Plato's philosophy is characterized by a combination of dialectic and analogy, both in its form and its content (Pons, 2019). Plato's dialogues use the term "dialectic" to refer to any method recommended as a vehicle for philosophy (Meinwald, 2020). However, López (2015) cautions against associating dialectic solely with question-and-answer objections, as this quality is shared with various procedures of ancient Greece in Plato's time.
Dialectic is not just a learned discipline, but rather a practice that is carried out (López, 2015). This practice applies not only to spoken dialogue but also to the generation of writings. Therefore, the skill of the dialectician lies in clarifying signs that require explanation due to their lack of intrinsic clarity. In this sense, dialectic is understood as an analysis of language beyond oral questions and answers. According to López (2015), it is based on inputs provided by science and also analyzes discourses in general, including the smallest aspects, namely, names.
Following this line of thought, it is possible to find Heraclitean roots in Platonic ideologies, represented by the famous phrase "everything flows" (López, 2015). In correspondence with López (2015), Plato proposes to find unity precisely where everything flows, in the midst of a river that will never be the same. Undoubtedly, the search for unity is one of the great characteristics of dialectical exercise (López, 2015). Cratylus, a teacher of Plato before Socrates, believed that in language, there is nothing permanent and that existing things are multiple and changing. He said that it is even difficult to assert with certainty that something exists since at the moment we say it, the object has already changed (López, 2015). In short, according to Pons (2019), Plato's reasoning on dialectic is based on the problem of unity and multiplicity, where truth presents itself as a combination of both.
Finally, this method presupposes that knowledge of a specific subject cannot be obtained in isolation but must be integrated into a broader explanatory structure (Meinwald, 2020). Therefore, to understand if an act is pious, it is necessary to know what piety is. This requirement allows the interrogator to correctly formulate questions related to the defendant's original claim. Meinwald (2020) mentions that if a contradiction arises during this process, the supposed expert reveals that they do not have complete mastery of knowledge since, if they did, they would have avoided the contradiction.
Dialectic in Meno
In Plato's dialogues, the term dialectic is not mentioned in the early periods or Socratic dialogues (López, 2015). The first reference to the term dialectic is found in a dialogue called "Meno" (Cañas, 2010). According to López (2015), the absence of the term implies that its function can be interpreted similarly to the Socratic method.
Dialectic is introduced when Socrates initiates his dialogue with Meno to discuss virtue. In this case, Socrates makes a small differentiation in the approach to the problem. After defining the problem and changing the way of responding, the distinction between dialectic and eristic is emphasized. Thus, according to López (2015), Plato insists on differentiating these two forms of conversation.
For this to happen, two conditions must be met: responding calmly and dialectically, and conducting the inquiry among friends (López, 2015). These requirements are necessary for any investigation in search of truth, beyond mere recognition or mutual praise. Additionally, the use of shared expressions is required, suggesting that knowledge of language is fundamental to achieve those shared expressions. However, according to López (2015), Socrates points out that within the dialogue, it is not necessary to have specific knowledge of the language, but it is important for the other person to know some shared expressions, as apparently that is the knowledge being sought.
Dialectic in The Phaedrus
Plato's dialectic, although not postulated by Socrates, draws inspiration from its roots (Cañas, 2010). In his work "The Phaedrus," the superiority of spoken word over written word is emphasized, as demonstrated by Socrates in his teachings. According to Cañas (2010), for a true philosopher, writing is merely a shadow of spoken word. When a true philosopher writes, it is done as a pastime, to aid their own memory in old age or for anyone who wishes to follow in their footsteps.
In this dialogue, Plato presents an important idea: each discourse or written word acquires a certain autonomy from its author as it freely circulates among readers with varying levels of understanding or ignorance. The text does not know to whom it is directed, as the words metaphorically move in all directions (Pons, 2019). This raises the question of whether written word requires the author's assistance to defend itself or if it can independently respond to the reader's inquiries. In essence, as stated by Pons (2019), Plato questions to what extent the author's intentions in writing can be distorted if the text is not read, interpreted, and understood correctly.
Hence, in the absence of the author, the written discourse lacks the means to be properly understood (Pons, 2019). Therefore, according to Pons (2019), it is crucial for the reader to appropriate the written content and understand that written language is an additional source of information that cannot replace or substitute for thinking and reflecting upon the problems the reader faces.
Dialectic in The Republic
During the composition of The Republic, Plato focused on developing positive viewpoints and considered dialectic not as a technique of proof, but as a way of stating what each thing truly is (Meinwald, 2020). In this sense, The Republic emphasizes that true dialectic takes place when one thinks exclusively in the abstract and unchanging realm of forms; it requires reason to establish a non-hypothetical starting principle, namely the good, and then derive further conclusions from this theory. However, Meinwald (2020) mentions that since this part of the dialogue is only a programmatic sketch, no concrete examples of the activity are provided.
On the other hand, in The Republic, Plato presents dialectic as the culmination of all sciences and as the final and highest study of the true philosopher (Cañas, 2010). In Plato's proposed curriculum, dialectic is reserved for those who are over thirty years old, raising concerns about the harm that premature initiation into dialectic can cause in young souls. Therefore, Plato embarks on a campaign to discredit the sophists and eristics, whom he does not directly name, referring to them as flatterers and impostors. According to Cañas (2010), Plato believes that dialectic practiced at a young age becomes a game whose sole purpose is contradiction.
Dialectic in Parmenides
In Parmenides, a dialectic is presented that Socrates must undertake in his youth to properly understand the Forms (Meinwald, 2020). This exercise, which Parmenides showcases in the second part of his work, is extremely challenging, consisting of eight argumentative sections. When engaging with this exercise, the reader is faced with the task of making a distinction that involves a sophisticated development of the theory of Forms. Therefore, according to Meinwald (2020), this understanding of dialectic provides a central place for the specification and explanation of each topic in terms of gender and differentiation.
Dialectic in The Philebus
The method of differentiation, as part of dialectics, is a divine gift that reveals the relationship between the one and the multiple (Pons, 2019). Plato considers the division into genders and species within dialectics to be important, giving a certain priority to dichotomy. However, according to Pons (2019), caution must be exercised in abusing this dichotomy and resorting to paradigm or analogy as support for dialectics.
In Philebus, it is emphasized that dialectics is primarily an ethical process related to virtue and reflection on a good life (Pons, 2019). Indeed, Pons (2019) mentions that the practical dimension of living knowledge requires reflecting on the concept of the good, examining what kind of life is preferable: pleasure, the good, or a combination of both.
Dialectic in The Sophist
In his work "The Sophist," Plato emphasizes that the fundamental characteristic of dialectics is the classification by genres, that is, the distinction between different categories to find their compatibility and the ability to gather and synthesize, thus creating a sieve that reveals the articulation of elements (Pons, 2019). However, at the beginning of the text, Plato proposes a simpler method to define the activity of the sophist: the paradigm of the angler. In fact, according to Pons (2019), this analogical and didactic method is based on the use of a paradigmatic example.
Dialectic in The Politicus
In his work "The Politicus," Plato demonstrates that the method of division fulfills its function when it aligns with the articulations of reality, thus avoiding excesses (Pons, 2019). It is crucial to establish differences and seek connections to determine specific characteristics, which is essential in dialectical development. Furthermore, in accordance with Pons (2019), the idea of paradigm used in "The Politicus" also plays a key role in complementing dialectic through the use of analogy.
References
Cañas, R. (2010). La Dialéctica en la filosofía griega. Redalyc.org. Recuperado 7 May 2021, a partir de https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/666/66620589003.pdf
López, J. (2015). Vista de ¿Qué es la dialéctica? Una indagación hasta el Crátilo. Revistas.uptc.edu.co. Recuperado 7 May 2021, a partir de https://revistas.uptc.edu.co/index.php/cuestiones_filosofia/article/view/5361/4474
Meinwald, C. (2020). Plato | Life, Philosophy, & Works. Encyclopedia Britannica. Recuperado 27 April 2021, a partir de https://www.britannica.com/biography/Plato#ref281697
Pons, J. (2019). Dialéctica platónica y metodología. Redined.mecd.gob.es. Recuperado 7 May 2021, a partir de https://redined.mecd.gob.es/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11162/195214/Dialéctica.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
