I propose a new interpretation of Plato’s Parmenides. I avoid the assumption of Developmentalism, that Plato is criticising his own ‘middle’ theory of forms. Instead, I read the dialogue as Plato’s serious presentation of the Eleatic position. He shows that Eleatics’s counterintuitive thesis follows from the fundamental assumption of qualitati…[Read more]

I propose a new interpretation of Plato’s Parmenides. I avoid the assumption of Developmentalism, that Plato is criticising his own ‘middle’ theory of forms. Instead, I read the dialogue as Plato’s serious presentation of the Eleatic position. He shows that Eleatics’s counterintuitive thesis follows from the fundamental assumption of qualitati…[Read more]

I propose a new interpretation of Plato’s Parmenides. I avoid the assumption of Developmentalism, that Plato is criticising his own ‘middle’ theory of forms. Instead, I read the dialogue as Plato’s serious presentation of the Eleatic position. He shows that Eleatics’s counterintuitive thesis follows from the fundamental assumption of qualitati…[Read more]

The Dream Theory in Theaetetus is Plato’s generalised account of Presocratic elements. Evidence for this given from Laws, Phaedo, Timaeus, and through a comparison with Aristotle’s account.

The Dream Theory in Theaetetus is Plato’s generalised account of Presocratic elements. Evidence for this given from Laws, Phaedo, Timaeus, and through a comparison with Aristotle’s account.

The Dream Theory in Theaetetus is Plato’s generalised account of Presocratic elements. Evidence for this given from Laws, Phaedo, Timaeus, and through a comparison with Aristotle’s account.

A response to John Finamore, “The Divided Line and the Cave in Proclus’ Republic Commentary.”

A response to John Finamore, “The Divided Line and the Cave in Proclus’ Republic Commentary.”

Interpretations of the Theaetetus digression fail to see how it functions in Plato’s argument because they have taken its praise of the philosopher at face value. But this is not the philosopher from Republic. His otherworldliness reflects both Theodorus’ mathematical understanding of philosophy as the study of ‘divine’ objects and the judgeme…[Read more]

Interpretations of the Theaetetus digression fail to see how it functions in Plato’s argument because they have taken its praise of the philosopher at face value. But this is not the philosopher from Republic. His otherworldliness reflects both Theodorus’ mathematical understanding of philosophy as the study of ‘divine’ objects and the judgeme…[Read more]

Review of: Neoplatonism after Derrida. Parallelograms. By Stephen Gersh. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 2006. Pp. xv + 223. $147.00 (cloth). ISBN 9789004151550.

Review: (M.) Martijn Proclus on Nature. Philosophy of Nature and its Methods in Proclus’ Commentary on Plato’s Timaeus. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Pp. x + 360. £105. 978900-4181915 The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 2012