The modal definition of being in Plato’s Sophist

Abstract

The common view is that, whatever the exact nature of the definition (from now on called the ‘modal definition of being’ after Crivelli), it disappears from the dialogue entirely after the Friends reject it. Against this, I will argue that the modal definition is still present in the dialogue because it is necessary for both communion between the Forms and knowledge of the Forms. Following Crivelli, I will argue that the modal definition of being means that any being possesses the power to affect something or to be affected by something. If the modal definition is indeed tacitly affirmed by Plato in the Sophist, then we have a unified definition for being that describes both Forms and the soul, finally answering the question of what unites these seemingly disparate types of entities. [excerpt]