Institutionalization and anti-institutionalization of thought in the ancient world

通过这项研究，Nakahata揭示了几个重要的哲学概念对柏拉图和亚里士多德的意义，以及这些意义在随后的哲学史上是如何变化的。例如，他揭示，尽管柏拉图对逻各斯的重要用法被解释为“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”。他还认为幻觉或想象对亚里士多德来说是感官知觉的构成要素。此外，他还具体追溯了这些基本概念意义的稳定化以及使用这些概念的思想制度化的历史过程。内山着重分析了希腊哲学家的思想与表现形式之间的关系，并指出早期希腊哲学家各自形成了自己的原创写作风格来表现自己的思想。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防止其哲学成为一种稳定的教条，同时又保证了知识的客观性的积极方法。中畑和内山相互考察了对方的研究，内山指出，柏拉图之前的哲学家都有意识地避免概念和学说的稳定，而中畑则证实，亚里士多德明确地阐述了一些概念和理论，而这些概念和理论在随后的哲学史上进一步制度化和稳定下来。

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.