A Comparison Of Truth In Theaetetus And Homer's Odyssey

Plato's Theaetetus and Homer's Odyssey - works that heavily influenced Ancient Greece's perceptions of the world surrounding them and the truth concerning reality itself. However, what defined them as the books modern society continues to read and fawn over is the ways they express their views: through Platonic and mythological truths. Through this analysis, one will better understand that period's thoughts surrounding reality and give insight into which perspective is ultimately more effective.

Homer's Odyssey discusses the concept of truth, laying the foundational understanding of the universe in a sensory, speculatory manner through mythological means. The beginning describes the troubles Odysseus encountered while attempting to return

Theaetetus follows a conversation between Socrates and Theaetetus, an encounter meticulously recorded by Plato as he studied under Socrates. "Socrates: Where, then, is false opinion? For if all things are either known or unknown, there can be no opinion which is not comprehended under this alternative, and so false opinion is excluded. Theaetetus: Most true.” Through this, one observes the revelation that Socrates presents, exposing the paradoxical existence of false opinion. The incessant line of questioning that Socrates commits to shows the logical interrogation he utilised with people of all professions, seeing if they could explain their profession’s essence. This method sparked rigorous debates, and people often reconsidered their originally accepted definitions of words. While he rarely took a specific position in each argument, Socrates inspired Plato's assertion that "essence precedes existence." This assertion plays into the Platonic truth that truth is permanent; if everything is to have an abstract essence, it must be unchanging. Therefore, the critical quality of Platonic truth must be permanence rather than relativity. Plato would have quickly learned that many don't understand what they pretend to, especially the Sophists, who were known to argue using fallacious arguments. As many didn't understand the concepts, Platonic truth often followed a style that was less accessible to the average individual. We also know from that excerpt that Plato believed there could only be what is known for what you don't know; you're aware that you don't know it, so the unknown is simply an extension of the