| Abstract [eng] |
In this paper the author analyses the third man argument found in Plato’s dialogue “Parmenides”. This work consists of main interpretations beginning from the middle of twentieth century and shows the most important controversies among scholars. The purpose of this paper is to find the meaning of the third man argument in Plato’s theory of Ideas. It is shown that the third man argument can be understood as logical, epistemological and metaphysical critique of Plato’s theory. It is also shown that the argument can be understood as performing educational role – it can be used to protect the theory from critique which is based on incorrect interpretation. In the last part of this paper the dialectical approach to the argument is developed. This interpretation is based on Plato’s distinction of science and dialectics in his „Republic“. When we consider the contradiction between the conclusion of the third man argument and the fact that argument itself exists we can come to understanding that the argument is made not for showing that knowledge is impossible but that knowledge is a necessary condition for the existence of the argument. |
