按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
Rabelais； such； in a different style； were Sterne； Jean Paul； Hamann；
writers who sometimes become unintelligible through the extravagance of
their fancies。 Such is the character which Plato intends to depict in some
of his dialogues as the Silenus Socrates； and through this medium we have
to receive our theory of language。
There remains a difficulty which seems to demand a more exact answer： In
what relation does the satirical or etymological portion of the dialogue
stand to the serious？ Granting all that can be said about the provoking
irony of Socrates； about the parody of Euthyphro； or Prodicus； or
Antisthenes； how does the long catalogue of etymologies furnish any answer
to the question of Hermogenes； which is evidently the main thesis of the
dialogue： What is the truth； or correctness； or principle of names？
After illustrating the nature of correctness by the analogy of the arts；
and then； as in the Republic； ironically appealing to the authority of the
Homeric poems； Socrates shows that the truth or correctness of names can
only be ascertained by an appeal to etymology。 The truth of names is to be
found in the analysis of their elements。 But why does he admit etymologies
which are absurd； based on Heracleitean fancies； fourfold interpretations
of words； impossible unions and separations of syllables and letters？
1。 The answer to this difficulty has been already anticipated in part：
Socrates is not a dogmatic teacher； and therefore he puts on this wild and
fanciful disguise； in order that the truth may be permitted to appear： 2。
as Benfey remarks； an erroneous example may illustrate a principle of
language as well as a true one： 3。 many of these etymologies； as； for
example； that of dikaion； are indicated； by the manner in which Socrates
speaks of them； to have been current in his own age： 4。 the philosophy of
language had not made such progress as would have justified Plato in
propounding real derivations。 Like his master Socrates； he saw through the
hollowness of the incipient sciences of the day； and tries to move in a
circle apart from them； laying down the conditions under which they are to
be pursued； but； as in the Timaeus； cautious and tentative； when he is
speaking of actual phenomena。 To have made etymologies seriously； would
have seemed to him like the interpretation of the myths in the Phaedrus；
the task 'of a not very fortunate individual； who had a great deal of time
on his hands。' The irony of Socrates places him above and beyond the
errors of his contemporaries。
The Cratylus is full of humour and satirical touches： the inspiration
which comes from Euthyphro； and his prancing steeds； the light admixture of
quotations from Homer； and the spurious dialectic which is applied to them；
the jest about the fifty…drachma course of Prodicus； which is declared on
the best authority； viz。 his own； to be a complete education in grammar and
rhetoric； the double explanation of the name Hermogenes； either as 'not
being in luck；' or 'being no speaker；' the dearly…bought wisdom of Callias；
the Lacedaemonian whose name was 'Rush；' and； above all； the pleasure which
Socrates expresses in his own dangerous discoveries； which 'to…morrow he
will purge away；' are truly humorous。 While delivering a lecture on the
philosophy of language； Socrates is also satirizing the endless fertility
of the human mind in spinning arguments out of nothing； and employing the
most trifling and fanciful analogies in support of a theory。 Etymology in
ancient as in modern times was a favourite recreation； and Socrates makes
merry at the expense of the etymologists。 The simplicity of Hermogenes；
who is ready to believe anything that he is told； heightens the effect。
Socrates in his genial and ironical mood hits right and left at his
adversaries： Ouranos is so called apo tou oran ta ano； which； as some
philosophers say； is the way to have a pure mind； the sophists are by a
fanciful explanation converted into heroes； 'the givers of names were like
some philosophers who fancy that the earth goes round because their heads
are always going round。' There is a great deal of 'mischief' lurking in
the following： 'I found myself in greater perplexity about justice than I
was before I began to learn；' 'The rho in katoptron must be the addition
of some one who cares nothing about truth； but thinks only of putting the
mouth into shape；' 'Tales and falsehoods have generally to do with the
Tragic and goatish life； and tragedy is the place of them。' Several
philosophers and sophists are mentioned by name： first； Protagoras and
Euthydemus are assailed； then the interpreters of Homer； oi palaioi
Omerikoi （compare Arist。 Met。） and the Orphic poets are alluded to by the
way； then he discovers a hive of wisdom in the philosophy of Heracleitus；
the doctrine of the flux is contained in the word ousia （= osia the pushing
principle）； an anticipation of Anaxagoras is found in psuche and selene。
Again； he ridicules the arbitrary methods of pulling out and putting in
letters which were in vogue among the philologers of his time； or slightly
scoffs at contemporary religious beliefs。 Lastly； he is impatient of
hearing from the half…converted Cratylus the doctrine that falsehood can
neither be spoken； nor uttered； nor addressed； a piece of sophistry
attributed to Gorgias； which reappears in the Sophist。 And he proceeds to
demolish； with no less delight than he had set up； the Heracleitean theory
of language。
In the latter part of the dialogue Socrates becomes more serious； though he
does not lay aside but rather aggravates his banter of the Heracleiteans；
whom here； as in the Theaetetus； he delights to ridicule。 What was the
origin of this enmity we can hardly determine：was it due to the natural
dislike which may be supposed to exist between the 'patrons of the flux'
and the 'friends of the ideas' （Soph。）？ or is it to be attributed to the
indignation which Plato felt at having wasted his time upon 'Cratylus and
the doctrines of Heracleitus' in the days of his youth？ Socrates； touching
on some of the characteristic difficulties of early Greek philosophy；
endeavours to show Cratylus that imitation may be partial or imperfect；
that a knowledge of things is higher than a knowledge of names； and that
there can be no knowledge if all things are in a state of transition。 But
Cratylus； who does not easily apprehend the argument from common sense；
remains unconvinced； and on the whole inclines to his former opinion。 Some
profound philosophical remarks are scattered up and down； admitting of an
application not only to language but to knowledge generally； such as the
assertion that 'consistency is no test of truth：' or again； 'If we are
over…precise about words； truth will say 〃too late〃 to us as to the belated
traveller in Aegina。'
The place of the dialogue in the series cannot be determined with
certainty。 The style and subject； and the treatment of the character of
Socrates； have a close resemblance to the earlier dialogues； especially to
the Phaedrus and Euthydemus。 The manner in which the ideas are spoken of
at the end of the dialogue； also indicates a comparatively early date。 The
imaginative element is still in full vigour； the Socrates of the Cratylus
is the Socrates of the Apology and Symposium； not yet Platonized； and he
describes； as in the Theaetetus； the philosophy of Heracleitus by
'unsavoury' simileshe cannot believe that the world is like 'a leaky
vessel；' or 'a man who has a running at the nose'； he attributes the flux
of the world to the swimming in some folks' heads。 On the other hand； the
relation of thought to language is omitted here； but is treated of in the
Sophist。 These grounds are not sufficient to enable us to arrive at a
precise conclusion。 But we shall not be far wrong in placing the Cratylus
about the middle； or at any rate in the first half； of the series。
Cratylus； the Heracleitean philosopher； and Hermogenes； the brother of
Callias； have been arguing about names； the former maintaining that they
are natural； the latter that they are conventional。 Cratylus affirms that
his own is a true name； but will not allow that the name of Hermogenes is
equally true。 Hermogenes asks Socrates to explain to him what Cratylus
means； or； far rather； he would like to know； What Socrates himself thinks
about the truth or correctness of names？ Socrates replies； that hard is
knowledge； and the nature of names is a considerable part of knowledge： he
has never been to hear the fifty…drachma course of Prodicus； and having
only attended the single…drachma course； he is not competent to give an
opinion on such matters。 When Cratylus denies that Hermogenes is a true
name； he supposes him to mean that he is not a true son of Hermes； because
he is never in luck。 But he would like to have an open council and to hear
both sides。
Hermogenes is of opinion