Aletheia vs. Truth: Socratic logos for a modern understanding of the universe

Ðàçìåùåíî íà http://www.allbest.ru/

Ðàçìåùåíî íà http://www.allbest.ru/

Guangdong university of petrochemical technology

Aletheia vs. Truth: Socratic logos for a modern understanding of the universe

Oleg Bazaluk,

doctor of philosophical sciences, professor

Maoming

Abstract

In the article, Socratic logos is used both metaphorically and literally. Its opposition to modern terminology and its meanings, such as «truth,» «the chronology of the Universe,» «space exploration,» and «the nature of space,» is metaphorical. The literal use demonstrates the potential of Socratic logos for modern inquiries into the Universe. Socratic logos is proposed to be used as a work. Namely, in this meaning, it is an authoritative beginning for any research. On the other hand, Socratic logos guarantees proper continuity and systematisation of the research results. It helps to go beyond highly specialised terminology and its meanings to use its particular complexity to investigate global interdisciplinary complexity. Thirdly, the most important is the effectiveness and results of its use. An example of the upward path «What is aletheia?» shows the work of Socratic logos and its result. The main feature of Socratic logos is that it does not provide for the victorious proclamation of «Truth» in the form of one or another cosmological model. However, it leads to the critical dichotomy of the kosmos, based on the metric expansion and compatible with the Hubble-Lemaitre law.

Keywords: Socratic logos, ontological dichotomy, aletheia, phusis of the kosmos

Main part

«Of all the agathon, for gods and men alike, aletheia stands first.»¹

The meanings development of the term aletheia² in the ancient philosophical tradition, with their subsequent rethinking in terms of verum («reality/realness») and «truth,» hid two fundamental Platonic messages that cannot be conveyed with the word «true». First, the aletheia and lethe³ have a standard beginning, in which the opposition between them is eliminated. Plato called it «unconditioned arkhe.»⁴ Plato explored the «unconditioned arkhe⁵» by «composing myths»⁶ and mathematics.⁷ According to Plato, man could discern (theoreo⁸) and come to know (ginosko⁹) it as the «alethos heaven and the alethinon light and thus hos alethos the earth.»¹⁰ Second, from the «unconditioned arkhe,» the upward path began.¹¹ The fundamental feature of ñËò|0º³à Sh navxrov gsv àóàáþó 0ºî³<; ùº³òà¿, navxrov Ss av0pronoig (Laws 5.730cl-2). Translated by R.G. Bury. The Greek text is cited according to (Burnet, 1901; 1903; 1978; 1907; Duke et al., 1995). The author follows the translation (unless otherwise indicated) of Plato in twelve volumes, 1967-1979.

² Aletheia (ñé,ò|0º³à), unconcealment, non-oblivion; opposite lethe. The author uses Greek words as the technical terms and does not stick to a grammatical case except for direct quotations. The meanings of the words are based on Plato's dialogues, the Platonic corpus, Liddell and Scott's Greek-English lexicon (Liddell & Scott, 1940) and Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Thayer, 1995). However, in the text, the author rethinks them and puts his understanding into them.

³ Lethe (A,t|0t|, noun, from verb Xav0avro (also Õ^0þ), I am concealed (hidden)), concealment, oblivion, closedness; opposite aletheia.

⁴ apxnv àóïïî0ºòîó (Republic 6.510b6). The “unconditioned arkhe” is understood from Plato's dialogues or (1) conceptually as the agathou idea (òîï àóà0îï iSsav) (Republic 6.505a-6.509c; 6.510a-6.511d; 7.518a-7.518d; 7.532c-7.532c; 7.534c; 10.621c-d; Timaeus 29a), or (2) mathematically as one (one, dg) (Republic 7.524e-7.525a). “Some of the names for the principles - one, many, indefinite dyad - show that Plato frequently thought of the highest, immaterial world in numerical terms. It is no surprise because he treated the entire universe, not just its immaterial component, as a chain of numbers” (Kalvesmaki, 2013).

⁵ Arkhe (apxh, noun) beginning, origin.

⁶ ï³ó p60oug (Phaedo 61b3). These are (Gorgias 522d-527b; Phaedo107ñ-114ñ; Republic 10.614a-621b; Phaedrus 245c-249d). See the review by Alexey Losev (Plato, Volume 1, 1990: 810-813).

⁷ “Plato greatly advanced mathematics in general and geometry in particular because of his zeal for these studies.” Translated by Paul Kalligas and Voula Tsouna (Philodemus' History, 2020: 283). According to Vlastos, “the most important point of disagreement between Plato and Aristotle” is that “Aristotle wants to provide an explanation of nature that is based on ordinary language, whereas Plato wants to leave such an explanation up to mathematics, which, in ever-changing sensible things, represents the traces of intelligible stability” (Vlastos, 2005: xviii). For mathematics in Plato's dialogues, see (Kalvesmaki, 2013; Karasmanis, 2020; Fierro, 2003; Philodemus' History, 2020: 282-283).

⁸ Theoreo (0ºþðºþ, verb, from theaomai), to be a spectator of, i.e. discern, gaze on for the purpose of analysing (discriminating), behold (Thayer, 1995).

⁹ 0ºþðîïàà, yvrovai (Phaedo 109e5). Ginosko (ó³óþàêþ = ó³óóþàêþ, verb), come to know, perceive, and in past tenses, know (Liddell & Scott, 1940), “to know, especially through personal experience (first-hand acquaintance)”) (Thayer, 1995).

¹⁰ yvrovai av îò³ ºêº³óî^ ºàò³ó î àÕï0é? onpavog êà¿ òî aXn0ivov ôéä êà¿ ^ d>g ñé,ò|0é<; yfj (Phaedo 109e5-110a1). Translated by Gwenda-lin Grewal. The italicised words are the inflection Alethes (a^n0h?, adjective) unconcealed. The upward path (Republic 2.364d) and the path above (Republic 7.514b). See (Schur, 2015; Gill, 2010: 172; Gonzalez, 2009: 244-245). the path was the need to pursue/practise (epitedeuo¹²) every new way/manner (tropos¹³) of the rightness (dikaiosune¹⁴). Epitedeuo (ºë³ò^ºîþ, verb), pursue or practise a thing, make it one's business (Liddell & Scott, 1940). Tropos (òðîïîé, noun, from òðåòþ, turning, adopting a new manner), a new direction from taking a turn or adopting a new way/manner (Thayer, 1995). Dikaiosune (5³êàþñòÜóã|, noun. From SiKaiog dkaios) +f-CTwn (-sune), rightness, righteousness) it refers to a person; as an adverb. - duly, rightly (Liddell & Scott, 1940). ^{SiKaioCTbvr|v} |òºòà ôðîó^àºþ^ ïàóò¿ òðîëþ ºë³ò^ºïàî^ºó (Republic 10.621c4-5). I deliberately omitted ^ºòà ôðîó^àºþ^. Methodos (^º0î$î<;, noun), path (hodos) of pursuit (meta-), to pursue one's inquiry, or literally “the way to follow.” Hegeomai (ò³óºîöñà, verb) lead the way, go before. Ôðîó^þ, “continuously connecting insight (enlightened inner perspective) to the necessary outward behaviour” (Thayer, 1995). This verb describes the actions (interactions) of Socrates in Symposium 220c6. “Though it may be only a coincidence, Alcibiades' report of what the soldiers at Potidaea said about Socrates' strange behaviour includes the verb ôðîó^þó” (Edmunds, 2006: 417). Logos (Õ6óî<;, noun), (i) that which is said: word, sentence, speech); (ii) that which is thought: reason, consideration, computation. òà òº ^ºòºþðà ôðîóò³àò^ êà¿ òà îïî yfg ïàóòà Î^ïòïêþ; êà¿ òîó ^òòþ Õîóîó êðºãàþ ïî³þó (Apology 18b6-18c1). See (Edmunds, 2006; Tell, 2010). Genesis (Swagai, verb) to be able, strong enough to do (Liddell & Scott, 1940).

Thus, the question «What is aletheiaT was, first of all, the way to follow (methodos)}⁶ This led the way (hegeomai¹⁷) (i) to considering, pondering¹⁸ things in mid-air, (ii) to thoroughly investigate (avaZn^sm) all the things below the earth, and (iii) making or doing (in an extensive application, more or less direct (ïþ) the weaker logos¹⁹ the stronger.²⁰ Socratic logos was an inseparable and essential part of this path (Nagy, 2002: 32). It served for computing the complexity of the global world; moreover, its inner dunamai²¹ was aimed at self-reinforcement and self-improvement to guarantee understanding and practice of the intelligible (Bazaluk, 2023).

Modern cosmology defines the «unconditioned arkhi» as «the initial singularity,» which has contained all the energy and space-time of the Universe (Sagan, 2013). It was followed by the «part of the Planck epoch,» or «the first second of the chronology of the Universe.» The Lambda-CDM Cosmological Model currently represents this period's most authoritative argument (Sagan, 2013). According to the Big Bang theory, singularity is an active principle “dark energy, in the form of a cosmological constant, makes up 71.4% of the universe, causing the expansion rate of the universe to speed up” See https://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/ that causes «the chronology of the Universe.» https://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/

I separate/define (horizo) Horizo (optiZ», verb, from opog (horos, “boundary, border”) + -(£» (-izo)), divide or separate from, as a border or boundary, define a thing (Liddell & Scott, 1940). the «unconditioned arkhi» by the noun genesis.²⁷ This decision is due to the predominance of the g^gnomai Genesis (ysvsmg, noun) coming into being, production, generation. G^gnomai (yiyvogai, verb) to come into being, namely, (i) to become, i.e. to come into existence, begin to be, receive being, and (ii) to become equivalent to come to pass, happen, of events (Thayer, 1995); opposite (i) phtheiro, “We should all agree that the opposite of gignesthai is phtheiresthai, should we not?” ((Philebus 55a). Translated by Harold N. Fowler. See the discussion (Ademollo, 2018; Burnyeat, 2003; Gonzalez, 2009; Vlastos, 2005)) and (ii) eimi (Timaeus 27d-28a; Republic 6.485a-b). See the discussion (Burnyeat, 2003: 22-23; Ademollo, 2018: 59). Phtheno (ô^ðþ, verb), to pass away, perish, be destroyed. symmetry over phthefro.²⁹ The above Greek verbs and their inflection define two fundamental physical phenomena: «come to be» and «cease to be.»

According to Myles Fredric Burnyeat, the verb g^gnomai «is that of a verb which is complete on its own, but which is further completable without change of meaning» (Burnyeat, 2003: 10). Therefore, gignomai “is used sometimes with, sometimes without a complement: (1a) “x yiyvexai,” (1b) “x y^yvºòàl F””) (Burnyeat, 2003: 9). y^yvºòàl is the third-person singular present mediopassive indicative of gignomai. It marks the dominant physical phenomenon «come to be,» which is complete on its own. (1à) «x come to be» and (1b) «x come to be F,» where x is a subject and F some predicate, are allowed.

The «come to be» phenomenon is (i) to become, i.e. to come into existence, begin to be, receive being) and (ii) to become equivalent to come to pass, happen, of events (Thayer, 1995). These are «to come to be is to come to be (predicatively) a being/something that is» (Burnyeat, 2003: 23). Burnyeat relied on ysvsaOai noxs ov (Sophist 245d1).and «to bring to light (pha/'no)» PhamO (ôàò», verb), to bring to light, to cause to appear. upon itself according to the formula (1c) «everything that comes to be comes to be (i) by the agency of something and (ii) from something and (iii) something» (Burnyeat, 2003: 18; 22-23).

The verb phthefro defines the opposite and subordinate physical phenomenon «cease to be.» Similarly to g^gnomai, I usephthewo as a technical term. It gives me the right to extend Burnyeat's idea to this verb. In fact, “in ordinary Greek you do not say `X ô0º^pºòàl F to mean `X ceases to be F'” (Ademollo, 2018: 63). I claim that the «cease to be» phenomenon is complete on its own, and I admit that (2a) «x ceases to be» and (2b) «x ceases to be F» I am guided by the law of conservation of energy and Noether's theorem. Hence, the «cease to be» phenomenon is «to cease to be (predicatively) a being/something that is» and «to bring to light» (phamo) on itself according to the formula (2c) «everything that ceases to be ceases to be (i) by the agency of something and (ii) from something and (iii) something.»

The result of the genesis and the apparent opposition between the dominant «come to be» phenomenon and the subordinate «cease to be» ôáîðîï' êà¿ ysvsmv (Philebus 55a). From rov, îéàà, ov (“being”), the present participle of eimi (“to be”), + -¿é (-Ø, abstract noun suffix). phenomenon is the third phenomenon. The Greeks separated/defined (horizo) by its verb eim^, to be, exist and its inflections: participle ontos, participle and noun on, noun ous^a^2Ú etc. According to Burnyeat, em^ defines «to be» as (3a) «x exists» and (3b) «x is F,»³⁶ that is, as a phenomenon that is complete on its own. There is no concept of existence as such, for subjects of an indeterminate nature (Bumyeat, 2003: 16). «To be is to be (predicatively) a being/something that is» (Burnyeat, 2003: 23). Moreover, the «to be» phenomenon brings the light (phamo) on itself according to the formula (3c) «everything that exists³⁷ exists (i) by the agency of something and (ii) from something, and (iii) something» (Burnyeat, 2003: 18).

The «to be» phenomenon is the result of genesis and the confrontation between g^gnomai and phthemo. Therefore, it excludes the existence of «come to be purely»³⁸ and/or «cease to be purely.» All «x exists» and «x is F» are always a regulatory compromise between the «come to be» and «cease to be» phenomena. Hence, the «to be» phenomenon is «always is purely» (on) as the upward path. It always brings to light (phamo) a new compromise symmetry of the whole and its parts.

The «to be» phenomenon, the result of genesis, which is «always is purely» (on), and which always brings to light (phamo) the compromise symmetry of the upward path, shows forth/manifests (emphamzo³⁹) itself as aletheia. Hence, aletheia is the unconcealed (alethes) unity and opposition between three fundamental physical phenomena: «come to be,» «cease to be,» and «to be.» The «to be» phenomenon both as a whole and the upward path, and as something that is a part of the whole and is dunamai, «to be able, strong enough to do» (Liddell & Scott, 1940). «For I put a boundary which defines being (onta), that it is (estin) nothing else but dunamis.»⁴⁰

Therefore, aletheia separates/defines (horizo) the commensurability of three physical phenomena, denoted by us with the verbs g^gnomai, phthemo and eim^. By itself, as a definition, it brings to light (phamo) the «to be» phenomenon and its upward path, that is, on something that is «always is purely» (on) as a whole and as dunamai.

«What is Aletheia?» vs. «Space Exploration»

The question «What is aletheia?» is not idle. It is a matter of self-preservation of anything that «comes to be and to beget.»⁴¹ It is the only way to follow (methodos) to the pure phenomenon «to be» to fasten/bind to it (hapto)⁴² as far as possible and «to be» simultaneously the whole and the part of the whole, the upward path and the dunamai. `x son' is, “uncontroversially, complete statements”; the pass from `x son' to `x son F' “is not to change the meaning of the verb, but to add a complement to a verb that was already complete, but further computable.” Where x is a subject and F is some predicate (Burnyeat, 2003: 9-10). Platonic Greek for “X exists” is “X is something”, º¿ëø ò³.' For examples of this use of ºïø n see Phd. 74a9- 12, 102b1, Rep. 9.583c 5, 584d3, Tht. 157a3 and 5, Soph. 246e5, 247a9, Tim. 51b7-8, Phlb. 37a2-9 (Burnyeat, 2003: 16). Pay attention that in English, “to exist” was a late-comer in 1602 (Burnyeat, 2003: 21). See (Phaedrus 245d) and the discussion (Burnyeat, 2003: 23). Emphamzo (ºöôàó³^þ, (From sv, in (inside, within) + ôàò») verb), show forth, manifest, to become visible (Liddell & Scott, 1940). ïáº^à³ yap opov opF^w òà ovxa rog sonv îéê aLLo n nLqv Swagig (Sophist 247e3). Translated by Harold N. Fowler with the modifications. The noun dunamis (Swagig) is a derivative of the verb dunamai. yr^v^va êà¿ óºóó^òà (Timaeus 28c2). The verb óº'Ó'óà³» means to beget (procreate a descendant), produce offspring; (passive) be born, “begotten” (Thayer, 1995). Hapto (àïòþ, verb), fasten or bind to (Liddell & Scott, 1940).

The way to follow (methodos) «What is aletheiaT» is, first of all, «to go through» (dierkhomai⁴³) «the realm of the things that are `never in the same state, '» Dierkhomai (5isp%ogai, verb, from Sia-, through, thoroughly + sp%ogai, erkhomai, to come, go), to go through, pass through (Schur, 2015; Gonzalez, 2009: 207-208; McPherran, 2007: 92). (Phaedo 78c6-8, 79a9-10, 79c6-7). For discussion, see (Ademollo, 2018: 36-40). to separate/define (honzo) pure dunamai. Where dunamai is the energy and spacetime, or a certain range of physical meanings, which demonstrate (i) intrinsic and extrinsic properties, i.e. always «to be» something, and the contrast between the physical meanings (ii) «come to be» Francesco Ademollo notes that Plato's “contrast between `coming to be' and `being” (ysvsaig and îïòà: e.g. Republic 7.525b-c, 7.526e, 7.534a), sometimes as a contrast between “what comes into being” and “what is” (to yiyvogsvov and to ov: e.g. Republic 6.518c, 6.521d) and sometimes as a contrast between “what comes and goes” and “what always is” or simply “what is” (to yiyvogsvov êà¿ anBXXngsv ov and just to ov: e.g. Republic 6.508d, 7.521e, 7.527b).” (Ademollo, 2018: 59). and (iii) «cease to be.» For “the contrast between the realm of being (emi) and that of coming to be (gignomai) and passing away (phtheiro)” in the Republic, see (Ademollo, 2018: 62-64). The etymology of the adjective homoios from the adjective ogog (homos), one and the same, common, joint (Liddell & Scott, 1940). g óèÕË cfg áËn0º^àg àëòºòà¿ (Phaedo 65b7). However, more critical and defining is that the question «What is aletheiaT» leads the way (hegeomai) «to be» as the upward path, that is, «to be like» homoios⁴⁷ to the whole, and, therefore, «to be» something that is «always is purely» (on).

The way to follow (methodos) «What is aletheiaT fastens/binds (hapto)⁴⁴⁸ to the «to be» phenomenon as a whole and forms an image/likeness (eikon) of its upward path. Anything that «came to be and beget,» and which was able to fasten/bind (hapto) to the «to be» phenomenon as a whole, acquires its upward path, or, as we call it, «its story.»

In the Academy, “We know that Plato taught for a long time in a pre-existing gymnasium (387-367) and then, on his return from the second trip to Sicily, bought a property nearby, and it was in this `small garden in the Academy' (cgmSiov ... to sv Àêà$ï^º1à) that he founded his school. I argue that, from the very beginning, the choice of the site was not coincidental but instead reflects the roots of Plato and his followers within a specific cultural background of which the Academy served as the heart” (Marchiandi, 2020: 11). the way to follow (methodos) to the pure phenomenon «to be» or, equivalently, the question «What is aletheiaT', promoted as the need to fasten/bind (hapto) to philosophia and pursue/practise (epitedeuo) the dying and being dead. KivSm^boum yap oaoi Tuy%avoumv op0(»g anco^voi ôËîàîôÿî; ^Xn0svai cong aXXong oti onSsv aXXo àïòî¿ smcr^noumv g 6rno0vf|m<£iv òº êà¿ òº0Ó'áï'à³ (Phaedo 64a4-6). Fuit ergo iam accepta a Platone philosophandi ratio triplex, una de vita et moribus, altera de natura et rebus occultis, tertia de disserendo et quid verum quid falsum quid rectum in oratione pravumve quid consentiens quid repugnet iudicando. [p. 9] (Cicero, Academica: 1.19). O. Plasberg, Ed. (http://data. perseus.org/citations/urn:cts:latinLit:phi0474.phi045.perseus-lat1:1.19). “There already existed, then, a threefold scheme of philosophy inherited from Plato: one division dealt with conduct and morals, the second with the secrets of nature, the third with dialectic and with the judgement of truth and falsehood, correctness and incorrectness, consistency and inconsistency, in rhetorical discourse.” Translated by H. Rackham (1933). See also (Horky, 2020: 171-181). Kathaho (êà0à^pþ, verb, from katharos), to make physically clean and free from admixture (katharos), cleanse/purify. êà0³|ðàà0à³ àóàóêã| (Phaedrus 243a2-3), literally a force/constraint/ necessity (ananke) cleanse/purify (kathairo) myself. Philosophers developed and used the Platone philosophandi ratio triplex'¹ to purify (kathafro⁵²) to their primary nature and, through it, and gaze at (theaomai⁵³), discern (theoreo), fasten/bind to (hapto) and pursue/practise (epitedeuo) pure phenomenon «to be» as the upward path and dunamai.

Over the past two and a half millennia, the way to follow (methodos) «What is aletheia?» has changed little. It is just as large-scale and time-consuming and includes the following work:

1. It is necessary to go through (dierkhomai) the boundaries of the «to be» phenomenon, which were separated/defined (horizo) by the predecessors.

2. It is to seek (zeteo⁵⁴) in the lethe ^concealment) and show forth/manifest (emphamzo)⁵⁵ new meanings of the real phusis, which establishes the kosmos⁵⁶ of the «to be» phenomenon.

3. It is to separate/define (horizo) new boundaries of dunamai and fasten/bind (hapto) to them. It is equal to «turning round»⁵⁷ towards «to be» itself and rising to it,⁵⁸ to «be like» (homoios) dunamai, therefore, to be (predicatively) a being/something that always is purely.

4. Finally, it is to pursue/practise (epitedeuo) the pure dunamai as the energy and spacetime. This personal and social «to be» is not «a capability of merely being present-with, but rather a capability of acting and being acted upon» (Gonzalez, 2009: 324; Phaedrus 247d-e).

2. The Phusisof the Kosmosvs. the Nature of the Space

According to modern concepts, the «to be» phenomenon is the phusis Theaomai (áºñþðø, verb, from thaomai, “to gaze at a spectacle”), properly, gaze on (contemplate) as a spectator; to observe intently, especially to interpret something (grasp its significance); to see (concentrate on) to significantly impact (influence) the viewer (Thayer, 1995). Zeteo (Znrsro, verb), to seek by inquiring, to investigate to reach a binding (terminal) resolution, “getting to the bottom of a matter” (Thayer, 1995). Zhtowtiêà¿ ep^otviZovu (Sophist 218b9-c1). “Thatphysis is even more basic than kosmos is evident from the fact that the discoverers of the cosmos came to be calledphysiologoi, not kosmologoi, and that “nature” occurs much more frequently in tides of their treatises than does “cosmos.” (Vlastos, 2005: 18). ëºðøóþóë, (Republic 7.518d3, 7.521c5). ion ovxog onaav snavoSov (Republic 7.521c6). Phusis (ôïà¿^, noun), is the energy that causes the expansion of the kosmos. I follow Gregory Vlastos (2005: 4-19) and Werner Jaeger (1961), which indicate the difference between the meanings of phusis and naturalism. “Christian interpreters (and not only they!) ought to remember that this Greek concept of nature is not identical with naturalism in our modern sense, but almost the opposite of it” (Jaeger, 1961: 18). The Friedmann-Lemaltre-Robertson-Walker metric (the FLRW metric) underlies the Big Bang cosmology. ow q òî^º òîï êîàðîè óã^ºàï; ºÅ, avayKqg òº êà¿ von îèàòààºþ^ ºóºãëò³áï (Timaeus 48a1-2). Ananke (avayKp, noun), force, constraint, necessity. (Liddell & Scott, 1940). Currently, four fundamental interactions, also known as fundamental forces, are defined: the gravitational and electromagnetic interactions and the strong and weak interactions. (not the «nature»⁶⁰) is based on the metric expansion or the FLRW metric.⁶¹ The phusis is represented as the kosmos or as the combination of ananke and noos.⁶² Where the noun ananke separates/defines (horizo) the force⁶³ in the kosmos. These are alethes fundamental forces,⁶⁴ which introduce constraint and necessity, or focus of actions (interactions) specified in the kosmos. In ananke, the superiority of the physical meaning of the «come to be» phenomenon over «cease to be» is exhibited. In turn, the noun noos separates/defines (horizo) the self-organisation (self-assembly) Examples of self-organisation are crystallisation, thermal convection of fluids, chemical oscillation, animal swarming, neural circuits, etc. In recent decades, related modelling - emergence has been developed along with the self-organisation (self-assembly) models. in the kosmos. These are the limitations caused by the «cease to be» phenomenon. In this physical meaning, the meanings of noos are related to the meanings of nomoi (laws), “For the `law' which we recognise in the regularity of the celestial motions is, for Plato, a proof of their rationality (voog and vogog being akin)” (Bury, 1937: 315). Plato's dialogos form is “a meandering journey” (Schur, 2015). “One way to talk about the difficulties encountered by interpreters of Plato's dialogue form is to focus on Plato's treatment of conversation as a meandering journey” (Schur, 2015). Kosmeo (Koagsro, verb), to set in order, to marshal, to arrange. “In English cosmos is a linguistic orphan, a noun without a parent verb. Not so in Greek which has the active, transitive verb, kosmeo: to set in order, to marshal, to arrange” (Vlastos, 2005: 3). and in a manner that noos determines nomoi.

Varied combinations of ananke and noos form variable intrinsic and extrinsic properties of dunamai.

Thus, the way to follow (methodos) «What is aletheiaT» does not aim at the victorious summit ascent and the establishment of Truth. It is the dialogos⁶⁷, where the preposition 5ia - «across (to the other side), back-and-forth to go all the way through» (Thayer, 1995) unmistakably points, first, to the necessary work of Socratic logos. Namely, Socratic logos leads the way (hegeomai), on the one hand, to consider/ponder and thoroughly investigation of the global complexity, on the other hand, to pursue/practise (epitedeuo) it in everyday life. Moreover, it sets in order ('kosmeo⁶⁸) the components that come to be into an organised structure.

Due to Socratic logos, the way to follow (methodos) «What is aletheiaT' appears as an effective way to separate/define (horizo) phusis, which causes the kosmos as the chronology of the Universe and dunamai. It will bring to light (phamo) that:

3a(i) x(kosmos) exists

3b(ii) x(kosmos) is F(dunamai)

3c(iii) kosmos exists (i) by the agency of dunamai and (ii) from dunamai and (iii) dunamai.

Where x(kosmos) and F(dunamai) are represented not only by cosmological models but also by the man's work, which is built into the work of phusis. Namely, “it is epistemological cause - i.e. the Good is that through which things, more specifically intelligible things, are known and understood, and that which makes them true (6.508d-e); it is the metaphysical cause - i.e. the Good is that by which things exist (6.509b7-8); and it is an ethical foundation - i.e. the Good is the basis of all virtues and the real good that all of us desire (6.504d-505a)” (Fierro, 2003: 226). is gq ovxog êà¿ ion ovxog siXiKpivrog (Republic 5.479d4). See discussion (Burnyeat, 2003: 12-16; Ademollo, 2018: 61-62)

The way to follow (methodos) «What is aletheiaT' leads the way (hegeomai) to investigate and master fundamental actions (interactions). It's to seek (zeteo), fasten/bind to (hapto) and pursue/practise (epitedeuo) the real physical meanings of the kosmosand dunamai. As «to be like» (homoios) to phusis and the metrics of the kosmos is equivalent to having its history (its upward path), and, therefore, «is purely (ontos), and not «what is not (not ontos).»⁷⁰

Thus, the way to follow (methodos) «What is aletheia?» brings to light (phamo) the key dichotomy of the kosmos:

What is that which comes to be ggnomai) and always is purely (on), and what is that which comes to be (gignomai) and not ever is (on)?⁷¹

References

socratic logo metaphorically space

1. Ademollo, F. (2018) On Plato's Conception of Change. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, Volume 55: 35-84. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198836339.003.0002 Bazaluk, O. (2023) What is the Passing Through (Dierkhomai) into Alethes (Unconcealed)?

2. Philosophy and Cosmology, Volume 30: 4-23. https://doi.org/10.29202/phil-cosm/30/1 Burnet, J. (ed) (1901) Oxford Classical Texts: Platonis Opera. Vol. 2: Tetralogia Ø-IV Oxford University Press.

3. Burnet, J. (ed) (1903) Oxford Classical Texts: Platonis Opera. Vol. 3: Tetralogia V-VII. Oxford University Press.

4. Burnet, J. (ed) (1978) Oxford Classical Texts: Platonis Opera. Vol. 4: Tetralogia VIII. Oxford University Press.

5. Burnet, J. (ed) (1907) Oxford Classical Texts: Platonis Opera. Vol. 5: Tetralogia IX Definitiones et Spuria. Oxford University Press.

6. Burnyeat, M.F. (2003) Apology 30b 2-4: Socrates, money, and the grammar of yiyveo0ai. The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 123: 1-25. https://doi.org/10.2307/3246257 Bury, R.G. (1937) Theory of education in Plato's «Laws.» Revue des Etudes Grecques, tome 50, fascicule 236-237, 304-320. https://doi.org/10.3406/reg.1937.2825 Duke, E.A., Hicken, W.F., Nicoll, W.S.M., Robinson, D.B., Strachan, J.C.G. (ed) (1995) Oxford Classical Texts: Platonis Opera, Vol. 1: Tetralogiae I-II. Oxford University Press. Edmunds, L. (2006) What Was Socrates Called? The Classical Quarterly, Vol. 56, No. 2: 414425.

7. Fierro, M.A. (2003) Plato's theory of desire in the Symposium and the Republic. Durham theses, Durham University.

8. Gill, M.-L. (2010) Method and Metaphysics in Plato's Sophist and Statesman. Definition in Greek Philosophy. Edited by David Charles. Oxford University Press, 172-199. Gonzalez, FJ. (2009) Plato and Heidegger. A Question of Dialogue. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.

9. Horky, P.S. (2020) Approaches to the Pythagorean Acusmata in the Early Academy. Plato's Academy: Its Workings and its History. Edited by Paul Kalligas, Chloe Balla, Effie Baziotopoulou-Valavani, and Vassilis Karasmanis.f Cambridge University Press, 167187.

10. Jaeger, W. (1961) Early Christianity and Greek Paideia. Cambridge, Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

11. Kalvesmaki, J. (2013) The Theology of Arithmetic: Number Symbolism in Platonism and Early Christianity. Hellenic Studies Series 59. Washington, DC: Center for Hellenic Studies.

12. I have changed the fundamental ontological dichotomy to fit the Big Bang theory. Plato expressed it as ò³ to ov as!, ysvsaiv Ss î³ê s % ov, êà¿ ò³ òî yiyvogsvov gsv (as!), ov Ss oiSsnoTs (Timaeus 27d6 - 28a1); What is that which always is (on) and has no genesis, and what is that which (always) comes to be (gignomai) and not ever (oiSsnoTs) is (on)? (Ademollo, 2018: 63) with modification. as! (always) is in brackets due to its controversial use in Plato's original presentation (Ademollo, 2018: 63-66).

13. Karasmanis, V (2020) Plato and the Mathematics of the Academy. Plato's Academy: Its Workings and its History. Edited by Paul Kalligas, Chloe Balla, Effie Baziotopoulou - Valavani, and Vassilis Karasmanis.fCambridge University Press, 108-140.

14. Liddell, H.G., Scott, R. (1940) A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

15. Marchiandi, D. (2020) In the Shadow of Athena Polias: he Divinities of the Academy, the Training of Politai and Death in Service to Athens. Plato's Academy: Its Workings and its History. Edited by Paul Kalligas, Chloe Balla, Effie Baziotopoulou-Valavani, and Vassilis Karasmanis.fCambridge University Press, 11-27.

16. McPherran, M.L. (2007) Medicine, Magic, and Religion in Plato's Symposium. Plato's Symposium: Issues in Interpretation and Reception. Edited by James Lesher, Debra Nails, and Frisbee Sheffield. Hellenic Studies Series 22. Washington, DC: Center for Hellenic Studies, 71-95.

17. Nagy, G. (2002) Plato's Rhapsody and Homer's Music: The Poetics ofthe Panathenaic Festival in Classical Athens. Hellenic Studies Series 1. Washington, DC: Center for Hellenic Studies.

18. Philodemus' History of the Philosophers: Plato and the Academy (PHerc. 1021 and 164) (2020) Translated with Introduction by Paul Kalligas and Voula Tsouna, and Notes by Myrto Hatzimichali. Plato's Academy: Its Workings and its History. Edited by Paul Kalligas, Chloe Balla, Effie Baziotopoulou-Valavani, and Vassilis Karasmanis.f Cambridge University Press, 276-383.

19. Plato. Collected Works in 4 Volumes (1994) Ed. by A.F. Loseva and others; Auth. enters, articles by A.F. Losev; Note. A.A. Takho-Godi. Moscow: Mysl, 1990-1994.

20. Sagan, C. (2013) Cosmos. New York: Ballantine Books.

21. Schur, D. (2015) Plato's Wayward Path: Literary Form and the Republic. Hellenic Studies Series 66.

22. Thayer, J. (ed) (1995) Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Coded with Strong's Concordance Numbers. Hendrickson Academic.

23. Vlastos, G. (2005) Plato's Universe. With a new introduction by Luc Brisson. Parmenides Publishing.

Ðàçìåùåíî íà Allbest.ru