CHAPTER XXXI.

KRATYLUS.

Persons and subjects of the dialogue Kratylus--Sokrates has no formed opinion, but is only a Searcher with the others 285

Argument of Sokrates against Hermogenes--all proceedings of nature are conducted according to fixed laws--speaking and naming among the rest 286

The name is a didactic instrument; fabricated by the law-giver upon the type of the Name-Form, and employed as well as appreciated, by the philosopher 287

Names have an intrinsic aptitude for signifying one thing and not another 289

Forms of Names, as well as Forms of things nameable--essence of the Nomen, to signify the Essence of its Nominatum _ib._

Exclusive competence of a privileged lawgiver, to discern these essences, and to apportion names rightly 290

Counter-Theory, which Sokrates here sets forth and impugns--the Protagorean doctrine--Homo Mensura 291

Objection by Sokrates--That Protagoras puts all men on a level as to wisdom and folly, knowledge and ignorance 292

Objection unfounded--What the Protagorean theory really affirms--Belief always relative to the believer's mind _ib._

Each man believes others to be wiser on various points than himself--Belief on authority--not inconsistent with the affirmation of Protagoras 293

Analogy of physical processes (cutting and burning) appealed to by Sokrates--does not sustain his inference against Protagoras 294

Reply of Protagoras to the Platonic objections 295

Sentiments of Belief and Disbelief, common to all men--Grounds of belief and disbelief, different with different men and different ages 295

Protagoras did not affirm, that Belief depended upon the will or inclination of each individual but that it was relative to the circumstances of each individual mind 297

Facts of sense--some are the same to all sentient subjects, others are different to different subjects. Grounds of unanimity 298

Sokrates exemplifies his theory of the Absolute Name or the Name-Form. He attempts to show the inherent rectitude of many existing names. His etymological transitions 299

These transitions appear violent to a modern reader. They did not appear so to readers of Plato until this century. Modern discovery, that they are intended as caricatures to deride the Sophists 302

Dissent from this theory--No proof that the Sophists ever proposed etymologies 304

Plato did not intend to propose mock-etymologies, or to deride any one. Protagoras could not be ridiculed here. Neither Hermogenes nor Kratylus understand the etymologies as caricature 306

Plato intended his theory as serious, but his exemplifications as admissible** guesses. He does not cite particular cases as proofs of a theory, but only as illustrating what he means 308

Sokrates announces himself as Searcher. Other etymologists of ancient times admitted etymologies as rash as those of Plato 310

Continuance of the dialogue--Sokrates endeavours to explain how it is that the Names originally right have become so disguised and spoiled 312

Letters, as well as things, must be distinguished with their essential properties, each must be adapted to each 313

Essential significant aptitude consists in resemblance _ib._

Sokrates assumes that the Name-giving Lawgiver was a believer in the Herakleitean theory 314

But the Name-Giver may be mistaken or incompetent--the rectitude of the name depends upon his knowledge 315

Changes and transpositions introduced in the name--hard to follow 315

Sokrates qualifies and attenuates his original thesis 316

Conversation of Sokrates with Kratylus; who upholds that original thesis without any qualification _ib._

Sokrates goes still farther towards retracting it 317

There are names better and worse--more like, or less like to the things named: Natural Names are the best, but they cannot always be had. Names may be significant by habit, though in an inferior way 318

All names are not consistent with the theory of Herakleitus: some are opposed to it 319

It is not true to say, That Things can only be known through their names 320

Unchangeable Platonic Forms--opposed to the Herakleitean flux, which is true only respecting sensible particulars _ib._

Herakleitean theory must not be assumed as certain. We must not put implicit faith in names 321

Remarks upon the dialogue. Dissent from the opinion of Stallbaum and others, that it is intended to deride Protagoras and other Sophists _ib._

Theory laid down by Sokrates _à priori_, in the first part--Great difficulty, and ingenuity necessary, to bring it into harmony with facts 322

Opposite tendencies of Sokrates in the last half of the dialogue--he disconnects his theory of Naming from the Herakleitean doctrine 324

Ideal of the best system of naming--the Name-Giver ought to be familiar with the Platonic Ideas or Essences, and apportion his names according to resemblances among them 325

Comparison of Plato's views about naming with those upon social institutions. Artistic, systematic construction--contrasted with unpremeditated unsystematic growth 327

Politikus compared with Kratylus 328

Ideal of Plato--Postulate of the One Wise Man--Badness of all reality 329

Comparison of Kratylus, Theætêtus, and Sophistês, in treatment of the question respecting Non-Ens, and the possibility of false propositions 331

Discrepancies and inconsistencies of Plato, in his manner of handling the same subject 332

No common didactic purpose pervading the Dialogues--each is a distinct composition, working out its own peculiar argument _ib._