Theodorus' lesson in Plato's Theaetetus (147d1-d6) Revisited-A New Perspective

TL;DR

This paper offers a new interpretation of Plato's mathematical discussion in Theaetetus, analyzing the historical, mathematical, and philosophical aspects to challenge standard views and provide fresh insights into pre-Euclidean mathematics.

Contribution

It introduces a comprehensive, multi-perspective analysis of Plato's text with a new translation and interpretation, challenging prevailing historical and philosophical interpretations.

Findings

Reveals a direct view of pre-Euclidean mathematics

Challenges the 'Main Standard Interpretation' in history of mathematics

Provides a new translation and interpretation of Plato's mathematical lesson

Abstract

This article is the first part of a study of the so-called 'mathematical part' of Plato's Theaetetus (147d-148b). The subject of this 'mathematical part' is the irrationality, one of the most important topics in early Greek mathematics. As of huge interest for mathematicians, historians of mathematics as well as of philosophy, there had been an avalanche of studies about it. In our work, we revisit this question, for we think something is missing: a global analysis of Plato's text, from these three points of view simultaneously: history, mathematics and philosophy. It is what we have undertook through a new translation, a new interpretation of the mathematical lesson about irrational magnitudes and a novel interpretation of the whole passage from these three points of view. Our guideline is considering Plato's writings seriously, not as some playful work. This simple rule is indeed surprisingly constraining, but it allows us to get a rare direct glance inside pre-Euclidean mathematics, in contradiction with the 'Main Standard Interpretation' prevailing in history of mathematics as well as in history of philosophy. This study had been divided in two parts for editorial reasons. In the present article, we propose an analysis of the first part of this 'mathematical part', Theodorus' lesson. In the second article (Brisson-Ofman (to appear)), we present the sequel of the lesson and a philosophical interpretation of the 'mathematical part' within the framework of the entire dialogue. Both articles form a whole. They are both aimed to an audience without any particular mathematical background, and require only elementary mathematical knowledge, essentially of high school-level. Some more delicate points are nevertheless developed in the Appendices.