Key Lessons from Plato’s Cratylus

Background:

This dialogue is on the philosophy of language: the ‘Correctness of Names’. When a name is the correct one for naming a given thing or performing another linguistic function, what is the source of this correctness?

Socrates is asked for his opinion on whether names are “conventional” or “natural”. The “conventional” definition is posited by Hermogenes, where the correctness of a name is defined by the community and whatever they agree upon within that community. The “natural” definition is put forward by Cratylus, this being, that words have an intrinsic relation to the things they signify.

Key Lessons:

1. A label is a tool, whose function is to instruct by separating the being of its object.
2. A label’s ‘power’ lies in its success in separating the being of its object by descriptive means.
3. Two labels have the same ‘power’ provided that both succeed in marking off the same object, even if they do so utilizing different descriptions, i.e. without being simple synonyms
4. Because a label signifies by description, it can be said to imitate the being of the object to which it has been assigned. It does with vocal materials what a painted portrait does with visual materials.
5. Our stability of words boosts our stability of values. That is, knowledge would not be possible if, during the process of our learning about its object, that object were already changing into something else. E.g. In the case of a Computer(Physical World), if we were to learn about the computer’s function and as we are learning its purpose let’s say it changed into something else(TV) it would impede our learning process and likewise if we change the name we give things or how we define them(Meta-Physical World), it not only disorders and hinders our means of communication but it also gives no meaning to the thing itself and therefore renders it useless.
6. Finally, one shouldn’t spend too much time on the knowledge of words but rather the functions they describe and rationalise their usefulness. Succinctly put, focus more on the “HOW” and “WHY” rather than the “WHAT”.