Читать книгу PLATO - Hoshang Khambatta - Страница 16

Overview: This dialogue is about the study of language and the giving of names to things. The discussants are trying to determine what the source of the name’s correctness is, when an item is named. This was a very popular field of inquiry during Plato’s time, though it is not much discussed in present-day Western philosophical circles. The dialogue here is between Hermogenes and Cratylus, but Socrates does much of the talking. Plato has Socrates considering etymological examinations of a long list of names of Gods, humans, and things in order to discover the ultimate truth about things through their names. This dialogue demonstrates that Socrates was an expert in this crowded field of study.

Hermogenes is the conventional linguist. He believes that any local or national convention determines the name of a thing. He feels that the same thing can be called by a different name if people can agree. Cratylus is a naturalistic linguist. He believes that names cannot be chosen arbitrarily. The name must belong to a thing and must have specificity.

Hermogenes and Cratylus are having a discussion about names and ask Socrates to join in. Why is an item or a person called by an assigned name? Cratylus believes that there is an etymological derivative for all given names, whereas Hermogenes believes that a name is anything that a community wishes to call something. Hermogenes first asks Cratylus whether his name is Cratylus, to which Cratylus replies affirmatively. Then Hermogenes asks Socrates whether his name is Socrates, to which Socrates also replies affirmatively. Then Cratylus jokingly says that he himself is called Hermogenes by everyone. When Hermogenes challenges Socrates about Cratylus’ remark, Socrates does not give a straight answer. He explains that there is an ancient proverb stating that fine things are difficult to explain. Socrates tells Hermogenes that Cratylus is only making fun of him. It was a pun on his name. Hermes is the God of profit and Hermogenes means son of Hermes. Socrates points out that Hermogenes was not making much money giving speeches.

Hermogenes says that he has often discussed names with other people who contend that the correctness of a name is determined by usage.

Any name someone gives becomes the correct name by usage. If an object or person gets a different name, then that new name becomes the proper name. Hermogenes gives an example of a domestic slave who had a previous name but was then given a new name. The new name becomes his true name. Socrates then asks if he should decide to call a man – a horse and a horse a man – whether that would be acceptable? The three of them discuss how even in Greece, different communities have different names for the same thing. Socrates then quotes Protagoras, a fellow philosopher, who has said that “man is the measure of all things.” and “that things are to me as they appear to me and to you as they appear to you.” Socrates then asks: “Do you believe that things have a fixed being of their own?” Hermogenes replies that he does not always agree with Protagoras, however, sometimes, even when he does not believe in him he accepts Protagoras’ ideas. They all then agree that there are both, men who are good and wise, as well as men who are bad and foolish. If names for each person are as he believes them to be, then it is not possible for one person to be wise and another foolish. Therefore, what Protagoras says cannot be true.

Socrates and Hermogenes discuss how they should go about properly naming things. Socrates suggests that perhaps Hermogenes should ask his brother Callias what he has learned from Protagoras after paying him such huge fees. Hermogenes declines this suggestion, as he does not believe in what Protagoras has to say. In that case, Socrates suggests, that Hermogenes may want to fall back on what Homer has said on the subject. They discuss multiple examples from Homer that describe names. Homer describes two names given to Hector’s son; men call him Astyanax, and women call him Skamandrios. Men were wiser. When one looks at the roots of the two names, astu and anax, both mean lord of the city. Homer also gave Hector his name. Hector means possessor. This discussion goes to show that Homer was well versed in connectedness in giving names. Socrates gives many more such examples of the correctness of names. He considers that some people’s names are deceptive. Sometimes these names are given to people because their ancestors had them. At other times the names are given in hopes that they will prove to be appropriate for the recipient. As examples he cites Eutychides – son of good fortune, Sosias – savior, and Theophilus – beloved by god. However, these names can be very misleading in describing the so named person.

Their discussion continues about how The Gods were named. The first inhabitants of Greece believed that the sun, moon, earth, stars, and sky were Gods. As these celestial bodies seemed to be always moving or running, they were called, theoi, from thein, to run.

Next, the meaning of daemons, heroes, and humans are discussed. Socrates asks as to what is the correct derivation of the word, daemon? He quotes the poet Hesiod who defined them as “they belonged to the Golden Race of men, the first human race.” They were good and beloved by The Gods and the children of The Gods. According to Hesiod when a good man dies he goes on to a great destiny and with great honors and becomes a daemon, a title then given to him. Hermogenes asks the meaning of the title, hero? Socrates replies that that is easy to explain. Heroes are born out of love, eroes and are thus demigods. They are the children of Gods and mortal women or, conversely, from mortal men with Goddesses. He points out that considering the old Attic dialect, makes it clear that hero is only slightly altered from eros. He notes that sophists who make clever speeches are called rhetores and skilled questioners are called eroten. Socrates asks why members of the human race are called human anthroepoi. He says that we often make small changes by adding or subtracting letters or alter the accents in order to change a phrase into a name. He gives as an example, Dii Philos, which means friend of Zeus. To change this into a name we drop the second i and join the words to make the name Diphilos. Another example Socrates puts forth is that among all of the animals, only humans observe things closely, hence the word anthropos meaning one who observes closely is used to define humans.

They also discuss how The Gods were named, and conclude that they were named for the powers they command. They illustrate with the names of several Gods based on their powers.

The discussion next turns to the correctness of the names of several virtues, such as wisdom, comprehension and justice. The three conclude that wisdom is the understanding of motion as it constantly flows. Judgment expresses that to judge is to examine and study and that is how the virtues were named. They examine the roots of the Attic dialect for derivation of the names for all the virtues and vices. Socrates adds that in his view all names are derived from a thought. Hermogenes agrees with this derivation.

Next they considered how that slight changes made to a name can reverse its meaning. Finally, they concluded there is only one type of correctness in all names, namely to express the nature of a things. The question arises of how someone without a voice or tongue could express names. They conclude that it would be by gesture of hands, head, or the whole body. Socrates says that the correctness of a name is displayed by its nature, an assertion to which Cratylus agrees. Socrates adds that names are spoken in order to give information, and they all agree with this definition. They also agree that the craft of naming things or a person is performed by those we call the rule-setters. Some names and their rule-setters are better than others. Cratylus disagrees that some rule-setters create better names, and also that some names are better than others. He believes that all names have been correctly given and that therefore, all objects have well-given names. Socrates asks if Cratylus believes that names are conventional signs that express things, or if they represent ideas to those who already know these things, or if they were ideas before conventions were established? Socrates contends that the correctness of a name lies in its conventionality. Cratylus insists that a name that expresses something is superior to a name given by chance. He adds that anyone who knows a thing’s name also knows that thing. Socrates contends that anyone who investigates things by considering only their names as a guide may be deceived. The name-giver might have given the thing a name based on a mistaken conception of the thing. Cratylus disagrees, saying that the name-giver must have known the thing before deciding on a name for that thing. Socrates does not agree. He argues that, if things cannot be learned except from their names, then how did the name-giver give the first name before he knew the thing. Cratylus acknowledges the point and adds that more than human power gave the first names, and so they are necessarily correct. Socrates predicts that there will be civil war between names given by humans and those by Gods. They all agreed that it is better to investigate things and learn about them through themselves, rather than to do so through their names.