This paper argues that Plato’s arguments at Cratylus 386e-390d are more robustly analogical than is generally supposed. Accordingly, it first establishes the nature of the main analogues (cutting and burning, boring, and shuttling). It then demonstrates the argument’s underlying structural relation (that, through their destructive or divisive nature, these analogues create), extending it to the target domain (names) and to Socrates’ chosen method for evaluating that domain (i.e., etymologizing).

Ancient Philosophy | History of Philosophy