Dažnai manoma, kad Teaitetas veda prie vėlyvųjų dialogų epistemologijos ir skatina atsisakyti Dviejų pasaulių teorijos. Tačiau tokią interpretaciją apsunkina garsioji etinė digresija, kuri, iš pirmo žvilgsnio, sunkiai dera su likusiu dialogu ir primena viduriniųjų dialogų nuostatas. Todėl kyla klausimų tiek apie pačią digresiją, tiek apie jos vietą dialoge. Straipsnyje siūloma į šias problemas pažvelgti iš viduriniajam platonizmui priklausančio Komentaro – Anonymi Commentarius in Platonis Theaetetum – perspektyvos. Konkrečiau, straipsnyje rekonstruojama, kaip Anonimas supranta homoiōsis theōi etinį principą ir jo santykį su Teaiteto epistemologija. Filosofinės polemikos su stoikais kontekste Teaitetas atsiskleidžia kaip dialogas, kurio etika ir epistemologija grindžiamos Dviejų pasaulių teorija. Vis dėlto Komentare stoikų siūlomos alternatyvos pristatomos ne kaip klaidingos, o kaip nepakankamos. Taigi parodoma, kad Komentaras yra ne toks kategoriškas ir banalus, kaip gali pasirodyti.
Armstrong, J. M., 2004. After the Ascent: Plato on Becoming Like God. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 26: 171–183.
Alesse, F., 2018. The Influence of the Platonic Dialogues on Stoic Ethics from Zeno to Panaetius of Rhodes. In: Brill’s Companion to the Reception of Plato in Antiquity, eds. H. Tarrant, F. Renaud, D. Baltzly & D. A. Layne. Leiden: Brill, 46–57. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004355385_004
Bastianini, G., and Sedley, D. N., 1995. Commentarium in Platonis Theaetetum. In: Corpus dei papiri filosofici greci e latini, Parte III: Commentari. Firenze: Leo S. Olschki, 227–562.
Bénatouïl, T., 2013. Theôria and scholê in Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius: Platonic, Stoic or Socratic?. In: Plato and the Stoics, ed. A. G. Long. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 147–173. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139629157.008
Bonazzi, M., 2003. Un dibattito tra Academici e Platonici sull’eredità di Platone: La testimonianza del commentario anonimo al Teeteto. Corpus dei papiri filosofici greci e latini XI: 41–74.
Bonazzi, M., 2008. The Commentary as Polemical Tool: The Anonymous Commentator on the Theaetetus against the Stoics. Laval théologique et philosophique 64(3): 597–605. https://doi.org/10.7202/037693ar
Bonazzi, M., 2013. Le commentateur anonyme du Théétète et l’invention du platonisme. In: La mesure du savoir. Études sur le Théétète de Platon, ed. D. El Murr. Paris: Vrin, 309–333.
Boys-Stones, G., 2024. (anon.) Commentary on the Theaetetus: P.Berol. inv. 9782. Draft translation, new version 10 June 2024. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/6394469/Anonymous_commentary_on_Platos_Theaetetus [Accessed 22 July 2026].
Burnyeat, M. F., 1990. The Theaetetus of Plato. Translated by M. J. Levett. Indianapolis: Hackett.
Chiaradonna, R., 2007. Platonismo e teoria della conoscenza stoica tra ii e iii secolo d.C. In: Platonic Stoicism – Stoic Platonism. The Dialogue between Platonism and Stoicism in Antiquity, eds. M. Bonazzi, Ch. Helmig. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 209–241.
Dillon, J. M., 1977, repr. 1996. The Middle Platonists, 80 B.C. to A.D. 220. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Lännström, A., 2011. Socrates, the Philosopher in the Theaetetus digression (172c–177c), and the ideal of homoiôsis theôi. Apeiron 44(2): 111–130. http://doi.org/10.1515/apeiron.2011.009
Long, A. A., 1999. The Socratic Legacy. In: The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, eds K. Algra, J. Barnes, J. Mansfeld, M. Schofield. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 617–641. https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521250283.020
Maffi, E., 2019. The Theaetetus Digression: An Ethical Interlude in an Epistemological Dialogue? In: Thinking, Knowing, Acting: Epistemology and Ethics in Plato and Ancient Platonism, eds. M. Bonazzi, A. Ulacco, F. Forcignanò. Leiden: Brill, 138–160. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004398993_009
Mahoney, T. A., 2004. Is Assimilation to God in the Theaetetus Purely Otherworldly? Ancient Philosophy 24: 321–338. https://doi.org/10.5840/ancientphil200424244
Menn, S., 2020. On the Digression in the Theaetetus. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 57: 65–120. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198850847.003.0003
Piazzalunga, A. & Bonazzi, M., 2024. L’Anonimo Commentatore del Teeteto tra Platone e l’Academia. In: Studi e testi per il corpus dei papiri filosofici greci e latini. Florence: Leo S. Olschki, 201–221.
Reydams-Schils, G., 2017. “Becoming like God” in Platonism and Stoicism. In: From Stoicism to Platonism: The Development of Philosophy, 100 BCE–100 CE, ed. T. Engberg-Pedersen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 142–158. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316694459.008
Rue, R., 1993. The Philosopher in Flight: The Digression (172c–177c) in Plato’s Theaetetus. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 11: 71–100.
Ryle, G., 1966. Plato’s Progress. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schofield, M., 1999. Social and Political Thought. In: The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, eds. K. Algra, J. Barnes, J. Mansfeld, M. Schofield. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 739–770.
Sedley, D., 2004. The Midwife of Platonism: Text and Subtext in Plato’s Theaetetus. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tarrant, H., 1985. Scepticism or Platonism? : the philosophy of the Fourth Academy. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tarrant, H., 2005. Recollecting Plato’s Meno. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472597830
Torri, P., 2019. The telos of Assimilation to God and the Conflict between theoria and praxis in Plato and the Middle Platonists. In: Thinking, Knowing, Acting: Epistemology and Ethics in Plato and Ancient Platonism, eds. M. Bonazzi, A. Ulacco, F. Forcignanò. Leiden: Brill, 228–250. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004398993_013
Šis darbas apsaugotas Creative Commons priskyrimo 4.0 viešąja licencija.