False Judgement In Theaetetus

The dialogue of Theaetetus, written by the Greek philosopher Plato, discusses the idea of knowledge with the help of Socrates, Theaetetus and Theodorus. The question of What is Knowledge, is proposed by Socrates, who then aids Theaetetus in making this discovery. Theaetetus comes up with three possible hypotheses, one after another that are as follows: (I) Knowledge is perception, (II) knowledge is true judgement, and (III) knowledge is true judgement with logos. While Socrates helps in the discovery of theses hypotheses, he soon after sets out to challenge Theaetetus on his thinking and logic. As the teacher, Socrates goal in invoking the rejection of each of these statements is to guide Theaetetus to better clarity of the question, as well …show more content…
This needs to be done in order to properly exclude false judgements when defining and attaining knowledge. The primary difficulty of distinguishing a false judgement from a true resides in the conflict of “… that there is, on every occasion, a false judgement, and that one of us judges what’s true and the other what’s false…?”. By defining a false judgement, conflicts can be avoided, but the question of knowledge when one unknowingly makes a false judgement prevails. Socrates proposes to Theaetetus the challenge of “someone who judges what’s false. Is he thinking that thing he knows are not those things but other things he knows? Is it that he knows both sets of things but on the other hand is ignorant of both sets of things?”. Socrates is searching for an answer to whether that is ignorance or something different, so as not to be …show more content…
Socrates gives three definitions for a Logos, but with examination, none can withstand Socrates’ rejection. The first definition proposed is that a logos is the ability “to make one’s thought plain by means of speech, with expressions and names” , but the problem Socrates finds with this proposition is that it is something most anyone could discover, and there would be no room for correct judgement, which is not a thing that knowledge would be. The second proposed definition of a Logos is to give “an answer in terms of its elements.”. However, as previously discovered, one cannot give an account to the elements, as it is impossible if and when they are true elements. This brings to light a new dilemma, where the then proposed complex is formed unknowable elements. The third and final proposed definition of a logos is “being able to state some mark by which the thing one is asked for differs from everything else.”. But to find a statement that can clearly make one thing differ in all matters from all others is nearly an impossible feat, so Socrates concludes that this statement, too, does not withstand his