cratylus-第3节

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