e r e a l i z e d t h a t n o n e o f u s

R . Ha c k fo r t h ,

Plato s Examination of Pleasure

(C a mbr i dge : C a m br i dg e Un i ve r s i t y P re s s

1945) , p . 24. Co mp are G uth r ie : P la to he r e uses ~ tnetQov numer ica l ly , for the un cou nta ble

mu l t i tu de of pa r t icula rs in a spec ies (W. K. C. Gu thr ie ,

History of Greek Philosophy,

6 vols.

(C a mbr i dg e : C a m br i dg e Un i ve r s i t y P res s , 1978) , vo l. V , p. 2o9) . C rombi e ' s i n t e rp re t a t i on i s

more nua nc e d a nd re fuse s t o s e t t he un l i mi t e d t o t al ly on t he s ide o f t he un i ve r sa l s o r o f

pa r t icula rs , but he too seems to presume tha t we a re dea l ing a t a l l t imes wi th se t s of f ixed

par t icula rs . (Cf . I . M. Crom bie ,

An Examination of Plato s Doctrines, 2

vols . (New York: Humani -

t ie s Press , 1963) , vol . I I , pp . 365, 425, 428-9 , 436-7) .

:~ J . C .B . G osl ing , Plato s Philebus (Oxfo rd : Ox fo rd Un i ve r s i t y P re s s 1975), pp . 16o -165 . I t

is no t e n t i r e l y c l ea r w he re Gos l i ng s t a nds o n t he r e l a t i on o f i nd i v i dua t i o n a nd c la s si f ic a ti on. He

c a re fu ll y d i s t i ngu i she s t he l i m it a nd un l i mi t e d a s P la t o 's P y t ha go re a n t e c hn ic a l too ls f rom t he

i n t e rna l c ons t i t u t i on o f t he ob j e c t s t ud i e d by me a ns o f t he se t oo l s ( c f . p . ~ 77 ) - W he t he r t he se

ob j e c t s a re i nd i v i dua t e d i nde pe nde n t l y o f t he u se o f t he t oo l s t o c l a s s i fy t he m se e ms t o va ry ,

pe rhaps r ight ly so , s ince in Gosl ing ' s v iew Pla to i s d i scuss ing the appl ica t ion of technai t o p h e n o -

me na , no t t he c ons t i t u t i on o f ob je c ts . C f. p . 86 a nd pp . 177 - 18o fo r pa s sa ges t ha t c ou l d be

i n t e rp re t e d e i t he r wa y, a nd p . 172 fo r a n e xa mpl e , d i s c usse d bel ow, t ha t p re suppose s i nd e pe n -

de n t p syc ho l ogi c a l g i ve nne s s o f t he pa r t i c u la r s .


5/16

5 J O U R N A L O F T H E H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Y 2 1 : 4 O C T 198 3

would ever l ea rn about them in i so la t ion f rom the res t , he conc luded tha t th i s

cons t i tu ted a s ingle bond tha t somehow made them a s ingle uni t , and pronounced

the s ingle skill that cove red th em ' the ar t of le t ters . ' (17 b- d, Gosl ing 's t ranslat ion)

W h a t is it t h a t T h e u t h f ir st n o t ic e s ? H e i s n o t c r e a t i n g s p e e c h ; h e is

d i s c e r n i n g i ts s t r u c t u r e . H e n o t i c e s dpovilv ~ t e t Q o v ; G o s l i n g t r a n s l a t e s t h is a s

t h e i n d e t e r m i n a c y o f v o c al s o u n d , H a c k f o r t h a s u n l i m i t e d va r i et y o f

s o u n d . B o t h t h e s e m a k e ~ tz te tQ ov t h e m a i n n o u n , b u t i t is a n a d j e c t i v e :

i n d e t e r m i n a t e s o u n d . E a r li e r, P la to h a s d e s c r i b e d s o u n d a s s o m e h o w o n e

( ~ o v ~ a ) a n d i n d e t e r m i n a t e i n its m u l t i t u d e ( 6 ~ t Q o v ~ kv ]0 ~t) ( 1 7b ) . I t is

t e m p t i n g t o g lo s s t hi s a s h e a r i n g a s e q u e n c e o f i n d i v i d u a l s o u n d s w i t h o u t

k n o w i n g t h e m i n d e ta il , s o m e t h i n g l ik e s e e i n g a c r o w d o f p e o p l e w i t h o u t

k n o w i n g t h e i r o c c u p a t io n s . B u t T h e u t h d o e s n o t a r r iv e at h e a r i n g i n d i v id u a l

s o u n d s a s i n d i v i d u a l s u n t i l t h e e n d of h i s p r o c e s s . A l t h o u g h f o r P l a to t h i n g s

a r e o n t o l o g ic a l ly d e f i n i t e q u i te i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f o u r a w a r e n e s s o f t h e m , it

d o e s n o t a u t o m a t i c a l l y f o l l o w t h a t o u r a w a r e n e s s is a p r o c e s s w o r k i n g u p

f r o m c l e a r ly i n d i v i d u a t e d b u t u n c l a s s if i e d it e m s . T o c o n c l u d e t h is o n e m u s t

a s s u m e t h a t , o n t h e b a s i c l ev e l, c r i t er i a o f i n d i v i d u a t i o n a r e i n d e p e n d e n t o f

t h e n a t u r e s o f t h e i t e m s i n d i v i d u a t e d , w h i c h is o n t o l o g i c a l a t o m i s m i n it s

e m p i r i c is t v e rs i o n. I f w e r e je c t th is a s s u m p t i o n t h e n u n c e r t a i n t y a b o u t n u m -

b e r a n d a b o u t k i n d s m a y a ls o b e u n c e r t a i n t y a b o u t i n d iv i d u a t io n . H e n c e t h e

p h r a s e & ~r tQ o v = ~.fi0 et s h o u l d m e a n u n b o u n d e d i n it s m u l t i p li c i ty , w h e r e

n o t o n l y a r e t h e n u m b e r a n d k i n d s o f i t e m s i n d is t in c t , h u t t h e i r b o u n d a r i e s

f r o m o n e a n o t h e r a s w e l l ?

M o s t d i s c u s s i o n s o f c l a s s if i c a ti o n u s e a d o m a i n o f e n t i t i e s a l r e a d y i n d i -

v i d u a t e d b y s o m e other c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . T h e u b i q u i t o u s t r a d e s p e o p l e w h o m

S o c r a t e s f o r e v e r r e cl a ss i fi e s a r e a l r e a d y i n d i v i d u a t e d b y t h e i r b o d i e s. I f w e

r e g r o u p t h e m i n t o n e w c l as se s , w e h o l d s t a b l e o u r w a y s o f i n d i v i d u a t i n g

t h e m a s p e o p l e . T h e t a b le s a n d c h a i r s w h i c h fill m o d e r n d i s c u ss i o n s o f

p e r c e p t i o n a r e i n d i v i d u a t e d b y t h e i r g l u e a n d n a il s a n d i n d e p e n d e n t m o v -

a b il it y. T h e s e s o r ts o f e x a m p l e s f e e d t h e p r e j u d i c e t h a t c la s si fi c at io n i n v o lv e s

o n l y r e g r o u p i n g . B u t t h e r e a r e o t h e r s o rt s o f e x a m p l e s w h e r e it is n o t so

o b v i o u s w h a t m a k e s u p o n e i n d i v id u a l a n d w h e r e a c h a n g e i n h o w w e c la s-

s if y m a y b e t ie d t o a c h a n g e i n h o w w e i n d i v i d u a t e . T h e s e a r e c as e s w h e r e

t h e r e a r e n o i n d e p e n d e n t c r i t e ri a o f i n d i v i d u a t i o n a v a il a b le , o r t h o s e a v a il -

a b l e a r e m i s t r u s t e d . C o n s i d e r a L i b e r t a r i a n c o n v e r t e d t o M a r x i s m : h e w ill

4 GiselaStriker Peras und Apeiron: Das Problem der Formen in P aaatons Philebus (Gottingen:

Vandenhoeck & Rup rech t, 197 o) translates ~trtetQov ~tk~j0et as un beg ren zt zahlreich. I am

suggesting that fiJt~tQov need not ap ply only to the nu mb er o f particulars involved, but to their

individuation and hence to the kind of m ultiplicity as well. In her discussion of ~.ovr Striker

presu ppo ses that speech comes before Th eu th with its items already individuated but not yet

classified (p. 95).


6/16

P Y T H A G O R A S B O U N D 5 1

now see things as part of the gove rnm ent which he did not before, for

instance Citibank. He will see more complex individuals where before he saw

simpler ones; a labor union will have mor e kinds of comp onen ts and more

interrelat ions among them. Closer to the P h i l e b u s , there is the difficulty we

experience in deciding what counts as one field of knowledge.

In such cases we do not have a crowd of particulars which need only to be

classified. N o r do we have an undifferentiated continuum, some pure poten-

tial to be cut as we choose. We have s omet hing already diffe rentia ted as to its

generic character but still indeterminate in more specific ways. Theuth starts

with speech sound indeterminate in its multiplicity. This is neither a blank

con tin uum nor a crowd of individual sounds but an indeterminately mul-

tiple and various stretch of speech sou nd. He has already distinguished this

generically fr om sights, smells, etc. He discovers stretches of s oun d which

contrast with other stretches. He classifies more and more finely, creating

more precisely bounded and contrasting species until he arrives at firm

particulars arranged in the lowest species as well as at the articulated genus.

He classifies and individuates; he arrives at his universals and his particulars

together. Th er e is no sharp s eparat ion between recognizing an individual

sound

as

individual, and kno wle dge of what sort of individual it is. 5

In the Th eu th examp le (as earlier in 17 a- b ) Plato evokes the exper ience

of learning to read an d wri te. We mod ern s should rem emb er that in his t ime

this involved analyzing heard sound by taking dictation and reading aloud.

One did not learn to read silently while facing letters which were already

spatially distinct; there was always the flowing indeterminacy of vocal

sound. 6 Nor were t here neat packets o f sound just waiting to be assigned to

distinct letters. Th e sou nd equivalents of one letter are frequen tly quite

varied al lophones of the same phon eme. One must learn to segmen t the

sound stream. Are the p of pin and that of spin the same sound? The

answer varies in English and in Greek. The same articulation can be part of

d i fferent phonemes.

Gosling seems to miss the point when he discusses learning one's letters in

5 Cf. J. Stenzel, Plato s Method ofDDDialectic, tr. D. Allen (Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press,

194o), p. 142 and p. 125: The particular only is in so far as it is this; and Io be th~ means to

have, or to fall under, this ~6og. Otherwise it is quite impossible to grasp the object, and even

&~o0 qotg can only do so in a spurious way. Until we have grasped how the ~6og and the sensible

particular are correlated, the latter remains unknowable; it is not 'one' but 'indefinite'

(6n~tQov). Stenzel assumes, however, that one and ~tnetQov apply here only to the particu-

lars, which seems unlikely. On this cf. A. E. Lloyd, Plato's Description of Division, in R. Allen,

Studies in Plato s Metaphysics (New York: Humanities Press, 1965), p. 225.

6 In his Confessions (VI, 3) Augustine records his puzzled astonishment at discovering

Ambrose reading silently to himself. Augustine's forced explanations of why Ambrose would

read in this unusual way testify to the opposite custom.


7/16

5 0 2 J O U R N A L O F T H E H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Y 2 1 : 4 O C T 1 9 8 3

t e r m s o f a v i su a l e x a m p l e . T h e l e t t e r C c a n b e

recognized,

b u t

knowing

it is

k n o w i n g it is a c o n s o n a n t , n o t a v o w e l, a n d w h a t k i n d o f c o n s o n a n t i t is , a n d

s o o n ( 1 72 , m y e m p h a s i s ) . H e is r i g h t , t h e p r i n t e d

letter

C c a n b e r e c o g -

n i z e d , b u t t h is is b e c a u s e w e a l r e a d y h a v e a n o t h e r c l as s if i ca t io n i n d i v i d u a t i n g

w r i t t e n l e t t e r s b y sp a t i a l s e p a r a t i o n . W o u l d i t b e s o e a s y to r e c o g n i z e in a

s t r a n g e - f l o w i n g s c r i p t ? B u t t h e

sound

C c a n n o t e v e n b e

recognized

e x c e p t b y

l e a r n i n g t h e r e l e v a n t c o n t r a s t s a n d c l as s if i ca t io n . I n P l a t o' s e x a m p l e t h e r e is

n o p l a c e f o r G o s l i n g 's s h a r p s e p a r a t i o n b e t w e e n r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e l e t te r a s

a n i n d i v i d u a l a n d k n o w l e d g e o f w h a t s o r t o f in d i v i d u a l it is. T h e u t h r e a l i z e d

w e c o u l d n o t l e a r n l e t t e r s i n i s o l a t i o n f r o m o n e a n o t h e r , b e c a u s e t h e i r i d e n -

t it y c o m e s t h r o u g h t h e c o n t r a s t s i n w h i c h th e y s t a n d. I n d i v i d u a t i o n a n d

c l a s s if i c a ti o n o c c u r t o g e t h e r . 7

I t m i g h t s e e m t h a t t h e p o in t I h a v e b e e n m a k i n g c o n c e r n s o u r k n o w l e d g e

o f en t i ti e s a n d n o t t h e e n t it i es t h e m s e l v e s . B u t s o u n d s a r e e x p e r i e n c e s a n d

e x p e r i e n c e s a r e e n t i t i e s . T h e

Philebus

is c o n c e r n e d w i th o u r e x p e r i e n c e s i n ce

it s m a i n s u b j e ct , p l e a s u r e , r e s i d e s t h e r e . I t is p a r t i c u l a r l y a p p r o p r i a t e t o h i s

e t h i c a l d i s c u s s i o n t h a t P l a t o d is c u s s t h e c l as s i f ic a t io n a n d i n d i v i d u a t i o n o f

e x p e r i e n c e s . E x p e r i e n c e , h o w e v e r , is a d a n g e r o u s w o r d t o u s e s i n ce it is a

m o d e r n n o t i o n w i th c o n n o t a t i o n s f r o m D e s c a rt e s a n d K a n t. W e m u s t r e -

m e m b e r t h a t, f o r t h e G r e e k s t h e s u b j e c t - o b je c t d i v is i o n w a s n o t t h e f u n d a -

m e n t a l c l e ft in t h e w o r l d it l a t e r b e c a m e . W h e n P l a to t a lk s o f s en s a t i o n s o r

p l e a s u r e s h e is t a l k i n g o f t h e m o n t o l o g i c a ll y as i t em s o n a p a r w i t h t r e e s a n d

t r a d e s p e o p l e , n o t a s i t e m s i n s o m e p r i o r e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l r e a l m . E x p e r i e n c e s

a r e e n t i t i e s l i k e a n y o t h e r . I n s o f a r a s a l l e n t i t i e s h a v e m e a s u r e a n d l i m i t i n

t h e i r c o n s t i t u t i o n , s o will e x p e r i e n c e s . I t m a y s o u n d p a r a d o x i c a l t o s a y t h a t

w e ca n b e u n s u r e a b o u t t h e c o m p l e x i t y o f t h e i n d i v id u a t i o n o f o u r e x p e r i -

e n c e s, b u t t h is b e t r a y s h o w d e e p l y w e a r e i n f l u e n c e d b y a n a t o m i s t i c p s y c h o l-

o g y t h a t b u i l d s u p e x p e r i e n c e f r o m b i t s w h i c h a r e u n c l a s s i f i e d b u t a l r e a d y

i n d i v i d u a t e d a s o n e s e n s a t i o n o r o n e e x p e r i e n c e e a c h .

P l a t o ' s p h y s i o l o g y d o e s n o t s u g g e s t a n a t o m i s t p s y c h o l o g y . P l a t o c o r r e -

l at es p l e a s u r es t o p r oc e s s es o f b u i l d u p a n d b r e a k d o w n w i t hi n th e o r g a n i s m

Philebus

3 3 f f ) . S o m e o f t h e s e m a y r e a c h t h e s o ul . T h e r e a r e m a n y s u c h

r h y t h m i c p r o c es s e s g o i n g o n a t a n y o n e t i m e ; m a n y o f t h e m r e a c h t h e s ou l

t o g e t h e r . I n a d d i t i o n , t h e s o u l ha s its o w n r h y t h m i c p r oc e s s e s. T h e s e

7 p la to s o t h e r e x a m p l e , m u s i c al n o t e s ( 1 7 b - e ) , c a n b e r e a d i n a w a y c o n s o n a n t w i t h t h a t o f

T h e u t h . O n e s t a rt s w i th i n d e t e r m i n a t e l y m u l t i p l e s o u n d , w i t h a r e a s o f d i f f e r i n g p i t ch , t h e n

d i s t i n g u i s h e s i n te r v a ls a s p h e n o m e n a r e p e a t a b l e a t d i f f e r e n t p i t c h e s , t h e n t o n e s a s t h e e n d s o f

in t e r va l s, t he n a r r i ve s a t s ca l e s a s spe c i e s c on t a in ing r u l e s f o r i nd iv idua t in g sou nd in to no t e s

r e l a t e d b y c o n t r as t s a n d m e a s u r e s . T h e m u s i c e x a m p l e is l es s c o n v i n c i n g, p e r h a p s b e c a u s e w e

have eas i ly ava i lab le

oth r

w a ys o f i nd iv idua t ing m us i c a l sounds ( by s t r i ngs on a l y r e , ho l e s i n a

f lute , e tc . ) .


8/16

PYTHAGORAS BOUND 5 3

r h y t h m s a r e all s u p e r p o s e d u p o n e a c h o th e r . T h e s u p e r p o s i t i o n o f v a r y i ng

f r e q u e n c i e s d o e s n o t o b l i g i n g l y s o r t i t s e lf o u t i n t o a li n e a r s e r i e s o f d i s c r e t e

a t o m i c s t im u l i t o b e c o r r e l a t e d w i t h a p a r a l l e l l i n e a r s er i es o f d i s c r e t e a t o m i c

e x p e r i e n c e s .

I f w e r e j e c t p s y c h o lo g i c a l a t o m i s m w e o b t a i n a s t r o n g e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f

t h e et h ic a l a r g u m e n t i n t h e d i a lo g u e . C o n s i d e r t h e p a s s a g e w h e r e P l a to

d i s cu s s e s a l if e o f p u r e p l e a s u r e w i t h o u t i n t e l li g e n c e . P r o t a r c h u s s u g g e s t s a

l if e o f c o m p l e t e p l e a s u r e w o u l d b e j u s t f in e . S o c r a t e s r e p l ie s :

But i f you l acked thought , me mo ry , know ledge , and t rue opin ion , sure ly to begin

wi th , you co uldn ' t know even w hethe r you were en joying yours e l f or not , s ince you

would l ack a l l in te l l igence . - -True . - -What i s more , in the same way, as you would

l ac k m e m or y , you w ou l d be una b le t o r e m e m be r t ha t you d id e n j oy you r s e l f on a ny

occas ion , and no recol lec t ion a t a l l o f p leasure a t one moment would surv ive to the

next . S ince you would l ack the capac ity for t rue jud gm en t you would not jud ge tha t

you we re en joying yo urse l f when y ou were , and l acking the ab il ity to predic t you

would be unab le to predic t y our fu ture p leasures . I t wo uldn ' t be a hum an l ife a t all,

but a je l ly-fish exis tence, or the l i fe of o ne of those sea- things that l ive in shel ls .

Aren ' t I r igh t? Philebus 2 lC, Gosl ing 's Translat ion.)

G o s l i n g r e a d s t h is p a s s a g e w i t h a n a t o m i s t p s y c h o l o g y . A l if e o f p u r e p l e a -

s u r e w o u l d b e a s t r e a m o f c o n s t a n t p l e a s u r e - e x p e r i e n c e s , b u t th e e x p e r i -

e n c e r w o u l d b e u n a b l e t o r e fl e ct iv e ly j u d g e ( o r r e m e m b e r o r p r e d ic t ) t h a t h e

w a s e n j o y i n g . T h e s t r e a m o f e x p e r i e n c e s w o u l d l ac k i n t e ll e c tu a l a n d r e f le c -

t iv e a d d i t i o n s t o t h e p l e a s u r e e x p e r i e n c e s . T h u s it w o u l d b e a m e r e a n i m a l

s t r e a m o f l if e. G o s l i n g s h o w s t h a t t h is f a il s t o p r o v e t h a t t h e p l e a s u r e s o f

s u c h a b e i n g w o u l d n o t b e m o r e p l e a s u r a b le , a n d c o n c l u d e s

Socrates ' point gets i ts pul l , of course, as an appeal to the individual honest ly to

dec la re h i s pre fe rences . Doubt less mos t of us would show some oppos i t ion to a

prop osal to red uce us to the condi t ion of co nten ted jel ly-f ishes, a t least a t the level of

dec la red prefe rence . I t may be tha t Socra tes should be read as conduct ing an ad

hom inem exam ina t ion of Pro ta rchus , which Pla to hopes will e li ci t the sam e admiss ion

f rom any hones t reader (182) .

T h e r e m a y b e m o r e t o t h e a r g u m e n t t h a n G o s l i n g s ee s. H is i n t e r p r e t a -

t io n p r e s u p p o s e s t h a t t h e s t r e a m o f p l e a s u r e - e x p e r i e n c e s w i t h o u t in te ll i-

g e n c e is i n it s e lf u n i f i e d a n d d i s t in c t a n d t h a t i n te l l ig e n c e w o u l d e n t e r t h e

s t r e a m o f e x p e r i e n c e s s i m p l y as a n e w k i n d o f e x p e r i e n c e , l i k e a n e w c o l o r

b e a d o n a s t r in g . I f w e q u e s t i o n t h e s e p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s w e se e t h e r o l e o f

i n te l li g e nc e a s m o r e c o m p l e x . T h a t f e w h u m a n s w o u l d c h o o s e i t d o e s n o t

p r o v e t h e l i f e o f a n o y s t e r o r j e l ly - f is h i n h u m a n ; it m i g h t b e o n e o f t h o s e

p r e c i o u s t h i n g s t h a t a r e a s d i f f ic u l t as t h e y a r e r a r e . R a t h e r P l a t o cl a im s w e

n e e d i n t e l l ig e n c e i n o r d e r t o h a v e a n y t h i n g t h a t c o u l d b e c a ll e d one t e m p o -

r a l l y u n i f i e d

l i fe

o f e n j o y m e n t . G o s l i n g s u g g e s t s t h a t P l a to is t r y i n g t o p r o v e

t h a t r e a l i z i n g o n e i s e n j o y i n g o n e s e l f is p r e f e r r e d t o j u s t e n j o y i n g o n e s e l f


9/16

5 4 JOURNAL OF THE HISTO RY OF PHILOSOPHY 2 1 : 4 OCT 983

(183). But p erhaps Plato's point is tha t one cannot enjoy oneself without

realizing one is enjoying oneself'.

Plato has argued in the earlier examples that we need the limit and the

unlimited to have knowledge. It is striking that the modes of knowledge

Plato suggests to avoid the fate of the oyster are explicitly correlated to the

three parts of time. Without memory you would not know that you have

enjoyed (~X(xtQegIpast). Wit hout true op inion abou t your sel f you would not

know you were enjoying (XctiQovzctIpresent). Without calculated expecta-

tions about the future you would not expect future pleasure ()~cttffr~oetg

future). A human life, as opposed to any oyster's, demands temporal unity.

This time-binding demands knowledge which will make a one out of indefi-

nitely multiple temporal flux. Applying Theuth's method, we can only di-

vide the moments from one another ( I am experiencing

this

pleasure

now )

when we have intermediate contrasting unities for the parts of time. It is

only because we can unify time into a one and divide it into the intermedi-

ates of the three temporal dimensions that we can experience the present

pleasure as one individual pleasure among many, as a pleasure, and as our

own. Without this temporal one-and-many the stream of experiences is

neither a stream nor experience.

Plato has two Kant ian insights: the need of a concep tual structure for

there to be experience of individuals, and the need of temporal synthesis fi)r

there to be experience at all. Plato links these by making the temporal

synthesis one sort of conceptual synthesis. None of this turns Plat() into

Kant. Plat() does not make the distinctively Kantian move of reversing the

dependence and holding temporal synthesis essential to our possessing con-

cepts. Nor does he in the

Philebus

separate transcen dental categories from

empirical concepts except by generality. Plato also differ s from Kant in

subordinating discussion of experience to the more general ontological dis-

cussion of limit and unlimited; the examination of knowledge has no special

privilege. Plato is not doing epistemology but onto logy; he gives necessary

ontological conditions for entities, including experiences, but not transcen-

dental conditions for experience as such.

This read ing o f the oyster passage does not make it a fully convincing

argument. It remains to be shown that the human life is better than the

oyster's existence. This value ju dg me nt is implied since hum an life contains

more complex unity, but such a criterion would not convince Philebus. Still,

on this reading Plato is making more than an ad hominem argument. It is

more than men's preferences which keep them from choosing the life of

pure pleasure without intelligence. Plato is trying to show the inconsistency

of the picture of a life containing nothing but pleasures which can still be

called

my life

in any me anin gful sense.


10/16


T h e u t h h a s t a u g h t u s th a t w e n e e d d i f f e r e n t i a t e d c o n c e p t s i f w e a r e t o

k n o w i n d i v i d u a l s . N o k n o w l e d g e w i t h o u t n u m b e r . T h e o y s t e r t e a c h e s u s t h a t

w e n e e d k n o w l e d g e t o a ch i e v e th e t e m p o r a l u n i t y o f a l if e o f p l e a s u r e . N o

p l e a s u r e w i t h o u t k n o w l e d g e . T h e f u r t h e r c o n c lu s i on P la to dr a w s t h r o u g h -

o u t t h e d ia l o g ue : n o p l e a s u re w i t h o u t n u m b e r . W h a t m a y s e e m t h e g r e a te s t

p l ea s u re s , g r e a t j u s t b e c a us e t h e y g o b e y o n d n u m b e r a n d m o d e r a t i o n , b y

t h a t v e r y ex ces s t h r ea t en t o d i s o r g an i ze l i f e s o t h a t t h e ex p e r i en ce o f p l ea -

s u r e i s d e s t r o y ed .

I t is n o t s u r p r i s i n g , t h en , t h a t a t t h e en d o f t h e d i a l o g u e i t is t h e f am i l y o f

k n o w l e d g e t h a t is a ll o w e d t o e x c l u d e s o m e o f t h e f a m i l y o f p l e a s u r e s w h i c h

w il l p r e v e n t u s [ k n o w l ed g e ] f r o m ev e r co m i n g i n t o ex i s t en ce ( 6 3d ) . T o

ex i s t a t a ll i n a w o r l d w h e r e b e i n g s a r e m i x t u r e s o f li m i t an d u n l i m i t ed

d e m a n d s c o n s t a n t c a r e f o r b a l a n c e a n d p r o p o r t i o n , l es t w e lo se re a li ty . I f

p l e a s u r e s b e c o m e i m m o d e r a t e t h e y w ill d i s r u p t t h e t i m e - b i n d i n g a n d d e t e r -

m i n i n g m i x t u r e o f l im i t a n d u m l i m i t e d ; h u m a n e x p e r i e n c e w i ll s to p . A s

a lways in P l a to , t he fu l l oppo s i t e o f an o r de re d l i f e is no l i fe a t a ll .

I n t h e c o u r s e o f h is a r g u m e n t s f o r m e a s u r e P l at o n o t o n l y re c la s si fi es b u t

r e i n d i v i d u a t e s p l e a su r e s . 8 I f w h a t w a s s a id e a r l i e r a b o u t t h e c o n n e c t i o n o f

c l a s s i f i ca t i o n an d i n d i v i d u a t i o n i s t r u e , t h en t h e n ew s p ec i e s i n t o w h i ch

S o c r a t e s d i v i d es t h e g en u s o f p l ea s u r e s c a r r y t h e p o s s ib i li ty o f n ew m o d es o f

i n d i v i d u a t i o n . W e c a n n o t s u p p o s e w e a r e d e a l i n g w it h a f ix e d d o m a i n o f

e x p e r i e n c e s a l r e a d y c l e a rl y i d e n t i f ie d a s o n e p l e a s u r e o r o n e p a i n e a c h . I n

fac t , P l a to tr i es t o show tha t no t a ll p l easu re s a re s imp le f e l t s t a t es ; he

ch a n g e s t h e k i n d s o f i n d i v i d u a l i t y s o m e p l ea s u r e s p o s s es s .

P h i l eb u s 's o r i g i n a l d e s c r i p t i o n (1 l b ) s u g g es t s p l ea s u r e s a r e u n i t ex p e r i -

e n c e s t o b e e v a l u a t e d b y c ri t e ri a o f i n t e n s i ty a n d q u a n t i t y . B y t h e e n d o f t h e

d i a l o g u e P l at o h a s a r r i v e d a t a v a ri e t y o f k i n d s o f p l e a s u r e s o n m a n y d i f f e r -

en t l ev e ls o f i n d i v i d u a l i t y : s i m p l e t r u e p l ea s u r e s , m i x e d p l ea s u r e s , p l ea s u r e

a t d e s i re s o f p l e a s u r e , p l e a s u r a b l e c o m p a r a t i v e j u d g m e n t s o f p l e a su r e , p le a -

s u r a b l e m e m o r i e s o f p l e a s ur e s , p l e a s u r a b l e a n t i c i p a ti o n s , p l e a s u r e s a t th e

r e l a t i o n s o f p l ea s u r e s , n o t t o m e n t i o n a ll t h e v a r i e t ie s o f p a i n an d t h e m i x -

t u r e s o f p l e a s u r e a n d p a i n. S e e m i n g l y s i m p l e p l e as u r e s , s u c h a s e n j o y i n g a

g la ss o f w a t e r o r l a u g h i n g a t a c o m e d y , a r e s h o w n t o b e c o m p l e x e s o f m a n y

k i n d s o f i n t e r l o c k i n g e x p e r i e n c e . W e d o n o t j u s t r e c l as s if y o u r p l e a s u r e a t

t h e c o m e d y ; w e a n a l y z e it a n d d i s c o v e r it h a s i n t e r n a l c o m p l e x i t y . O n e

p l e a s u re o r p a i n c a n b e a c o m p o n e n t o f a n o t h e r . O u r a m u s e m e n t a t t h e

co m e d y i s a p l ea s u r e , b u t i t is a co m p l ex o f o t h e r ex p e r i en ces a s w e ll .

I f i t i s t r u e t h a t p l ea s u r e s m u s t b e i n d i v i d u a t ed i n t h i s m o r e v a r i ed w ay ,

Plato also re-individuates fields of knowledge, as is clear from the discussion of the two

arithmetics and the summary at 57 D.


11/16

5 6 JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 21: 4 OCT 198 3

that pleasures d o not all have the same kinds of individuality, then it is diffi-

cult to apply the simple criterion of quantity to their evaluation. Truth and

falsity, mixture and purity, will assume a new importance in our evaluations.

This reading might also open an approach to Plato's notion of true and

false pleasures. When pleasures are taken as atomic experiences the ir fal-

sity can only mean the falsity of a related ju dg me nt which leaves the plea-

sure itself unch anged . If, however, pleasures can be individuated in other

ways, if something can be a compound experience and still be a pleasure,

then ju dg me nt can be built into pleasures more intimately and pleasures

may be false in a stro nger sense. Tr ue pleasures, on the oth er hand , are

not true by virtue of any related judg ment. Their truth is that of true

reality. Th ei r interna l st ructure is simple; in themselves, in their q~oLg

(52b3) they require no reference to another temporal moment to complete

them or to make them harmoniously pleasurable. This would seem to pose

problems for my int erpr etat ion since true pleasures look suspiciously like

psychological atoms. Tr ue pleasures might, however, be thoug ht of as the

pleasure-equivalents of prime numbers and harmonious ratios, not psycho-

logical atoms so much as self-contained units like those musical chords that

imply no build-up and de ma nd no resolution. In his physiological section

Plato does not speak of a series of discrete bodily states but of superposed

rhythms; analogously, the true pleasures might be thought of as the experi-

enced correlates of har moniousl y bound body or soul rhythms, as the physi-

cal atoms of the

Timaeus

are mathematically bou nd flux.

I have tried to purge a residual empiricism from the interpretatio n of the

Philebus

by removing psychological atomism from Plato's examples and ethi-

cal argument. It is a familiar theme in Plato's writings that complex entities

like cities or personalities are built from components whose mixture is cor-

rect when it approaches a norm given by the Form of the object or quality in

question. Joining the rejection of psychological atomism with the account of

physical atoms given in the

Timaeus

we see that the physical and psychologi-

cal components themselves contain measure and limit rather than brutely

given qualities.

What of the Forms? Most interpretations of Plato treat the Forms much

as the myth in the

Timaeus

presents them, as given eternal exemplars, with

all questions terminated in the claim that a certain form

just does

contain a

certain quality in its definition.

The

Philebus

however, speaks of our arriving at pro per classifications and

prop er divisions of genera by a process of finding measure. Th eu th works at

making his classifications. In so doing he not only determines the indefinite

plurality of speech sound into individual units, he determines the generic

universal speech sound into species in a har mon iou s and complete man-

ner. As he e ncounters the indefinitely multiple sound already distinguished


12/16

PYTHAGORAS BOUND 507

i n s o m e w a y ( f r o m s m e l ls a n d s ig h ts ), s o h e e n c o u n t e r s u n i t y a s a d e f i n i t e

g e n u s n e e d i n g f u r t h e r s p e ci fi c at io n . T h e s e a r e n o t t w o e n c o u n t e r s , b u t tw o

s id es o f th e s a m e p r o c e s s . W e e n c o u n t e r n e i t h e r i n d e f in i t e ne s s n o r u n i ty b y

t h e m s e l v e s , n o r c a n w e e n c o u n t e r e i t h e r i n a p u r e s t a te .

T o c o m e t o k n o w a F o r m is t o g r a s p t h e s t r u c t u r e d m o d u l a t i o n o f u n i t y

i n s o m e a p p r o p r i a t e f ie ld . T h e u t h ' s a c ti v e s p e c i f y in g o f t h e g e n e r i c u n i v e r s a l

r e p r e s e n t s o u r a r r i v i n g a t k n o w l e d g e o f t h e F o r m s . T h e r e is a n o t a b l e a b -

s e n c e h e r e o f t h e a p p e a l s t o i n t u i t i o n m a d e i n e a r l i e r d i a lo g u e s . A l s o a b s e n t

is a p ro c e s s o f a b s t r a c ti o n f r o m a l r e a d y g i v e n d e t e r m i n a t e p a r t ic u l a rs . T h e

u n i v e r s a l is s p e c i f ie d a n d t h e p a r t i c u l a r s d e t e r m i n e d t o g e t h e r . T h i s p r o c e s s

s e e m s t o m i r r o r , i n o u r k n o w i n g , th e g e n e r a t i o n o f t h e F o r m s t h e m s e l v e s .

A r i s to t le s p e a k s o f t h e g e n e r a t i o n o f th e f o r m s o u t o f th e o n e a n d t h e

i n d e f i n i t e d y a d

(Metaphysics

I , 6 ; XI V , 1 , e t c .) . W hi l e t he de t a i l s o f t h i s

d o c t r i n e a r e f a r f r o m c l e a r, e n o u g h c a n b e m a d e o u t t o s h o w t h a t t h e

p i c t u r e o f P l a t o p o s i t i n g b r u t e l y g i v e n F o r m s is w r o n g . I t is n o t e n o u g h t o

c l ai m t h a t t h e F o r m s a r e i n t e r re l a t e d a n d m i x e d w i th o n e a n o t h e r i n t h e

f a s h i o n d e s c r i b e d i n t h e Sophist. T h e r e is a n o r d e r o f g e n e r a t i o n i n v o l v e d a s

w e ll . I t is t r u e t h a t t h e F o r m s a r e e t e r n a l l y w h a t t h e y a r e . Y e t t h is is n o t a

b r u t e f ac t. T h e F o r m s a r e a s t h e y a r e b e c a u s e t he y a re t h e h a r m o n i o u s

m o d u l a t i o n s o f u n i t y in t o m u lt ip l ic i ty . T h e y c o u l d n o m o r e b e d i f f e r e n t t h a n

t h i r t e e n c o u l d c e a s e t o b e a p r i m e n u m b e r . B u t t h i r t e e n is n o t a b r u t e f a ct ; i t

a ri se s f r o m t h e g e n e r a t i o n o f t h e n u m b e r s b y t h e m i x i n g o f u n i ty a n d t h e

i n d e f i n i t e d y a d . 9

I t s e e m s l ik e l y P l a t o h o p e d t h a t al l t h e F o r m s , t h e i r q u a l i ti e s a n d i n t e r -

r e l a t i o n s h i p s , c o u l d b e d e r i v e d a s h a r m o n i o u s s et s o f r a ti o s , n a t u r a l p o i n t s o f

u n i ty i n t h e c o m b i n i n g o f l im i t a n d u n l i m i te d . T h e p r o p o s a l h o p e d f o r a

s y s t em o f n e c e s s a r y t r u t h s a b o u t t h e n a t u r e s o f all t h in g s , d e r i v e d f r o m t h e

f u n d a m e n t a l r e l at i o n s o f u n i ty a n d m u l ti p li c it y . T h o u g h n e v e r r e a li z ed , th is

p r o g r a m c o u l d h a v e i n s p i r e d m a n y r e s e a r c h p r o je c t s a t t h e A c a d e m y .

A s s u m i n g t h a t A r i s t o t le i s n o t t o t al ly m i s r e p r e s e n t i n g P l a to , t h e r e is t h e

p r o b l e m o f r e l a t i n g t h e u n w r i t t e n d o c t r i n e s w i t h t h e o n t o l o g i c a l d i s cu s -

s i ons i n t he

Philebus.

E n o u g h o f th e u n w r i t t e n d o c t r i n e s c a n b e r e l a te d t o th e

Philebus t o s h o w t h a t P l a t o is n o t t h e r e a n o n t o l o g i c a l a t o m i s t c o n c e r n i n g t h e

F o r m s . T h e c l a i m a t 1 6c t h a t a ll e n t it i e s a r e c o m p o s e d o f l i m it a n d u n l i m i t e d

fits w i th , t h o u g h it n e e d n o t e x p r e s s d i r e c t ly , t h e u n w r i t t e n d o c t r i n e s ? ~ T h e

q u e s t i o n is m o r e o b s c u r e i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h th e f o u r f o l d d i v i s i o n o f e n t it i e s

Cf. Findlay's intriguing conjectures on how this might have been envisaged, an d the

special role played by the prime numbers

(Plato,

pp. 67- 7o )

' As is clear from the general mo vem ent of this essay, I accept the traditional translation

of 16c9 as refe rrin g to all entitles, r ath er th an Striker's revised translation refe rrin g only to the

Forms. The arguments used by Pamela Huby in her review of Striker's book

(Classical Review

XXII (197~), p. 333) and Gosling

(Plato s Philebus,

p. 84) seem convincing.


13/16

5 8 J OURNA L OF THE HI STORY OF PHI LOS OPHY 2 1 :4 OCT 983

into limited, unlimited, mixed, and cause (23c-26d) . Explaini ng this

division, Plato states that the m ixt ur e of limit and unlimi ted is car ried o ut by

nous with reference to both our souls and the world soul. This mixing

activity is also connected to wisdom and knowledge, which are said not to

exist except in souls. This poses no problem for the mixture of limit and

unli mited rele vant to the ethical topics discussed. But were we to appl y this

description to the Forms themselves we would be blocked. For there is no

sense of cause accep table to Plato in which one could say that soul is the

cause of the generat ion of the Forms fr om the one and the indefini te dyad.

To read the unwrit ten doctrine s straight into the four| old classification of

the Philebus requires serious reinterpret at ion. With Jackson, one could turn

Plato's doctrine into idealism, but this seems anachronistic in the extreme.

With the Neoplatonist s and Findlay one could read the cause,

nous

not as

single souls but as the F or m o f soul, an eternal Intellect which bot h is a For m

and contains the Forms. '~ This, however, would be to read the entire Neo-

platonic hierarchy into the Philebus a move which, I argue below, goes

against Plato's intent. In a similar vein one could interpret wisdom and

knowledge as referring to Forms from which others could be derived. While

this could be made congruent with Plato's overall doctrine, i t is expressly

excluded as a meaning for this text.

We should conclude that the unwritten doctrines are not expressed di-

rectly in the fourfold classification, though the doctrines are not excluded

either. In addition, as Striker argues, both some Forms (e.g., Heat) and some

concr ete objects (e.g., impu re pleasures) are included in the genus of the

unlimited. Th e ethical application of the fo urf old classification suggests that

unlimite d or indefinite includes those Forms and those particulars which

lack a definite ratio or n um be r that makes them perf ect of their kind, and

are always relative to a more-and-less and to contrasting items. There is no

highest heat nor any definite temperature which is perfect heat, while there

are such rules a nd ratios fo r Forms such as horse or man. '~ The se points

suggest that the unwrit ten doctrines be seen in the background. Had the

Henry Jackson, in a series of articles in the Journal of Philology which appeared from

1882 through 1886 (vols. X through XV) argued that after the self-criticism found in the

Parmenides Plato modified his theory in a way which eliminated the presence of the Forms in

sensible particulars and made of the theory a thoroughgoing idealism in which each Form is

a thought which is eternally present in the universal mind (or which would be eternally present

in the universal mind, if in passing into time and space it retained its universality). Particulars

are the same thought imperfectly actualized by finite minds in [perceived] time and space (Vol.

XIII, p. ~43). The phenomenalistic use to which the concept of mind is put in this theory is

more nineteenth-century than Greek.

'~ Cf. Findlay, pp. 281-295 for an account in this spirit.

~:~ Striker, pp. 41-68.


14/16


pr og ra m which Aristotle repor ts been capable of being carried out, i t would

have provided an explanat ion why the rat ios that determine a horse are

what they are, and why some Forms need f urthe r determin ation, given their

place in the generative scheme.

Striker also wishes to argue, however , that the unlimited cann ot be

seen as an ele ment in entities. '4 This concl usion seems unnece ssar ily strict.

Th e ter m ~t~etOov can be app lied on a variety of levels. Striker her sel f

shows several: the gen eric universal, the multiplicity of particulars, particu-

lar individual pleasures. These all have in common that in themselves or in

their context they demand or al low further determination. While we can-

not make any simple equat ion of the unlimited with one constant element

in all entities, we can see it describing many different levels of indetermina-

t ion. The need of measure and determination holds equally and with no

special p rimac y fo r atoms of fire, pleasures, politics, percept ions, and per-

sonalities, with all their dif fer ing kinds of comp one nts and of indefinite-

ness. This is not so dif fer ent fr om Aristotle's flexibility with matt er an d

potentiality.

When Theuth is inventing letters, he faces indeterminately multiple

sound, already distinguished in a generic way fr om othe r kinds of experi-

ence. Presumably we never face the simply indeterminate, for to do so would

be to lack any experience. In so far as we can experience the indeterminate

it is already de-scribed or de-limited in some generic way. So too whenever

entities, be they Forms or particulars, are described as indeterminate the

entities will be already determinate in some other way. Thus the fact that the

unli mite d of the four fo ld classification is a gen us of entities and no t som e

pur e potential l ike Aristotle's prima ry matter need not force us to deny that

determinate entities can be composed, on various different levels, of the

inde term inat e plus meas ure or limit. '5

The unwrit ten doctrines again stand in the background, unit ing this

flexible use of the ter m unli mite d into a gene rati ve series of specifications

of the indetermina te dyad. Th e dyad would be a purely indetermi nate

principle, but it is not an entity. To make such a generative series plausible it

,4 Striker, pp. 45-5 o. I do not deal with all of Striker's arguments on this question nor

with her overly restrictive hermeneutic principle about what it means to take the text on its

own. Striker (and Gosling's) various other arguments against seeing limit and unlimited as

elements in things can be met, I think, by a position which (a) refuses to separate knowing

particulars from knowing universals, (b) links classification and individuation, (c) has more

flexible and multi-leveled notions of the limit and unlimited, and (d) makes unifying back

ground reference to the unwritten doctrines. The interpretation still has difficulties with 16el-

2 (dismissing units into the indeterminate).

~ I am bypassing the question whether the hilebt~ does or does not presuppose the

distinction drawn in the

Statesman

between limit in general and normative measure (283-285).


15/16

51 JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 21 :4 OCT

1 9 8 3

would be necessary to link the indefinite dyad and the Receptacle discussed

in the

Timaeus.

Th e Receptacle can be seen as a specification of the indefinite

dya d into the realm of space. 16 Th e two are related as a generically deter-

mined to a simply indefinite principle. Plato seems to have thought that the

progressive limitation of the dyad described in geometrical terms eventually

produced the spatio-temporal indeterminate, which by the fact of its spatial-

ity is generically determinate. Aristotle indicates in his criticism of Plato in

Metaphysics

lo9oa 23 - 9 that the re is one indefin ite principle, which cries

out at the way it gets dra gge d about into what Aristotle thinks are too many

different generative processes.

The unwritten doctrines stand behind the

Philebus

not as necessary pre-

suppositions but as a fuller story which, had Plato been able to complete it,

would have unified the discussion of limit and unlimited and would have

explained the details of their application to Forms and particulars. This

means that the

Philebus

suggests and the unwritten doctrines confirm that

Plato is nowhere an ontological atomist. There are no beings which are

brutely given as what they are. All determinations are generated by pro-

cesses which are ideally those of harmonious measure; the question why? is

in principle answerable for any determination, based only on the notions of

unity and indefinite miltiplicity and their combination into a set of necessary

structures.'7

Plato could have reconciled his dualisms more easily had he asserted the

unchalle nged primacy of the principle of unity and m ade it the source of the

principle o f indet ermi nati on, as do the Neoplatonists. Plato himself has little

or nothing to say about the basic principles of unity and indefiniteness

themselves. This is not coyness; as the ontological conditions of possibility

for any definite entity, the limit and the unlimited are not themselves defi-

nite entities to be spoken about. The Neoplatoists do ask and answer ques-

tions about the ultimate principles in themselves. Emanation and ~ntoxQoq~,

the power of the One which by its being makes a counterspace as it over-

,5 According to Plato the one and the indefinite dyad, which he spoke of as the great and

small, are the principles of all things and even of the Forms themselves. So Aristotle reports in

his work On the Good (Alexander, quoted by Simplicius in his comment ary on

Physics 187a12

translated by Findlay, Plato p. 4x4). Cf. also the passages translate d on p. 44 x con cer nin g the

Timae~

and Aristotle,

Metaphysics

~o85a 7- 14 for the series numb er, line, surface, volume and

the referenc e to species of the indefinite dyad.

,7 Thi s is not quite true. Plato, like Aristotle, seems to dismiss accidental determinations as

not knowable by a science of dialectic such as he proposes. Th e d octr ine of

infimae species

implies

this conclusion for both thinkers; cf. PosteriorAnalyticsI, 4(73b15ff). The problem whether (and

if so where) to draw the line between determinat ions which are accidental and those which can

be necessarily known plagues thinkers who reject ontological atomism.


16/16

kolb - pythagoras bound. limit and unlimit in plato´s philebus

Documents