The Relationship between Language and Reality in Plato: An Interpretation of Plato's Cratylus in the Light of the Three Allegories in Republic

Before Plato, the thinkers dealing with the problem of language viewed it as a dual phenomenon. In Aristotle’s eyes, language is a mysterious entity which functions not only as a link connecting the gods and human beings but also as a body of laws for revealing the truth. For Heraclitus, language enjoys a code-like aspect similar to logos, which is mainly a phenomenon referring to the truth rather than a tool for explaining and analyzing it. On the other hand, for Parmenides, language is a deceptive phenomenon which is the product of a kind of social contract as well as a problem in the sensible world which, by itself, is not of much value. Sophists also consider language to be an arbitrary and relative phenomenon which merely functions as a medium of speech and entails no absolute truth by itself. Given this historical background, Plato set out to explore the problem of language. He developed a view in Cratylus which completed the mentioned historical background. For him, language is a deceptive and imperfect phenomenon; a phenomenon which he investigated in Cratylus based on its essence and its relationship with reality. He maintains that, since language is an artificial entity, it is essentially imperfect and, hence, incapable of providing any knowledge regarding reality. He believes that language can only be used to reflect the reality as accurately as possible, is ontologically posterior to reality, and is only temporally prior to it in terms of its instructional feature. In other words, according to Plato, one cannot attain knowledge through language because it is an artificial phenomenon which, at its best, can manifest the reality in an imperfect form.