For Different thinkers, throughout history, ‘The unknowable non-existent’ has had different meanings. However, despite these differences, the ordinary absolute non-existent in Muslim philosophy (ma‘dūm muṭlaq; non-existent in both the external world and in the mind), can be expressed ...
Read More
For Different thinkers, throughout history, ‘The unknowable non-existent’ has had different meanings. However, despite these differences, the ordinary absolute non-existent in Muslim philosophy (ma‘dūm muṭlaq; non-existent in both the external world and in the mind), can be expressed in this way: absolute non-existent is never existed in external world or in mind (rather it is impossible to be conceived in the mind), neither detailedly nor un-detailedly, neither in perception nor in imagination and intellect. ‘The absolute non-existent’ leads us to a paradox which is usually called the paradox of informing from absolute non-existent; suppose that (P) is ‘The absolute nonexistent is unknowable’, since the very P is a kind of knowledge or information about the absolute nonexistent, so we are encountered to a paradox. In this paper I explore the roots of the ‘absolute nonexistent’ and the paradox in Greek philosophy; actually in Parmenides and Plato.
Dialectical method has certain roots in the Greek philosophical thought before Plato. Such roots may be traced back from Heraclitus and Parmenides to Sophists. There, the first regular uses made of it may be found in Socrates. Though, Aristotle has mistakenly introduced Xenon of Elea as the founder of ...
Read More
Dialectical method has certain roots in the Greek philosophical thought before Plato. Such roots may be traced back from Heraclitus and Parmenides to Sophists. There, the first regular uses made of it may be found in Socrates. Though, Aristotle has mistakenly introduced Xenon of Elea as the founder of dialectical method. Plato inherited Socrates' method. But what is clear is the distinction which may be seen between dialectical methods of Socrates and Plato. The doctrine of Ideas gives much importance to this distinction. This distinction may be summarized in this way that the doctrine of Ideas is in conflict with Socratic ignorance. In other words, Socrates employed the dialectical method to show that his logical style prevents him from providing decisive statements based on knowledge; and that his duty is only "to correct", a correction for which no end may be found. Introducing the doctrine of Ideas, Plato made it completely different. And as this doctrine is introduced, it becomes clear that the end of the dialectical method is revealing the "Idea" of the subject discussed.
The present article tries to show that:
(1) Roots of the dialectical method may be found in the Greek philosophical thought before Plato, and
(2) Probably Xenon of Elea has nothing to do with the dialectical method, and
(3) Doctrine of Ideas is Plato's (and not that of Socrates), and
(4) When this doctrine is added to the dialectical method, it is of a clear impact on the process of finding an end for the logical search; or, to put it more accurately, (5) dialectical method with, and without, the doctrine of Ideas are different from each other.
