Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Plato's own philosophical method in dialogues like the Timaeus and Phaedrus relies on myths to convey truths that discursive argument cannot reach.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
If myths convey truths discursive argument cannot reach, we lack criteria to distinguish true myths from merely persuasive fiction.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Plato himself uses logical argumentation extensively in dialogues; treating myths as primary philosophical tools misreads his actual practice.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Appealing to myth risks obscuring claims rather than clarifying them, making critical evaluation and rational scrutiny impossible.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Myths engage imagination and intuition, accessing modes of understanding that pure logical argument cannot stimulate or convey.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Platonic myths (World Soul, Cave allegory) communicate about transcendent Forms and realities beyond empirical verification or proof.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Discursive argument requires shared definitions and axioms; myths bypass these constraints to suggest truths about ultimate reality.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.