M. Luz Presocratics 10

Dr Menahem Luz,
Presocratic Philosophers
Summary 10
Sophists, Protagoras, Gorgias etc.

next Summary 11 (Socrates)
return to index of summaries
Contents

Sophists

background
ancient criticism
modern reassessment
sophist individuals

sophist figures
Protagoras of Abdera
Gorgias of Leontini
Hippias of Elis
Prodicus of Ceos
two surviving sophist documents
Dissoi Logoi
Anonymous Iamblichus

return to top

Sophists
background
The word 'sophist' (Greek: sophistes) comes from the roots sophia (= wisedom) + the suffix istes (= expert in). See tadpis p. 25 no. 1)
Its specific meaning refers to a group of wandering educators and teachers of wisdom and statesmanship who taught in various Greek cities during the 5th century BC.
although they had some very general features in common, they ascribed to no central authority -- i.e. they formed a movement not a school.
in general, the movement marks a renewed interest in society, ethics, teaching and the means of knowing, rather than the old Ionian examination of nature physis and the cosmological interests of previous thinkers
this is not to deny that several of the Prescoratics questioned society and ethics (e.g., Xenophanes, Democritus) and on the other hand, some sophists like Protagoras and Prodicus examined questions like the origin of man and the nature of the earth.
However there was a new, fresh emphasis in sophistic enquiry that was lacking in previous Presocratic thinkers
one of the questions of importance was: does excellence in society come from nature (a good family, or spontaneousl by nature) -- or by teaching and training. The first is examined in some anonymous sophist documents -- the last by Protagoras
return to top
ancient criticism of the movement
In non-philosophical Greek (comedy, speeches etc), it could be used to mean 'philosopher' (often in the negative sense in which the public regard philosophy).
But in Socrates, Plato and Aristotle it refers to a specific group of thinkers whom they contrasted with true philosophers.

Plato criticises them:
for being argumentative (in Greek they were eristikoi), i.e. arguing for the sake of argument -- and not interested in the search for truth (tadpis p. 25 no. 4)
of teaching in an authoritative rhetorical fashion (as opposed to Socrates' dialectic) -- i.e. they delivered their speech and did not answer questions
of denying the absolute value of morality;
of claiming to know what they did not.
Aristotle criticsed them:
of self-contradiction;
of shallowness of thought (tadpis p. 27 no. 14)
return to top
modern reassessment of the movement
A more positive assessment of the sophists' contribution to philosophy results from an impartial examination of their actual fragments.
As the sophists were a movement and not a school, they had no commitment to each other's opinions. One should thus criticise them on an individual basis rather than in general terms.
their commitment was to train the young to take part in political life and to achieve excellence (arete) in the state.
but since they taught in cities of differing constitutions, they were in principle willing to justify any type (democratic, oligarchic, tyrannic etc)
their methodology was by means of a sophisticated epideictic speeches -- an epideixis is a speech meant to show off the power of the lecturer to defend the most difficult of subjects and to persuade his audience of it.
their professionalism meant that they often charged for imparting knowledge and entrance to their lectures (see: tadpis p.25 no. 2, 4)
the aristocratic and new rich had money for their teaching
but since they were willing to educate anyone in principle, their philosophical arguments were more suited for democracy

return to top
sophist individuals
We have fragments only from the greatest and earliest sophists who all show their individualism

Protagoras (490-420 BC) espoused an early form of relativism and subjectivism. His main interest was in society and the individual.
Hippias of Elis was Protagoras' contemporary, but more interested in literature, history and art.
Gorgias (485-380 BC) went further than Protagoras: justice should be interpreted as the correct timing to do an action -- and the need to do it. His work included the art of persuasion and rhetoric and perhaps a philosophy of nihilism.
Prodicus of Ceos -- a contemporary of Socrates (469-399 BC) was much more conservative in contrasting absolute virtue with evil -- and was also interested in a philosophy of nature.

But there were many also minor sophists who copied them, some of whom are mentioned by Plato in his dialogues:
Thrasymachus (end of 5th century argued that justice should be dictated by strength of position in the state. Thrasymachus is described in Plato's Republic I.
Antiphon (end of 5th century) advocated a return to natural justice

By the 4th century BC, the great sophist age had ended. The general movement had developed into schools of rhetoric.
Some minor sophistic orators like Polycrates (440-370 BC) attacked Socrates' influence after his death, provoking a response from Plato and other pupils of Socrates.
Others like Isocrates (436-338 BC) were political orators who also spoke on education and opened schools of rhetoric in Athens
Later in the 2nd century AD, there was a sophist revival by professional orators and popular philosophers, known as the Second Sophistic.

return to top
Protagoras of Abdera (490-420 BC)
background
Abdera was also the home of Democritus the atomist.
Because of this the ancients mistakenly supposed that Protagoras was his pupil (tadpis p. 25 no. 2).
There is little in common between them except that both thought that every sensation was true qua (= in as much as) it is a physical sensation.

Around 444/443 BC, he drew up the constitution for the new colony of Thurii in south Italy As it was a pan-Hellenic colony founded by colonists from different cities with different types of constitutions, Protagoras gave it a mixed constitution suitable for its diversity (tadpis p. 25 no. 2) Such an act was in conformity with his philosophy of the conventionality of social justice. Justice is what is conventionally accepted as just by society.
As other sophists, he taught in various cities of Greece and Italy -- Plato describes his visit to Athens in his dialogue Protagoras (Heb. trans. Liebes, vol. 1) where he pesents his philosophy that all can learn statesmanship in a democracy.
the titles of his works are recorded (tadpis p. 25-26 no. 15) but very little is left of their actual content
Philosophy and Fragments
His work, They that Make a (Wrestling) Throw discussed

how to win an argument
the subjectivity and individuality of truth.

argumentation is based on equipollence:
to every argument (logos) there is a counter argument (anti-logos) (tadpis p. 27 no. 13, 11)
Protagoras was one of the first to develop the epideictic speech meant to persuade his audience that one can defend and attack the same theme successfully
a work influenced by Protagoras' philosophy is the Double Arguments (the Dissoi Logoi) -- social truth is persuasion of society -- it is obtained through rhetorical excellence (tadpis p. 27 no. 15)
this ability may be obtained by all if they are first given training and teaching(tadpis p. 27 no. 15)
Truth is subjective:
Man is the measure (metron) for all things (tadpis p. 25 no. 5) -- i.e., Man is both an attributive measure (that things are of such a quality) and an existential one -- that they exist (tadpis p. 26 no. 6)

for this he was criticised by Plato, Aristotle and the Sceptics
According to the sceptics Protagoras was not an actual sceptic since he had a criterium to judge things (Man is the measure)(tadpis p. 26-7 no 7-8)
According to Plato and Aristotle, Protagoras breaks the law of the excluded middle -- that an object can exist and not exist simultaneouly and have contrary qualities simultaneously (tadpis p. 27 no 9-10)

in addition
a new fragment -- probably of sceptic origin -- gives examples of Protagoras' idea of the subjective truth of existential and attributive descriptions of the world (tadpis p. 26 no 6)

The idea of Progress

Although he believed that individual truth was subjective and that social truths were conventional, Protagoras also believed in the progress of civilisation by means of endeavour, learning and training (tadpis p. 29 no 18)
the details are found in a number of literary texts that do not cite Protagoras by name (tadpis p. 29-30 no 19-20)
that man advances technologically and in the arts and sciences. Parallels may be found in the speeches attributed to Protagoras in Plato's dialogue Protagoras (Heb. trans. Liebes, vol. 1)
return to top
Gorgias of Leontini (in Sicily)(485-380 BC)

He wrote a number of epideictic speeches meant to show off his ability as a rhetorician to defend impossible themes.
His philosophy of reality is contained in the speech On Nothing In it, he extended Protagoras' subjectivism to include a form of nihilism
Nothing exists
even if it did, it would be impossible to understand
even if it were comprehensible, no one could teach it.
(tadpis pp. 32-33 no. 5)
It is possible that the whole speech is an unserious parody of Parmenides
but it could also be interpreted as an extension of Protagoras' subjectivism

His speech A Defense of Helen
Here he attempts to justify the actions of Helen of Troy in abandoning her husband, children and country in order to commit adultery and thus lead to a war in which many were killed because of her.
Part of his argument also relies on this philosophy that justice and morality are dictated by the correct hour (kairos) to do a deed -- and by expediency and needs (deon)
(tadpis p. 30-31 no. 3)
Plato attacked him for this philosophy in his dialogue Gorgias (Heb. trans. Liebes, vol. 1)
His speech A Defense of Palamedes
He defends the mythological hero, Palamedes, of the charge of treason
(tadpis p. 31 no. 4)
His denotative method of definition was attacked by Plato, but defended by Aristotle:

In Plato's Meno, Gorgias' type of definition overlooks the universal essence of virtue that Socrates wanted, but merely lists examples of it
(tadpis p. 30 no. 1)
His opening of the Defense of Helen uses this type of denotative list of defnitions to explain the concept of kosmos
(tadpis p. 30 no. 3) < /ul>
Aristotle prefers Gorgias method to that of Socrates
(tadpis p. 30 no. 2)
return to top
Hippias of Elis (contemporary of Protagoras (c. 490-420 BC)
In the dialogue Protagoras, Plato briefly describes Hippias' lecturing about nature, astronomy and the heavens.
He invents a fictitious conversation between Socrates and Hippias in the dialogue Hippias Minor on the subject of self-restraint.
The dialogue Hippias Major may not be genuine but contains a conversation between Socrates and Hippias on poetry
The education that he demanded was intended to produce an all round student
The anonymous composition, the Dissoi Logoi , also contains a section on Hippias' method of mnemonics (a method to remember parts of a speech)

return to top
Prodicus of Ceos (a contemporary of Socrates)
Socrates joked that he paid to attend one of Prodicus' cheaper lectures, but could not afford the more expensive longer ones. This may be a genuine reference to Prodicus' teaching in Socrates' youth or middle age
In Plato's Protagoras, reference is made to Prodicus' interest in the use of words and their exact meaning (On the Correctness of Names)
He may have given an account of the origins of religion
He also wrote an allegory on Hercules' choice between Virtue and Vice in a book called Seasons preserved in Xenopon's Reminiscences of Socrates ii.i.21-34 (Heb. trans. Simon)

return to top
Dissoi Logoi
Is an anonymous composition probably comosed by some student of sophistic work at the end of the 5th century
it uses the methodology of Protagoras, Gorgias and Hippias
(tadpis p. 28-29 no 16)
On Good and Evil: here the author contrasts Protagoras' relativistic (antilogical) approach to morality with (Socrates'?) absolute stand on morality
On Justic and Injustice: the author contrasts the same methods in relation to justice
On Wisdom and Excellence recalls some of Gorgias' arguments on the possibility of teaching and learning ability -- the author contrasts the sophists' approach in general with that of society
the same section also examines the origin of language in a way that may recall Protagoras or Prodicus
the final section examines a theory of mnemonics much like that of Hippias

return to top
Anonymous Iamblichus

This is another anonymous sophistic document but preserved in a quotation by the Neoplatonic writer Iamblichus
it examines what we need in order to achieve greatness: nature, learning and training.
(tadpis p. 29 no. 17)

return to top