The Mathematical Anti-atomism of Plato’s Timaeus

Abstract

In Plato’s eponymous dialogue, Timaeus, the main character presents the universe as an (almost) perfect sphere filled by tiny, invisible particles having the form of four regular polyhedrons. At first glance, such a construction may seem close to an atomistic theory. However, one does not find any text in Antiquity that links Timaeus’ cosmology to the atomists, while Aristotle opposes clearly Plato to the latter. Nevertheless, Plato is commonly presented in contemporary literature as some sort of atomist, sometimes as supporting a form of so-called ‘mathematical atomism’. However, the term ‘atomism’ is rarely defined when applied to Plato. Since it covers many different theories, it seems that this term has almost as different meanings as different authors. The purpose of this article is to consider whether it is correct to connect Timaeus’ cosmology to some kind of ‘atomism’, however this term may be understood. Its purpose is double: to obtain a better understanding of the cosmology of the Timaeus, and to consider the different modern ‘atomistic’ interpretations of this cosmology. In short, we would like to show that such a claim, in any form whatsoever, is misleading, an impediment to the understanding of the dialogue, and more generally of Plato’s philosophy.

Critical Evaluation of Gadamer’s Interpretation of Plato’s Timaeus

“…Furthermore, the mathematical nuance in the interpretation was also adopted by scholars who believed in modern atomism. According to Brisson and Ofman (2022), modern atomism initially argued that the regular solids in the Timaeus were not geometrical but thin physical particles that possessed three dimensions, length, width, and depth, because void existed in the universe. This contradicted Plato's assertion in the Timaeus that the universe was constructed not only on physical principles but also primarily on mathematical rules.…”

Traditional and Cosmic Gods in Later Plato and the Early Academy

“…Prauscello (2014) supports his reading on the political level. These revisionist readings are challenged by Kahn (2004) and Brisson (2005a).…”

“…However, Schofield does not consider whether the political power and, more significantly, the educational programme of the Nocturnal Council matches what we find in the Republic. For this point, seeBrisson (2005a) 109-16 and Rowe (2010) 47n59.87 Note that even the guardians of the law are not a uniform group, for they will have epistemic achievements ranging from true opinion to wisdom, as confirmed by the disjunction μὲν . .…”