Element contents
Series: Elements in Ancient Philosophy
Plato's Unwritten Doctrines
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 September 2025
Summary
This Element examines the arguments advanced by the Tübingen-Milan School in support of the claim that Plato had Unwritten Doctrines (agrapha dogmata), revealed in Aristotle and other testimonia and indicated – but not explicitly treated – in some of his dialogues. The Unwritten Doctrines are primarily concerned with Plato's Theory of Principles of (the One and the Indefinite Dyad) which accounts for unity and multiplicity respectively. This Element considers two opposing approaches to reading Plato: that of sola scriptura (through the writings alone) or via the tradition. While it may appear counter-intuitive to privilege other sources over Plato's own works, his criticism of writing in the Phaedrus and the 'deliberate gaps', where he teases the reader with the possibility of a fuller response than that provided on the current occasion, firmly indicate the existence of doctrines not committed to his dialogues.
Information
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Series: Elements in Ancient PhilosophyOnline ISBN: 9781009506212Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 16 October 2025
References
Primary Sources
Aristoxenus. Die harmonischen Fragmente. Ed. by Marquard, P.. Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1868.Google Scholar
Iamblichus. De communi mathematica scientia. Ed. by Festa, N. and Klein, U.. Stuttgart: Teubner, 1975.Google Scholar
Plato. Plato in Twelve Volumes. Vols. 5 & 6. Trans. by P. Shorey. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1969.Google Scholar
Plato Philebus. Trans. with notes and commentary by J. C. B. Gosling. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975.Google Scholar
Plato Philebus. In Plato. Complete Works. Ed. by Cooper, J. M. and Hutchinson, D. S.; trans. by D. Frede. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett, 1997, 398–456.Google Scholar
Simplicius On Aristotle Physics 1.5–9. Trans. by H. Baltussen, Share, M., Atkinson, M., and Mueller, I.; intro. by R. Sorabji. London: Bloomsbury, 2012.Google Scholar
Secondary Sources
Baltzly, D. (1996).‘“To an Unhypothetical First Principle” in Plato’s Republic’. History of Philosophy Quarterly 13, 149–165.Google Scholar
Böckh, A. [1808] (1872). ‘Kritik der Übersetzung des Platon von Schleiermacher’. Heidelbergische Jährbuch der Literatur für Philologie I 1. Reprinted in A. Böckh, Gesammelte Kleine Schriften Siebenter Band. Kritiken. Leipzig: Teubner, 1–38.Google Scholar
Broadie, S. (2021). Plato’s Sun-Like Good. Dialectic in the Republic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnyeat, M. and Frede, M. (2015). The Pseudo-Platonic Seventh Letter. Ed. by Scott, D.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Büsching, A. F. (1774). Grundriß einer Geschichte der Philosophie. Vol. 2. Berlin: Bosse.Google Scholar
Cherniss, H. (1936). ‘The Philosophical Economy of the Theory of Ideas’. American Journal of Philology 57, 445–456.10.2307/290396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cherniss, H. (1944). Aristotle’s Criticism of Plato and the Academy. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Cherniss, H. (1945). The Riddle of the Early Academy. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Corrigan, K. (2023). A Less Familiar Plato. From Phaedo to Philebus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781009324885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corrigan, K. and Glazov-Corrigan, E. (2004). Plato’s Dialectic at Play. Argument, Structure and Myth in the Symposium. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
D’Ancona, C. (2000). ‘La doctrine des principes: Syrianus comme source textuelle et doctrinale de Proclus. 1ère Partie: Histoire du problème’. In Steel, C. and Segonds, A.-P. (eds.), Proclus et la Théologie Platonicienne. Actes du Colloque International de Louvain (13–16 mai 1998). En l’honneur de H. D. Saffrey et L. G. Westerink. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 189–225.Google Scholar
De Cesaris, G. (2023). ‘The Chicken or the Egg? Aristotle on Speusippus’ Reasons to Deny the Principle Is (the) Good’. Apeiron 56, 105–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillon, J. M. (2003). The Heirs of Plato. A Study of the Old Academy (347–274 BC). Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillon, J. and Brisson, L., eds. (2010). Plato’s Philebus. Selected Papers from the Eight Symposium Platonicum. Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag.Google Scholar
Ferber, R. and Damschen, G. (2015). ‘Is the Idea of the Good beyond Being? Plato’s “epekeina tes ousias” Revisited’. In Nails, D. and Tarrant, H. (eds.), Second Sailing. Alternative Perspectives on Plato. Helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica.Google Scholar
Findlay, J. N. (1974). Plato. The Written and Unwritten Doctrines. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Fine, G. (1993). On Ideas. Aristotle’s Criticism of Plato’s Theory of Forms. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Frede, D. (2018). ‘A Superannuated Student. Aristotle and Authority in the Academy’. In Bryan, J., Wardy, R., and Warren, J. (eds.), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 78–101.Google Scholar
Gaiser, K. (1968). Platons Ungeschriebene Lehre und geschichtlichen Begründung in der Platonischen Schule. 2nd ed. Stuttgart: Klett.Google Scholar
Gaiser, K. (1980). ‘Plato’s Enigmatic Lecture “On the Good”’. Phronesis 25, 5–37.10.1163/156852880X00025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaiser, K. (2012). ‘Plato’s Synopsis of the Mathematical Sciences’. In Nikulin (2012b), 83–120.Google Scholar
Gerson, L. P. (2005). Aristotle and Other Platonists. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Gerson, L. P. (2013). From Plato to Platonism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.10.7591/cornell/9780801452413.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerson, L. P. (2014). ‘Harold Cherniss and the Study of Plato Today’. Journal of the History of Philosophy 52, 397–409.10.1353/hph.2014.0059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerson, L. P. (2016). ‘The “Neoplatonic” Interpretation of Plato’s Parmenides’. International Journal of the Platonic Tradition 10, 65–94.10.1163/18725473-12341333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerson, L. P. (2020). Platonism and Naturalism. The Possibility of Philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Gerson, L. P. (2023). Plato’s Moral Realism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gill, C. (2002). ‘Dialectic and the Dialogue Form’. In Annas, J. and Rowe, C. (eds.), New Perspectives on Plato. Modern and Ancient. Washington, DC: Center for Hellenic Studies, 145–171.Google Scholar
Gomperz, H. (1931). ‘Platons philosophisches System’. In Ryle, G. (ed.), Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of Philosophy. London: H. Milford, 426–431. Reprinted in Wippern (1972), 159–165.10.5840/wcp7193174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hackforth, R., ed. (1952). Plato’s Phaedrus. Trans. with an introduction and commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Halfwassen, J. (1992). Der Aufstieg zum Einen. Untersuchungen zu Platon und Plotin. Stuttgart: Teubner.Google Scholar
Halfwassen, J. (2001). ‘Der Ursprung der Geistmetaphysik. Die wiederentdeckte Einheit des antiken Platonismus’. In Szlezák, T. A. (ed. with assistance from Stanzel, K. H. ), Platonisches Philosophieren. Zehn Vorträge zu Ehren von Hans-Joachim Krämer. Hildesheim: Olms, 47–65.Google Scholar
Halfwassen, J. (2006). ‘Proklos über die Transzendenz des Einen bei Platon’. In Perkams, M. and Piccione, R. (eds.), Proklos Methode, Seelenlehre, Metaphysik. Leiden: Brill, 363–383.10.1163/9789047409397_019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halfwassen, J. (2012). ‘Monism and Dualism in Plato’s Doctrine of Principles’. In Nikulin (2012b), 143–159.Google Scholar
Halfwassen, J. (2015). Auf den Spuren des Einen. Studien zur Metaphysik und ihrer Geschichte. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halfwassen, J. (2021). Plotinus, Neoplatonism and the Transcendence of the One. Ed., trans., and intro. by O’Brien, C. S.. Steubenville, OH: Franciscan University Press.Google Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. [1832] (1986). Vorlesung über die Philosophie der Religion I. In Moldenhauer, E. and Michel, K. M. (eds.), Werke in zwanzig Bänden. Theorie-Werkausgabe. New ed., vol. 16. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Hösle, V. (2019). ‘The Tübingen School’. In Kim, A. (ed.), Brill’s Companion to German Platonism. Leiden: Brill, 328–348.10.1163/9789004285163_015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ionescu, C. (2019). On the Good Life. Thinking through the Intermediaries in Plato’s Philebus. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Krämer, H. J. (1959). Arete bei Platon und Aristoteles. Zum Wesen und zur Geschichte der Platonischen Ontologie. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.Google Scholar
Krämer, H. J. (1964a). Der Ursprung der Geistmetaphysik. Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Platonismus zwischen Platon und Plotin. Amsterdam: Schippers.Google Scholar
Krämer, H. J. (1964b). ‘Retraktationen zum Problem des esoterischen Platon’. Museum Helveticum 21, 137–167.Google Scholar
Krämer, H. J. (1986). ‘Mutamento di Paradigma nelle Richerche su Platone. Riflessioni intorno al Nuovo Libro di Giovanni Reale’. Rivista di filosofia neoscholastica 78, 341–352.Google Scholar
Krämer, H. J. (1990). Plato and the Foundations of Metaphysics. A Work on the Theory of the Principles and Unwritten Doctrines of Plato with a Collection of the Fundamental Documents. Ed. and trans. by Catan, J. R.. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Krämer, H. J. (2012a). ‘Epekeina tēs ousias: On Plato, Republic 509b’. In Nikulin (2012b), 39–64.Google Scholar
Luna, C. (2000). ‘La doctrine des principes: Syrianus comme source textuelle et doctrinale de Proclus. IIème partie: Analyse des textes’. In Steel, C. and Segonds, A.-P. (2000), Proclus et la Théologie Platonicienne. Actes du Colloque International de Louvain (13–16 mai 1998). En l’honneur de H. D. Saffrey et L. G. Westerink. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 227–278.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, M. M. (1982). ‘Paradox in Plato’s Phaedrus’. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society n.s. 28, 64–76.10.1017/S0068673500004405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menn, S. (2022). Simplicius. On Aristotle Physics 1–8. General Introduction to the 12 Volumes of Translations. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Migliori, M. (2020). Lifelong Studies in Love with Plato. Baden-Baden: Academia Verlag.10.5771/9783896658661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Migliori, M. (2023). How Plato Writes. The Educational and Protreptic Intent of the Great Student of Socrates. Baden-Baden: Academia Verlag.10.5771/9783985721467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nikulin, D. (2012b). The Other Plato. The Tübingen Interpretation of Plato’s Inner-Academic Teachings. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.10.1353/book21283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nikulin, D. (2019). Neoplatonism in Late Antiquity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, C. S. (2015). The Demiurge in Ancient Thought. Secondary Gods and Divine Mediators. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, C. S. (2019). ‘Plato on the Absolute’. In Plevrakis, E. and Rohstock, M. (eds.), Grundlegung des Absoluten? Paradigmen aus der Geschichte der Metaphysik, Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter, 15–36.Google Scholar
O’Brien, C. S. (2021a). ‘Jens Halfwassen and the German Intellectual Tradition’. In Halfwassen (2021), xv–xxvii.Google Scholar
O’Brien, C. S. (2021b). ‘Platonic Dialogues and Platonic Principles’. International Journal of the Platonic Tradition 15.1, 90–98.10.1163/18725473-12341490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, C. S. (forthcoming). ‘The Theory of Principles and Neoplatonic Readings of the Atlantis Myth’. In O’Brien, C. S. and Wear, S. K. (eds.), Platonic Principles. Essays in Honor of Lloyd Gerson. Steubenville, OH: Franciscan University Press.Google Scholar
O’Brien, C. S. and Wear, S. K. (2017). ‘The Figure of the Diadochos from Socrates to the Late Antique Athenian School of Neoplatonism’. In Finamore, J. and Wear, S. Klitenic (eds.), Defining Platonism. Essays in Honor of the 75th Birthday of John M. Dillon. Steubenville, OH: Franciscan University Press, 253–270.Google Scholar
Osborne, C. (1998). ‘Was Verse the Default Form for Presocratic Philosophy?’. In Atherton, C., (ed.), Form and Content in Didactic Poetry. Bari: Levante Editori, 23–35.Google Scholar
Ostenfeld, E. M. (2010). ‘The Psychology of the Philebus’. In Dillon and Brisson (2010), 307–312.Google Scholar
Owen, G. E. L. (1953). ‘The Place of the Timaeus in Plato’s Dialogues’. Classical Quarterly n. s. 3, 73–95.Google Scholar
Papandreou, M. (2024). Aristotle’s Ontology of Artefacts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781009340557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penner, T. (2007a). ‘What Is the Form of the Good the Form of? A Question about the Plot of the Republic?’. In Cairns, D., Herrmann, F. G., and Penner, T. (eds.), Pursuing the Good. Ethics and Metaphysics in Plato’s Republic. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 15–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penner, T. (2007b). ‘The Good, Advantage, Happiness and the Form of the Good. How Continuous with Socratic Ethics Is Platonic Ethics?’. In Cairns, Herrmann, and Penner (2007), 93–123.10.3366/edinburgh/9780748628117.003.0006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Politis, V. (2020). ‘Plato’s Seventh Letter. A Close and Dispassionate Reading of the Philosophical Section’. Classics Ireland 27, 56–77.Google Scholar
Reale, G. (1990). ‘Introduction. The “Italian Plato” of Hans Krämer’. In Krämer (1990), xvii–xxvi.Google Scholar
Reale, G. (1997). Toward a New Interpretation of Plato. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press.Google Scholar
Reale, G. (2010). Per una nuova interpretazione di Platone alla luce della ‘dottrine non scritte’. Milan: Bompiani.Google Scholar
Reale, G. and Antiseri, D. (2010). Historia de la filosofía I. De la Antigüedad a la Edad Media. Filosofía antigua-pagana. Barcelona: Herder.Google Scholar
Rist, J. M. (1962). ‘The Neoplatonic One and Plato’s Parmenides’. Transactions of the American Philological Association 93, 389–401.10.2307/283770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robin, L. (1908). Le théorie platonicienne des Idées et des Nombres d’après Aristote. Étude historique et critique. Paris: Alcan.Google Scholar
Rowe, C. J. (1986). ‘The argument and structure of Plato’s Phaedrus’. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society n.s. 32, 106–125.10.1017/S0068673500004843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowe, C. J. (2007). ‘The Form of the Good and the Good in Plato’s Republic’. In Cairns, Herrmann and Penner, (eds.), Pursuing the Good. Ethics and Metaphysics in Plato’s Republic. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 124–153.10.1515/9780748631889-009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowe, C. J. (2014). ‘Methodologies for Reading Plato’. In Oxford Handbooks Editorial Board, The Oxford Handbook of Topics in Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199935314.013.28.Google Scholar
Sayre, K. M. (2005). Plato’s Late Ontology. A Riddle Resolved. Las Vegas, NV: Parmenides.Google Scholar
Schleiermacher, F. (1804). Platons Werke von F. Schleiermacher, Volume I 1. Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Sedley, D. (2008). Creationism and Its Critics in Antiquity. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.10.1525/california/9780520253643.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, D. (2016). ‘An Introduction to Plato’s Theory of Forms’. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 78, 3–22.10.1017/S1358246116000333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, D. (2021). ‘Xenocrates’ Invention of Platonism’. In Erler, M., Heßler, J. E., and Petrucci, F. M. (eds.), Authority and Authoritative Texts in the Platonist Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 12–37.10.1017/9781108921596.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seel, G. (2007). ‘Is Plato’s Conception of the Form of the Good Contradictory?’. In Cairns, D., Herrmann, F. G., and Penner, T. (eds.), Pursuing the Good. Ethics and Metaphysics in Plato’s Republic. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 168–196.10.1515/9780748631889-011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shorey, P. (1903). The Unity of Plato’s Thought. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Smith, C. C. (2023). ‘The Senses of Apeiron in Philebus 16b–27c’. Méthexis 25, 167–184.10.1163/24680974-35010010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorabji, R. (2012). ‘Introduction’. In Simplicius. On Aristotle Physics 1.5–9. London: Bloomsbury, 1–12.Google Scholar
Steel, C. (2002). ‘A Neoplatonic Speusippus’. In Barbanti, M., Giardina, G. R., and Manganaro, P. (eds.), Hénosis Kaì Philía, Unione e Amicizia. Omaggio a Francesco Romano. Catania: Cooperativa universitaria editrice catanese di magistero, 469–476.Google Scholar
Strauss, L. (2000). On Tyranny. Including the Strauss–Kojève Correspondence. Gourevitch, V. and Roth, M. S. (eds.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Sung-hyun Yang, D. (2024). ‘Aristotle’s Critique of Form-Number’. Elenchos 45, 229–254.10.1515/elen-2024-0013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szlezák, T. A. (1985). Platon und die Schriftlichkeit der Philosophie. Interpretationen zu den frühen und mittleren Dialogen. Berlin: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110848762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szlezák, T. A. (2004). Das Bild des Dialektikers in Platons späten Dialogen. Platon und die Schriftlichkeit der Philosophie Teil II. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Szlezák, T. A. (2012a). ‘The Idea of the Good as Archē in Plato’s Republic’. In Nikulin (2012b), 121–142.Google Scholar
Szlezák, T. A. (2012b). ‘The Tübingen Approach’. In Press, G. A. (ed.), The Continuum Companion to Plato. London: Bloomsbury, 303–305.Google Scholar
Szlezák, T. A. (2019a). Aufsätze zur griechischen Literatur und Philosophie. Baden-Baden: Academia Verlag.10.5771/9783896658067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szlezák, T. A. (2019b). ‘Friedrich Schleiermachers’s Theory of the Platonic Dialogue and Its Legacy’. In Kim, A. (ed.), Brill’s Companion to German Platonism. Leiden: Brill, 165–191.Google Scholar
Szlezák, T. A. (2021). Platon. Meisterdenker der Antike. Munich: Beck.10.17104/9783406765285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, C. C. W. (2002). ‘The Origins of Our Present Paradigms’. In Annas, J. and Rowe, C. (eds.), New Perspectives on Plato. Modern and Ancient. Washington, DC: Center for Hellenic Studies, 73–84.Google Scholar
Trendelenburg, F. A. (1826). Platonis de ideis et numeris doctrina ex Aristotele illustrata. Leipzig: Vogel.Google Scholar
Vlastos, G. (1963). ‘Review of Arete bei Platon und Aristoteles by H. J. Krämer’. Gnomon 41, 641–655. Reprinted as ‘On Plato’s Oral Doctrine’. In Vlastos (1973), 379–398.Google Scholar
Wilamovitz-Moellendorff, U. von (1919). Platon. 2 vols. Berlin: Wiedmannsche Verlagsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
Wippern, J. ed. (1972). Das Problem der Ungeschriebene Lehre Platons. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.1 AA
The PDF of this Element
complies with version 2.1 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), covering newer accessibility requirements and improved
user experiences and achieves the intermediate
(AA)
level of WCAG compliance, covering a wider range of accessibility requirements.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
Visual Accessibility
Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Structural and Technical Features
ARIA roles provided
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.
This Element is free online from 22nd September 2025 - 6th October 2025