Author ORCID Identifier

https://orcid.org/0009-0009-0211-8946

Date Available

5-15-2025

Year of Publication

2025

Document Type

Master's Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Arts (MA)

College

Arts and Sciences

Department/School/Program

Classical Languages and Literature

Faculty

David Bradshaw

Faculty

Valerio Caldesi Valeri

Faculty

Milena Minkova

Abstract

This master’s thesis will attempt to solve a dilemma presented by Parmenides in Plato’s dialogue of the same name. This dilemma arises because the young Socrates suggests that the forms may be thoughts that come to be in the soul. Parmenides responds to this statement by attempting to force Socrates to admit that this can only lead to one of two outcomes: (1) each thing thinks because it is composed of thoughts or (2) each thing does not think, even though it is composed of thoughts. Both of these outcomes are unsatisfactory and do not provide a solid grounding for the Theory of Forms. Unfortunately, Socrates does not directly respond to this dilemma in the original dialogue, so it is up to interpretation for how the theory of the Forms might resolve these difficulties.

My thesis looks to the philosopher Proclus to provide a Neoplatonic solution to this dilemma. My argument is that he answers it by correctly distinguishing between the Forms as thoughts and the Forms as objects of thought. The former interpretation presumes that the Forms themselves think, which is what leads to Parmenides’ dilemma. This is because both horns of the dilemma rely on the assumption that participating in the forms entails participating in the activity of thought. However, the latter interpretation does not fall into this error, so it allows Proclus to grasp the dilemma by the horns and thereby unravel it.

Following an introduction, the first three sections will provide a brief philosophical history of the issues underlying this dilemma and an account of how Proclus adapts prior insights for his own theory. The first part will discuss the language that Proclus develops to analyze concepts, thereby clarifying the significance of the term “thought.” The second part will examine the role of the hypostasis of Soul in Proclus’ theory of cognition. The third part will enquire into the Forms themselves and their relation to the Divine Intellect. After this philosophical history, the final part will analyze Proclus’ solution to this dilemma in his Commentary on the Parmenides. It will focus largely on sections 891-906, where Parmenides and Socrates discuss the third aporia.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

https://doi.org/10.13023/etd.2025.146

Download

Share

COinS