First Assumption Socrates

The “first" assumption is: In order for an individual to judge about a thing, the individual must stand in a knowledge-relation to that thing. The “second" assumption is: In order for an individual to have knowledge of a thing, he or she has to either know that thing 100%, or he or she does not know that thing at all. The “second” assumption is explicitly laid out in the text. In order to take this assumption as plausible, an understanding of the “first” assumption is necessary. The first assumption underlying this text is not explicitly laid out. This assumption clarifies that knowledge is getting brought into the discussion about true belief. If we are going to explain how we get to assumption two and show how assumption two is relevant, …show more content…
Socrates shows that just because an individual may have knowledge of how to spell a name, it does not necessarily follow that this individual has knowledge/understanding of the word he or she spelled. Socrates says that a student learning to read and write might think the first syllable in Theaetetus is ’the’ and mistakenly think the first syllable in Theodorus is ’te’. According to Socrates, because this individual is wrong, this shows that an individual can have knowledge of how to spell, all-the-while having no knowledge of syllables and the basic rules of words. This is because the individual does not understand the structure and rules that govern words and language — the individual cannot differentiate between letters in a certain order and proper names. All of this shows that an individual putting letters in the correct order does not have actual understanding of the words being produced. With this demonstration, Plato is showing that knowledge of an object’s material components is not enough to understand that object. One also must understand the form/essence of said object. This argument has the same structure as Searle’s Chinese room …show more content…
According to Socrates, one can make a judgment about all of Theodorus’s physical attributes, such as the fact that Theodorus has two eyes, a nose, legs, etc., but this does not distinguish Theodorus from other people that share the same physical attributes. Thus, in order to separate Theodorus from the rest of the people that share the same attributes, one must be able to distinguish what it is that differentiates Theodorus from the rest of the people that share the same physical attributes. However, mere judgment is not capable of isolating what it is that differentiates Theodorus from other people that share the same physical attributes. What is required is the ability to distinguish Theodorus from other people that share the same attributes, but this is impossible via judgment alone. Judgments, by themselves, cannot produce any distinguishable impressions. If judgment was able to make this distinction, it would not involve mere judgment, it would involve knowledge. But one cannot have this knowledge without knowing what it is that separates Theodorus from the other individuals who share similar physical characteristics. Thus, this account is