Plato’s Theaetetus is a dialogue between Socrates and Theaetetus, a young mathematician. The dialogue explores the nature of knowledge and the possibility of defining knowledge. The central question of the dialogue is whether knowledge is identical with perception or opinion.
The dialogue begins with Socrates questioning Theaetetus about his definition of knowledge. Theaetetus offers several definitions, but Socrates challenges each of them, exposing their inconsistencies and contradictions. Socrates argues that knowledge must be something more than mere perception, as perception is often mistaken and can lead to false beliefs.
Socrates introduces the concept of false beliefs, or “doxai,” and argues that they cannot be knowledge, as they are not grounded in truth. The dialogue then turns to the question of whether true beliefs are knowledge, and Socrates suggests that this is not the case, as true beliefs can be held without knowledge of why they are true.
Socrates then introduces the idea of an account or explanation, which he argues is necessary for true knowledge. An account must explain why something is true and cannot be based on mere perception or opinion. The dialogue then turns to the question of whether knowledge can be defined as a true belief with an account or explanation.
The rest of the dialogue is dedicated to exploring this question. Socrates offers several definitions of knowledge, but each is challenged and ultimately rejected. He argues that knowledge cannot be mere perception, nor can it be a true belief without an account. He suggests that knowledge must be a true belief with a “logos,” or an account that explains why the belief is true.
The dialogue concludes with Socrates admitting that he does not have a satisfactory definition of knowledge. He suggests that the search for a definition of knowledge may be an endless task, as every definition can be challenged and ultimately found to be inadequate.
The Theaetetus is significant for several reasons. First, it is a powerful critique of empiricist and relativist views of knowledge. Socrates argues that knowledge cannot be based on mere perception, as perception is often mistaken and can lead to false beliefs. He also argues that true beliefs are not sufficient for knowledge, as they can be held without understanding why they are true.
Second, the dialogue introduces the idea of an account or explanation as a necessary condition for knowledge. This idea is central to much of modern epistemology, and has been used to argue for a wide range of theories about the nature of knowledge.
Finally, the dialogue raises important questions about the possibility of defining knowledge. Socrates suggests that the search for a definition of knowledge may be an endless task, as every definition can be challenged and ultimately found to be inadequate. This suggests that the nature of knowledge may be inherently elusive and difficult to pin down.
In conclusion, Plato’s Theaetetus is a complex and challenging dialogue that raises important questions about the nature of knowledge. It challenges traditional views of knowledge and offers a powerful critique of empiricist and relativist theories of knowledge. The concept of an account or explanation introduced in the dialogue is central to modern epistemology, and the dialogue’s exploration of the possibility of defining knowledge continues to be relevant to contemporary discussions in philosophy.