Institutionalization and anti-institutionalization of thought in the ancient world

通过这一研究，中田揭示了柏拉图和亚里士多德对哲学的几个重要概念的含义，以及这些含义在随后的哲学史上是如何变化的。例如，他揭示了，虽然柏拉图对逻各斯的重要使用被解释为“理性”，但它们实际上并不意味着这种个人的理性能力，而是“公共规范”。内山还指出，在亚里士多德看来，幻想或幻想是感官知觉的构成要素。此外，他还具体地追溯了这些基本概念的意义稳定化以及利用这些概念使思想制度化的历史过程。内山关注的是希腊哲学家的思想与表达形式之间的关系，并说明了早期希腊哲学家各自为表达自己的思想而创造了自己的写作风格。他还考察了柏拉图采用对话形式的原因，揭示了这种对话形式是柏拉图避免其哲学成为稳定的教条，同时又确保知识的客观性的积极方法。中端和内山相互审视对方的研究，内山指出柏拉图以前的哲学家都有意识地避免概念和学说的稳定化，中田证实了亚里士多德明确地阐述了一些概念和理论，并且这些概念和理论在随后的哲学史中进一步制度化和稳定化。

Through this research Nakahata reveals what several significant concepts of philosophy means to Plato and Aristotle, and how those meanings has changed in the subsequent history of philosophy. For example, he reveals that, although Plato's important uses of logos have been interpreted to mean "reason", they don't actually mean such individual's faculty of reason, but "public norm". He also argues that phantasia or imaginatio means to Aristotle a constitutive element of sense perception.Furthermore, he traces specifically the historical process of stabilization of these basic concepts' meanings, and of institutionalization of the thought using those concepts.Uchiyama focused on the relationship between the thoughts and the expression forms of Greek philosophers, and showed that each of early Greek philosophers respectively made up his original writing style to express his own thoughts. And he also examined the reason why Plato adopted the dialogue form, and revealed that this dialogue form was Plato's positive method to prevent his philosophy from being a stabilized dogma and to secure objectivity of knowledge at the same time.Nakahata and Uchiyama mutually examined each other's study, and while Uchiyama notes that philosophers up to Plato consciously avoided the stabilization of concepts and doctrines, Nakahata confirms that Aristotle explicitly formulated some concepts and theories, and that those concepts and theories had been further institutionalized and stabilized in the subsequent history of philosophy.