Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Artículo científico |
| Language: | en |
| Published: |
Universidad Panamericana
2010
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=323028514005 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Table of Contents:
- THE THIRD MAN ARGUMENT (PARM .132 A 1- B 2)- A ‘PURELY’ METAPHYSICAL EXERCISE? Marcus Nabielek Filosofía All commentators of the ‘Parmenides’ agree that the Third Man argument, 132a-b2, raises a difficulty for Plato’s theory of forms. Many commentators, following Vlastos, hold that the argument’s infinite regress is vicious for epistemic reasons. Rickless contends that the infinite regress is vicious for exclusively metaphysical reasons. This essay intends to show that Rickless’ interpretation is inadequate, as well as to vindicate Vlastos’ interpretation. 2010 artículo científico 0188-6649 https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=323028514005 en http://www.redalyc.org/revista.oa?id=3230 Tópicos, Revista de Filosofía application/pdf Universidad Panamericana Tópicos, Revista de Filosofía (México) Num.38