Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

52
7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 1/52 Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Master's Teses Teses and Dissertations 1939 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato  Jeremiah J. O'Callaghan  Loyola University Chicago Tis Tesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Teses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Teses by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact[email protected] . Tis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Aribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 1939 Jeremiah J. O'Callaghan Recommended Citation O'Callaghan, Jeremiah J., "Sophists and Sophistry in Plato" (1939).  Master's Teses. Paper 671. hp://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses/671

Transcript of Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

Page 1: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 1/52

Loyola University Chicago

Loyola eCommons

Master's Teses Teses and Dissertations

1939

Sophists and Sophistry in Plato Jeremiah J. O'Callaghan Loyola University Chicago

Tis Tesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Teses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in

Master's Teses by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please [email protected].

Tis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Aribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.

Copyright © 1939 Jeremiah J. O'Callaghan

Recommended CitationO'Callaghan, Jeremiah J., "Sophists and Sophistry in Plato" (1939). Master's Teses. Paper 671.hp://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses/671

Page 2: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 2/52

SOPHISTS AND SOPHISTRY IN PLATO

BY

JEREMIAH J. 0 'CALLAGHAN, S. J.

A TIIESIS

SUJ31IITTED TO THE G I U ~ D U . \ T E "B,ACULTY

OF LOYOIJ.L . UNIV:.i;HSITY, CHICAGO

IN PARTIAL F l J L F I L L M . i ~ . N T OF rrHE

R E C ~ U I R T ; ] · : . E ~ ' ~ T S FOR THE DEGICE OF

JUNE, 1939

Page 3: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 3/52

T ~ - - ; . B L E OF CONTENTS

Chapter

I . A JUSTIFIC .>.TION OF THE J?ROSOPOGRAPHIC AP:FROACH

I I .

I I I .

IV.

v.

TO THE PLATONIC DIALOGUESPurpose of ThesisContribution

0 • • • • • • • • • •

Method of Procedure

'RESUiviB.: OF 'Y.dE RI3E OF THE SOPHISTS • •Philosophical and Pol i t ical BackgroundNegative ApproachPositive Arproach

. . .PROT)J..GORitS • • • • • • • • • • •

From an Exoteric Point of ViewFrom an Esoteric Point of ViewPositive Merits

• • • • 0 • •

As a Typical SophistPlato 's Str icturesSummary View

G O R G L ~ S o • • • • • •

Gracious TreatmentThe RhetoricianThe SophistHis ApologySurm:nary View

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

FRODICUS • • • • •Rhetorician r ~ l u sPraise

• • • • 0 • 0 • • • • • • •

Censure

Summary View

Page

1

5

9

17

24

VI. HIPPD\.S ••••••••••• o •••• o ••• 31Hostile TreatmentThe Typical SophistRange of His KnowledgeVanitySummary View

Page 4: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 4/52

..

Chapter

VII . FLiTO 1 S CP.ITICISM OF SOPHISTRY .ri.3 A ' ~ U " ' ' " S I -

PHILOSOPHY • • • • • • • • • • • • • •.i1.S a Philosophy in the Str ic t SenseAs a Philosophy of Life

• • • •

1->.PPENDIX • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •Objectivity of }la to ' s Por t ra i tCriter ia for Historical Evidence

BIBLIOGHAPHY • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Page

40

45

Page 5: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 5/52

Chapter I .

A Just i f icat ion of the Prosopographic Appraach to the

Platonic Dialogues.

The purpose of th is thesis has been part ial ly expressed

a scholar of another century in these words, "veterum

populorum meditandis, ad ant iqui tat is , u t i ta dicam,

penetrare."1 More explic i t ly , i t intends revealing

e mind of Plato in regard to four Sophists, Protogoras, Gor-

Prodicus, and Hippias; his descriptive crit icism of

philosophy, and his cri t icism of Sophistry as a quasi-

Though the Sophists are frequently studied as

this study will inquire into their philosophy

in so fa r as it i s embodied in the man. I t is important

note, as a special character is t ic of th is thesis , that i t s

of information wil l be the dialogues of Plato; any

concerning these men which may have been derived from

sources or authors wil l resolutely be put aside.

Two defini te and outstanding gains should be made by such

study. In the f i r s t place, the Sophists, as men who have

a vivid path in history, are in terest ing and even

people. Men disagree as to what we should cal l

teachers, journal is ts , mountebanks, apostles of l ibera l

i t will be in terest ing to see them, "non

nobis, posteris suis , videri voluerunt, sed quales

aequalium existimatori vis i sunt, velut i in scenam

prodeuntes."3 Secondly, to those who are interested

Page 6: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 6/52

2

in the world of Plato, this study wil l have the special ad

vantage of enlarging the i r view of the Platonic world and i t s

problems. Just as we should l ike to vis i t the places where

Plato and his companions held forth in disputation, roam the

hallowed grounds of the academy, and drink in the environment

that fed the mind of Plato, so we should l ike to be able to

read the dialogues of Plato, co-thinkers with Plato, in so far

as this i s possible. This study should enable us to come a

l i t t l e closer to Plato 's mind, for we wil l be able to think of

some of his fr iends and enemies as he thought of them.

The question natural ly arises , in how far does Plato

paint adcurate character portra i ts , and how close can we come

to Plato 's mind? The answers to both of these questions are

disputed. Grote, Sidgwick, Zeller , Burnett, and Shorey dis

agree among themselves.4 As Shorey points out, a look a t

Diels 's Fragmenten der Vorsokratiker shows that most of our

knowledge of the Sophists is derived from Plato 's dramatic

pictures of their conversations with Socrates. Since Plato 's

word-pictures of the Sophists are heavily colored with sat i re ,

i t i s diff icu l t to t e l l when we are seeing the true characters

of the Sophists in question, and when we are reading Plato 's

honest estimate of the i r character. This much, however, seems

c l e a ~ ; i t seems much more natural , and much more in harmony wit

Pla to ' s t ru thful character, to argue that he painted his

characters as he real ly saw them. In other words, even i f we

Page 7: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 7/52

3

are gett ing only Plato 's view of these men, and, consequently,

possibly a prejudiced view, a t leas t we do see them as Plato

saw them. Further, we should bear in mind that the point of

this thesis is not purely objective, that i s , i t does not

attempt precisely to determine the subjects ' characters as

they actual ly were, but rather the i r characters as they were

imaged in the mind of Plato . In l ine of importance, then, i t

seeks primarily to learn more about Plato, secondarily to

learn more about the Sophists.

The method of inquiry is very simple. Firs t the Sophists

are introduced; we are told who they were and how the i r type

happened on the fifth-cdntury Greek scene. Then we are given

Plato 's vignettes of Protagoras, Gorgias, Prodicus, and Hippias.

Finally, the thesis is summarized with a review of Plato 's

cri t icism of Sophistry as a quasi-philosophy.

Page 8: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 8/52

1.

2.

Notes to Chapter I .

Van Prinsterer, Platonica P r o s o p o g r a ~ h i a , p.2.

Zeller, Outlines of Greek Philosophy, p. 91; Jackson,

Encyclopedia Brit tanica, ar t . "Sophists", p. 420; Gomperz,Greek Thinkers, ch. on Sophists; L e c l ~ r e , La PhilosophieGracque Avant Socrate, p. 111; Shorey, Vfuat Plato Said,pp. 14-15.

Van prins terer , loc. c i t .- - -There are pointed bibliographical comments on Sophisticl i terature in Henry Jackson's excellent ar t ic le in theBrit tanica on the Sophists; in Shorey, loc. c i t . ; and inLeclere, ~ · c i t . , pp. 125-126. - - - - - -

Page 9: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 9/52

5

Chapter I I .

t

A Resume of the Rise of the Sophists.

From the beginning of the f i f th century, there began to

prevai l among the Greeks certain views the dissemination of

which af ter some decades wrought an important change in the

manner of thought of the cultured circles and in the tendency

of scient if ic l i f e . These views were the legitimate offspring

of a cr i s i s in philosophy. The materialism of the Atomists,

the idealism of the Eleat ics, and the doctrine of universql

change, which was a tenet of the School of Heracl i tus--al l

these tendencies resulted in a condition of unrest, out of

which philosophy could not advance to a more sat isfactory s ta te

unt i l an enquiry was made into the problem of the value of

knowledge. This rest lessness of sp i r i t , however, must also

be attr ibuted to the general development of Greek national

l i f e . The greater and more rapid was the progress of universal

culture since the Persian War in the whole of Hellas, and above

a l l in Athens, which was now the center of i t s in te l lec tua l and

pol i t ica l l i fe , the more did the necessity of a special prep

arat ion for pol i t ica l act ivi ty assert i t s e l f in regard to those

who desired to dist inguish themselves; the more completely vic

torious democracy gradually se t aside a l l the l imits which

custom and law had hitherto placed to the wil l of the sover

eign people, and the more br i l l ian t the prospects thus opened

to anyone who could win over the people to himself, the more

Page 10: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 10/52

valuable and indispensable must have appeared the instruct ion,

by means of which a man could become an orator and popular

leader. This peculiar state of the national l i fe and the

chaotic state of philosophy gave rise to a new class of men,

the Sophists.1

The Sophists did not propose a solution to the Question

of the aptitude of the mind for t ruth and the cr i ter ion of

t ruth and cert i tude. They did focus at tent ion on the problem.

The Sophists may be called the f i r s t sceptics2

and it is be-

cause we have sceptics that we have evolved a system of

epistemology. This might be considered a negative approach to

an understanding of the Sophists. Posit ively, i t was the Sophists

who announced themselves ready to rain men for eminence in

private and civi l l i fe .3

Various Sophists used various means

to achieve this end. Some, l ike Protagoras, used grammar,

style, poetry and oratory. This t raining resembled a higher

education supplementing the ordinary t raining in music and

gymnastics with which the older Greeks had contented themselves.

Other Sophists l ike Hippias of Elis , widened the range of

instruct ion, including scient i f ic and techinical subjects, but

handling them, and teaching their pupils to handle them in a

popular way. Gorgias of Leontini brought the Sophists a new

tool from Sicily, where the technical study of rhetor ic-

especially forensic rhetor ic-- had reached a degree of prefec

t ion. The teaching of the Sophists had posit ive merit; i t re-

cognized

Page 11: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 11/52

.and to some extent undertook to supply the demands of a l ibera l

7

l i terary education. I t i s also reasonable to assume that the

program of the Sophists as extended by men l ike Hippias, had

not a l i t t l e to do with the development of that versa t i l i ty

which was so notable an element of the Greek character.

Counterbalancing these merits, the teaching of the Sophists

had one outstanding, regret table defect, i t s indifference to

t ruth.4 We wil l not say that the Sophists were the foes of

t ruth, though some of them did not hesi ta te a t times to sacra-

fice the t ruth to their own ends, but the dialogues of Plato

make i t quite clear that the Sophists were guil ty of shameful

indifference to the t ruth.

I t wil l be suff ic ient for our purposes i f we note two

facts . Firs t , the Sophists, though they did not consti tute

a school of philosophers, were philosophers of a sort , and

were philosophers of the same school in so far as they a l l had

a sceptical at t i tude, refusing to give credence to any philo-

sophical system of their predecessors, and scept ical of pro-

posing any system themselves. Second, they were educators,

supplementing the ordinary Greek education with a higher educat on

in a grand diversi ty of subjects. Plato would natural ly be in

terested in these men who were quasi-philosophers and rea l

educators. 'v've proceed now to a ful ler description of the

Sophists, together with a cri t icism of thei r philosophical te -

nets and thei r pedagogy, as we read of them in the dialogues

of Plato.

Page 12: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 12/52

1.

2.

Notes to Chapter I I .

Cf. Jackson, Encyclopedia Brit tanica, ar t . "Sophists";Shorey, Vfuat Plato Said, pp. 14-15; Zeller, Outlines ofGreek Philosophy, p. 91.

Cf. Turner, History of Philosophr, ch. on Sophists .

Vf. Protagoras, 318.D-319.A.

8

Cf. Protagoras, 331.0, 336.0; Theaetetus, 152.A; Gorgias,459.0; Phaedrus, 26?.A; Greater Hippias, 288.A, 298.B.

Page 13: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 13/52

9

Chapter I I I .

Protagoras

Of the four Sophists to be t reated in th is thesis , the

f i r s t on the scene i s Protagoras, "qui Sophistarum duxit ag

men".1 According to Plato 's Athenian standards Protagoras was

a foreigner, a ci t izen of Abdera. Among the Greek people in

general, whether in Athens or abroad, he was held the wisest

of thei r generation.2

In fact this reputation for wisdom and

his abi l i ty to teach i t to others so captivated the Greek

mind, that the th r i l led Hippocrates did not hesitate to rouse

Socrates from sleep a t early dawn to announce the exciting

news of Protagoras' advent to the ci ty .3

In the narration of

this incident Plato gives us a vivid picture of ~ h e grip tha t

the sophisims of Protagoras had on the Greek mind, and the

consequent reputation for wisdom and cleverness tha t he enjoyed

among the generali ty of the Greeks. Plato, however, did not

subscribe to th is popular opinion. Though he does not say so

in so many words, s t i l l the br i l l i an t Platonic sat i re reveals

his rea l mind. I t is quite clear that Plato i s giving us Pro-

tagoras ' reputation for wisdom as it actual ly flourished among

the Greeks, not as Plato himself would have i t .

The esteem Protagoras enjoyed among the Greeks as a

general run vvas but an echo of the reverence he received from

his own disciples. These men, who were from various ci t ies

and had l e f t whatever calling they had in order to follow him,

Page 14: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 14/52

10

hung on Protagorast l ips and dogged his footsteps. "He en-

chants them with his voice l ike Opheus, while they follow

where the voice sounds, enchanted."4 In an admirable l i t t l e

passage in the Protagoras, Plato describes these spellbound

disciples when he pictures a scene in which Protagoras is

s trol l ing along while he discourses, with his pupils t ra i l ing

af ter him, eager to be as close to him as possible, yet

cautious l e s t they come to close and coll ide with him should

he make a sudden stop. "As for me," narrates Socrates, "I

was delighted with the admirable care they took not to hinder

Protaros a t any monent by gett ing in front; but whenever

the master turnedabout and those with him, i t was fine to see

the orderly manner in which his t ra in of l i s teners sp l i t up

into two part ies on this side and on that , and reeling round

formed up again each time in his rear most admi.rably." 5 I t

seems that here Plato shows a mild rancor over an adulation

shovm to Protagoras, and an adulation of more modest proportion

than that shown la ter to Plato himself by the humanists of the

I tal ian Renaisance.

Protagoras was not a ret i r ing genius. He had no mean

estimation of his own gif ts and vms confident of his abi l i ty

to teach others vir tue.6

He l iked to make a display before

people, reveled in their applause, and gave himself ai rs on

the personal attachment shown by his followers.? All of which

leads us to pidture Plato 's Protagoras as a man who had

Page 15: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 15/52

11

achieved a reputation far beyond his deserts , and one who was

vain of his false repute.

Plato gives some reasons to account for Protagoras ' fame.

8

He t e l l s us that Protagoras was a very clever speaker. Even

Socrates seems to admit Protagoras' mastery of speech. In

fact , though Protagoras i s made to pause at times by Socrates '

questionings, he proves himself an adroi t disputant, seldom

a t a loss for words, and a t times star t l ingly clever.9 So

that there appears to have been some reason why r·rotagoras

yielded to no man in abi l i ty to argue, or in understanding

the interchange of reason.10

Plato merely hints a t the breadt

of Protagoras 's knowledge when he instances his knowledge of

the poets, a knowledge which Protagoras considered of the

greatest importance. 11

In general, however, Protagoras owed h is fame to the fact

that he was a Sophist.12

Plato complains that i t is diff icu l t

to say jus t what a Sophist i s .13 He pictures him as "a sor t

of merchant or dealer in provisions on which the soul is

nourished, hawking them about to any odd purchaser who may

desire them."14 Though Protagoras knew that there were many

who blushed to admit that theywere Sophists and t r ied to oon-

ceal the fact by various subterfuges, 13 he himself enlarges

complacently on his own frank practice of openly avowing his

possibly invidious profession, even being the f i r s t to chrage

a fee for his services.16

Protagoras seemed to convey to his

Page 16: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 16/52

12

followers the exalted view he himself had of Sophistry. He

made i t out an ancient ar t , and many famous men he claimed

were Sophists, e .g . , Homer, Hesiod, and Simonides.17

Some of

his followers came to him with the intention of becoming pro-

fessional Sophists, others came for a more generic education;

they watned to become clever speakers, quick ra ther than deep. 1

Protagoras claimed that he could teach them what they wanted.

He said tha t he improved both the old and the young through

association with himself. He thought that among a l l the Sophis s

he alone had the correct method--he did not teach his followers

arithmetic, astronomy, geometry, and music, but "good judgment

in the i r own affar is , showing a man how best to order his own

home; and in the affa i rs of the city showing how he may have

most influence on public affa i rs , both in speech and in action. •19

In a word, he taught them to be good ci t izens.

Plato did not concede to Protagoras a l l of the vir tues

with which he considered himself possessed. He admitted he

was clever in speaking, well versed in the subt let ies of argu

mentation. He denied Protagoras' abi l i ty to teach men to be

d i t. 20 . . 1 h d"d t d • t th t . t

oo c 1zens,s1nce 1n genera

e 1no

am1

av1r ue

was teachable. Even as regards his clever-ness a t speech and

argumentation Plato had a blighting word to say. He said

that compared to Prodicus, a t l eas t , Protagoras was not expert

t d . t• . h" d 21 I t• 1 h d"d t t1s 1ngu1s 1ng war s . n par 1cu ar, e 1 no seem o

22distinguish between a discussion and a harangue. In fact

Page 17: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 17/52

13

Protagoras' prol ixi ty in argumentation was quite a t r a i l to

Plato. "He spins out a lecture on each question--beating off

the arguments, refusing to give a reason, and so dilat ing un

t i l most of the hearers have forgotten the point a t issue.n 23

Protagoras' long-winded answers, evasive repl ies , and childish

vanity jarred the smooth, polished, philosophic mind of Plato.

Yet, since he knew that Protagoras was resentful i f his ig

norance was manifested, Plato had to feed his vanity i f the

discussion was to be continued.24 He realized that Protagoras

was too vain to care much for the ideas of others; a defect he

manifested when he patronishingly approved Socrates ' zeal in

argumentation, declaring that he himself was neither i l l -

natured nor envious.25

Finally, Protagoras showed a certain levity of mind in the

way in which he boasted that he did not even bother to consider

whether the gods existed or not, excluding them from a l l dis

cussion, oral or \vritten.26

There was not much room for the

gods in Protagoras's scheme of l i f e , for man was for him the

measure of a l l things.27

This was a less blatant way of saying

that for Protagoras, Protagoras was the measure of a l l things.The existence of the gods would only complicate the case.

The Frotagoras which Flato portarys for us, then, i s on

the other hand a thoroughly talented man, versed in many

branches of learning, clever a t discourseand argumentation,

and with a certain charm of manner. On the other hand Pro-

toagoras

Page 18: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 18/52

14

had the defects of a Sophist, a levi ty and t r ickery of the min

and a lack of prolonged ser ious purpose, combined with a

scarcely pardonable vanity. This is the Protagoras which the

f if th-century mind of Plato reveals to us.

Page 19: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 19/52

Notes to Chapter I I I .

1. Platonica Prosopographia, p. 79.

2. Protagoras, 309.D; Theaetetus, 160.D; Meno, 91.E.

3. Protagoras ·309 .E.

4• Protagoras, 315.A.

5· Protagoras, 314.E - 315.A; cf. Republic, 6oO.B.

6. Protagoras, 316.D.

l-5

7• Cf., Protagoras, 317.C, 320.C, 328.B; Theaetetus, 179.A.

8. Protagoras, 310.E, 320.D, 328.D; Phaedrus, 267.c.

9. Protagoras, 350.c, 339.E.

10. Protagoras, 336.c.

11. Protagoras, 339.A, 352.D.

12. Protagoras, 3ll .E.

13. Protagoras, 312.D.

14. Protagoras, 313.C, D.

15. Protagoras, 312.A.

16. Protagoras, 316.B, 328.B.

17. Protagoras, 316.c, D, E.

18. Protagoras,. 315.A, 312.B, D.

19. Protagoras,318.D - 319.A.

20. Protagoras, 3lO.D, 319.B.

21. Protagoras, 341.A.

22. Protagoras, 336.A.

23. Protagoras, 336.c.

24. Protagoras, 329.C.

Page 20: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 20/52

16

£5. Protagoras, 361.E.

26. Theaetetus, 162. E.

27. Theaetetus, 152. A, et passim.

Page 21: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 21/52

17

Chapter IV.

Gorgias

Our dramatist gives Gorgias of Leontini a much more

gracious entrance than that accorded to Protagoras. As pro

fessor Shorey points out, "The discussion with Gorgias is

conducted in terms of s t r i c t courtesy. Instead of the con

troversy in the Protagoras, a studiously poli te and cautious

appeal from Socrates induces Gorgias to substi tute the method

of brief question and answer, in which he also claims to ex

cel l , for the long speeches to which he i s more accustomed."l

Gorgias appears to have been amiable and fr iendly, and in

pleasant contrast to the quick-tempered Polus he i s wise and

gentlemanly. He shows consideration for his l is teners , l e s t

the conversation prove tedious to them, and for his fellow

isputants he plays the part of the mild-mannered peacemaker,

the o il of tact on the turbulent waters of the dis-

. 2c u s s ~ o n .

Generally when Plato speaks of Gorgias he refers to his

as a rhetorician. This is Gorgias' t i t l e to fame, and

f this t i t l e he enjoys a master 's pride. He boasts that he

s not only a rhetorician, but a good rhetorician as such he

be addressed. Plato has Prodicus, no mean rhetorician

t e l l us, "I have often heard Gorgias constantly main

that the a r t of persuasion surpasses a l l others; for th is ,

said, makes a l l things subject to i t se l f , not by force, but

Page 22: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 22/52

18

bY the i r free wil l , and i t is by far the best of the ar ts ."3

This was too much for Plato, so that he had Socrates parody

Gorgias' sublime notions about rhetoric.4 Evidently Gorgias'

eye was single, and his singlemess of purpose meant being a goo

rhetorician, with the profi ts consequent upon th is achievement.

As a resul t , nearly everything Plato has to t e l l us is some-

thing in reference to Gorgias, the rhetorician par excellence.

Gorgias could regale a crowd with such a feast of words

that they would s i t for hours l i s tening to his lengthy dis-

courses, heavy with Gorgian features and affectat ions. After

such a t rea t the speaker dared to run a question-box, le t t ing

his hearers heckle him with questions on any subject . Such

an invitat ion would undoubtedly bring forth numerous diff icu l t

questions from the ar t fu l Greeks. Nevertheless, Gorgias

maintained that no one had asked him anything new for many

years. This i s really no slur on the ingenuity of the Greeks,

because Gorgias was not noted for any scrupuleousness in

sticking to the point . Rather, his discourse was generally

lengthy and in tr icate enough to lose his ihterragator in a

labyrinth of words, so that his rhetoric served him as a cloak

with which to hide his ignorance of the other ar t s .5

His genious for rhetoric gained for Gorgias both a name

and a l ivelihood. 6 "Gorgias, the Sophist frlDm Leontini,"

recounts Socrates, "came here from home in the public capacity

of envoy, as being best able of a l l the cit izens of Leontini

Page 23: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 23/52

19

to attend to the interes ts of the community, and i t was the

general opinion that he spoke excellently in the public as-

sembly, and in his prive capacity; by giving exhibitions and

associating with the young, he earned and received a great

deal of money from this ci ty."? Plato t e l l s us that even he

gave the Thessalians, who of old were famous and admired among

the Greeks for the i r r iding and the i r r iches, a name for

wisdom. ttFor this you have to thank Gorgias," he explains,

"for when he came to that ci ty he made the leading men of the

Aleudae and the Thessalians generally enamoured of wisdom.

Nay more, he has given you the regular habit of answering any

chance question in a fearless, magnificent manner, as befi ts

those who know; for he sets the example of offering himself

to be questioned by any Greek who chooses, and on any point

one l i ~ e s , and he has an answer for everybody." 8 He was able,

besides, to e l ic i t from the cautious Socrates himself the en-

viable name of Nestory.9 This is praise from one who was not

t one with Gorgias' views. Even so, Socrates gives credit

here credit is due, and i f he has any faul t to find with

orgias, i t is not because Gorgias is deficient in his chosen

fei ld; on the contrary, he had attained a disastrous proficienc •

Plato has Socrates t e l l us various things about Gorgias

did not l ike or with which he disagreed.10

In general

was a foe of the Sophists, and he frequently puts Gorgias

the i r number. Plato knew that Gorgias insisted tha t

Page 24: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 24/52

he should not be called a Sophist but ra ther a rhetorician.

Plato dismisses the dist inct ion, "Sophist and orator," he

says, "are the same thing, or very much of a piece.n11

20

Further, Plato denied that Gorgias could make any one a rhetor-

ician. Even i f he should succeed Plato would consider the

pupil to have acquired a very unenviable ta len t . He says

that the rhetorician uses his a r t to mask his ignorance. Just

as a lazy man might use fancy garments to give shape 1 and

comliness to his body, instead of t raining i t by gymnastics,

so the rhetorician cloaks his ignorance with al lur ing figures

of speech, paying no heed to rea l i ty , but only to appearances.

In th is vein he says, "Gorgias saw that probabil i t ies are more

to be esteemed than t ruths; he makes small things seem great

nd grea&tthings small by the power of his words, and new

things old and old things the reverse, and he invented con-

ciseness of speech and measurless length on a l l subjects." 12

though he admits that Gorgias has a more pleasant

of t raining those about him, gorging them with abun-

of nice things of every sor t , s t i l l he is confident

hat only by his own diff icu l t method of a s t r i c t discipl ine

f the Tiind wil l the young men of Athens b ~ made good ci t izens.

while the f lat tery of Gorgias, for so Plato denominates

is rhetoric, wil l bring the applause of the crowd, the

draughts of Socrates ' logic wil l be swallowed with

s t i l l , only the s te rner regimen wil l fashion good

Page 25: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 25/52

cit izens, imbued with the t ruth and wary of appearances.

Gorgias does not suffer the s t r ic tures of Socrates

without a word in his own defense.13 He wil l not admit that

he is a Sophist unless a dist inct ion i s drawn. He i s not of

the number of those who trap the i r fellovv-s with the snares of

an insidious logic . Nor does he heedlessly promise to teach

21

others vir tue . We read in the Meno: Socrates, "Well, and what

of the Sophists? Do you consider these, wisdoms only professor ,

to be teachers of virtue?" Meno repl ies , "That i s the point,

socrates, for which I a d ~ t r e Gorgias; you vnll never hear him

promising th is , and he r idicules others when he hears them

promise i t . Ski l l in speaking i s what he takes it to be the i r

business to produee.n14 Gorgias purposes to teach men to per-

suade with speeches. Since he maintains that "virtue i s the

power of governing rnanldnd, nl5 he wil l teach virtue incidental

because it wil l be the rhetorician who will have the power of

swaying the minds of his fellow men. Gorgias himself deprecate

the evi l use of rhetoric , but says logically enough that we

should blame the individual person not the a r t .16

His own de-

fense i sweak,

it bogs dovm a ta very

importantpoint, for he d es

not show how in h is own speech his ar t i s but a medium not a

substitute for his thought. This is a weakness which Socrates

made pungently clear, for in the Gorgias, our friend is abashed

when tricked into a contradiction by Socrates ' rhetoric . l7

Page 26: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 26/52

22

v'fuen we review Plato 's port ra i t of Gorgias we find that he

considered him a poli te , considerate gentleman, ever mindful

of the convenience of his l is teners and the personal feelings

of his opponents in debate. His sk i l l in polished i f flowery

speech is unmatched by the Greeks of his time. In paying

tr ibute to the splendor of Gorgias' speech he does not intend

to say that it was remarkable for content. Rather he censures

Gorgias for the shallowness of his art--point ing out a t the

same time the answer to such censure, "blame the a r t i s t not the

ar t" . He places Gorgias in the damning category of Sophist ,

and wil l not l i s ten to Gorgias' contention that a dist inction

must be drawn between the Sophist and orator . Plato, evidently,

was firmly convinced that the sk i l l which Gorgias had to teach

would only prove an instrument of undoing in the hands of the

.a.thenian youth. In general, Plato 's Gorgias proves to be the

Gorgias of history.

Page 27: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 27/52

z.

6.

8.

Notes to ~ Chapter 2£ Gorgias.

Shorey, ~ m a t Plato Said, p . 134.

Cf. Gorgias, 447.B, C, 461.0, 506.B.

Philebus, 58.A.

Cf. Gorgias, 449.A, C, 448.D, 449.0, 456,A & B.

Cf. Gorgias, 447,A. C, 448,A. 457.E, 458.B, C, 466.B,459.C; Symposium, 198.c.

Apology, 19.E; Theages, 128.A.

Greater Hippias, 282.B

Meno, 70.B

Fhaedrus, 26l.C.

10. Cf. Gorgias, 458.E, 463.A, B, 513.A, 52l.D, E, 522.A;Meno, 73.c, 76.c.

11. Gorgias, 520.A.

12. Phaedrus, 267.A.

13. Cf. Gorgias, 520.A, 452.E, 457.A, B, C, 494.D.

14. ~ ' 95.C.

15. liieno, 73.0.

16. Gorgias, 457.A, B, c.

17. Gorgias, 494.D.

23

Page 28: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 28/52

Chapter v.

Prodicus

In an exposition of Plato 's portra i t of Frodicus of Ceos

one could easily be guil ty of over-simplif ication. I t is t rue

that by far the greater number of references to Prodicus in the

dialogues have to do with Prodicus the genius for synonyms.

Nevertheless, i t i s possible in a number of instances in the

dialogues to glimpse Prodicus the man. Witness this b i t where-

in Socrates discovers in the Protagoras that Prodicus is among

those present. ~ a y more, Tantalus also did I there behold,

for you know Prodicus of Ceos is in Athens too: he was in a

certain apartment formerly used by Hipponicus as a strong-room,

but now cleard out by Callias to make more space for his

numerous vis i tors , and turned into a guest-chamber. Well,

Prodicus was s t i l l abed, wrapped up in sundry fleeces and rugs,

and plenty of them too, i t seeme.d. ,l A scholar of the early

nineteenth century, comrnenting on this passage, has this obser

vation to make: "Plato cer t de ipsius moribus non honorifice

sensit •••• mollem eum et voluptarium fuisse, idem, neque admo-

dum obscure, indicavit . Porro non sine causa ••• suspicatur

appellations Tantali hominis tangi avarit iam."2

Appealing to

another passage he defends th is l a s t statement: "Nam avarus

profecto fui t , cuius interiores doctrinae recessus nonnisi

grandi soluta pecunia patebant; quamvis, ne sci l ice t ullam quaes us

faciendi rationem omitteret , mediocrem mediocris ins t i tu t ionis

Page 29: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 29/52

25

mercedem statuebat .n 3 He refers to the following passage in th

Cratylus: "Now i f i had attended Prodicus' fifty-drachma o

course of lectures, af ter which, as he himself says, a man has

complete education on this subject, there would be nothing to

hinder your learning the t ruth about the corrections of names

at once; but I have heard only the one-drachma course, and so

I do not know what the t ruth is about such n:a t t e rs . n4 Vvhether

or not we agree entire ly with the interpretat ion of Plato w h ~ c hwe have given above, i t does seem Plato means us to know that

Prodicus was not of the "daily dozen school". Whether because

of ill health or because of a very human degree of laziness,

Prodicus was one to enjoy a certain physical snugness. And

while we are speaking of the very human side of Prodicus, we

might mention that as Plato describes him he was not altogether

of a sense of humor, or l eas t he had a gentlemans'

knack for smoothing over a rough si tuat ion, for more than once

Plato mentions Prodicus laughing.5

Vve do have to be cautious in saying that Plato would have

us believe that Prodicus was guil ty of avarice. The reference

to Tantalus may well have been a mock serious and mock epicr ~ n n e r of introducing a Sophist who enjoyed a reputation beyond

his deserts . St i l l i t is quite true that Plato was annoyed

that Prodicus should demand a fee for his instructions and he

indicates that Prodicus made no mean prof i t . He te l l s us: "He

received a marvelous sum of money •

his

• • earning more money from

"6

Page 30: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 30/52

26

plato was piqued a t seeing the young men pay a grateful fee to

prodicus when they could learn from others free of charge.

"He is so wise that he goes to our ci t ies and persuades the

noblest and weatthiest of our young men - - who have the choice

of learning from any cit izen they choose, free of charge - - he

persuades them to abandon that instruction and learn from him,

with a deposit , besides, of a large sum of money as his fee,

and to feel thankful in addit ion."? According to Plato 's mind,

Prodicus' pupils were paying fon something that would do them

more harm than good.

Plato gives us reason to believe that he did not altogethe

disapprove of Prodicus ' teaching, because in a number of places

. 8Socrates is also called the pupil of Prod1cus. I t i s reason-

able to suppose that he would admit Prodicus' dictum, "Firs t

of a l l you have to learn about the correct use of words." 9

This would be a logical point ilif departure in any system of

pedagogy. In the Theaetetus Socrates, the midwife of thought,

te l l s his l i s tener that he did not hesitate to send some pupils

to Prodicus - - pupils who did not seem to respond to the

Socratic method. "But in some cases, Theaetetus, when I see

that they have no need of me, I act with perefect good-will as

a match-maker, and, under God, I guess very successfully with

whom they can associate profi tably, and I have handed over many of

them to Prodicus, and many to other wise men."10

We cannot

imagine Socrates sending any one to a teacher whose methods he

Page 31: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 31/52

27

repudiated.

I t may be a doubtful compliment, but this much may be said

of Prodicus and his methods, he was a pupular success. In a

private way we note this in the Protagoras where we see that

Prodicus had a circle of his ovvn within the larger group of

Protagoras ' followers. 11 Plato makes mention of a more public

following of Prodicus in a passage in the Greater Hippias.

"Prodicus," he narrates, "often went to other places in a publi

capacity, and the l a s t time, jus t lately when he came here in

a public capacity from Ceos; he gained great reputation by his

speaking before the Council, and in his private capacity, by gi ing

exhibit ions and associating with the young, he received a great

12sum of money.u \!Then we associate with th is a passage from

the Republic, we ascertain Plato 's mind in regard to Prodicus '

success. He t e l l s us: u••• Prodicus of Ceos, and a host of

other persons, can, as we see, persuade the men of thei±ddy by

private intercourse, that they will be incapable of managing

their own houses and c i ty , unless they superintend thei r ed-

ucation; and so ••• the wisdom implied in this assures to

these teachers an affect ion so unbounded, that they are almost

ld . . "13carried about on the shou ers of the1r compan1ons.

Evidently Plato is making mention of a popular triumph of which

he is ut ter ly unenvious, yet it remains in some sense a triumph.

Prodicus was not timid about proclaiming his contributions

to Greek rhetoric. In a discussion concerning the advances mad

Page 32: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 32/52

28

y various rhetoricians, "Prodicus, when he heard of the i r in

ventions, laughed and said that he alone had discovered the ar t

of proper speech, that discourses should be neither long nor

short, but of reasonable length.n14 When we consider the succes

had in winning over a crowd vre must acknowledge that he

gi f t for clever speech. From what Jlato te l l s us,

i t seems that Prodicus ' reputation rested on his

to dist inguish synonyms. Occasinally Plato seems to be

in his admiration for Frodicus' gi f t , as for instance,

he appeals to Prodicus' label for those who t rained orators

or the law courts, " whom Prodicus described as on the border

between philosoph(flr and pol i t ician."15

As a rule Plato 's

of Prodicus ' genius is t inged with irony. In i l lust rat ior

f th is we may quote a very gem of a passage from the Protagoras

Shorey seems to have preserved i t s savor in the follow

ng version: "The auditors of such a debate ought to be impar-

but not neutral in the i r sentiments. They should l is ten

o both impartially but take the part of the wisers, not the

And I implore you, Socrates and Protagoras, to make

concessions and to contravene but not to controvert. For

is the argument of friends, but controversy i s the

opponents. Thus wil l you, the speakers, receive

but not acclamation from us, since approbation i s

he cr i t i ca l judgment of themdnd, while acclamation may be the

f lat tery of the tongue. And we, your hearers, wil l

Page 33: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 33/52

29

grat i f icat ion, not delectat ion, for grat i f icat ion is the

delight in learning and delectat ion is the body's

in eat ing."l6 I f , we suppose, Plato ' s :parody smacks

f the rea l Prodicus, it i s easy to understand why, "Prodicus

s supposed to be the cleverest of the Sophists a t dist inguish-

ng terms."

In surmoory, Plato ' s del ineat ion of the Sophist Prodicus

to us a very human character, who enjoyed a t leas t his

of the amenities of th is l i fe ; ateacher who considered

eminently worthy of his hire . Prodicus was a man whose

as a rhetorician were unquestioned by the p.r.ofanum

and whose subtle dist inction of synonyms was the envy

f his fellow subjects and Sophists. The great Socrates called

h is :pupil. His fellow townsmen sent him as an ambassado

o match wits with the wily Athenians. His achievements in his

capacit ies made him a :popular hero. Plato considered

thwa;rted genius, since, according to his mind, Prodicus

t ru th in a maze of dist inct ions.

Page 34: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 34/52

1. Protagoras, 315.C

2. Platonica Frosopographia, Van Prinsterer, p. 89.

3. Ibid.

4• Cratylus, 384.B

5· Cf. Protagoras, 358.B; Phaedrus, 267.B.

6. Greater Hippias, 286.c, D.

7• Theages, 128.A; cf. Apology, 19.E.

30

8. Cf. Cratylus, 384.B; Protagoras, 34l.A; Charmides, 163.D.

9. Euthydemus, 305.c.

10. Theaetetus, 15l.B.

11. Protaeioras 317.E.

12. Greater Hippias, 282,

3. Re;eublic, 600. c.

4. Phaedrus, 267. B.

5. Euthydemus, 305. C.

c'

D.

6. Frotagoras, 337.A; What Plato Said, p . 127.

Page 35: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 35/52

31

Chapter VI.

Hippias

The bi t teres t barbs of Plato 's sat i re are reversed for

of Elis . The very authentici tyof the Hippias dialmgues

questioned, since i t has been maintained that Plato

ould never have writ ten so sa t i r i ca l a dialogue as ei ther

or the Greater Hippias; and certainly not about a

n of such universal i ty of learning and vocation.1

Be that as

t may, the Hippias whom Plato engages in the Protagoras is

on the same l ines , i f not in such defini te proportions,

s the Hippias of the dialogues of tha t name. The few referen-

es we find to him in other dialogues are in harmony with the

we see in the Hippias dialogues; certainly they do not

a picture of a contradictory nature. Besides, the Hippias

are not a mere diatr ibe directed against Hippias; i f

were, we should besurprised to find Plato mentioning so

things for which Hippias has won the admiration and s t i -

the imitation of the moderns.

In some respects Hippias was a typical Sophist. He profess d

o be able to cure the ignorance of those whom he taught, and

that through association with himself men were made better

n vir tue. I t i s character is t ic of Hippias that he should say

2he was by far the best in transmitting virtue to others.

made quite a point of the fact tha t even the virtuous

were in some sense his pupils, though they could not

Page 36: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 36/52

32

3him the usual fee since foreigh education was taboo. Pro-

hints a t the point of s t ress in Hippias' teaching when

insinuates tha t Hippias erred in requiring of his pupils that

learn ari thmetic, astronomy, geometry, and music. 4 Like a

Sophist , Hippias was careful tha t his charges learn to use

knowledge to the best advantage, so he did not f a i l to see

versed in dialect ics and rhe tor ic . We even find him in -

the redoutable Socrates to become his disciple in order

he might learn i r refutable answers to a l l questions.5

pupils were also taught the social graces, and he

that ,he, the most pol i te of men, could best teach good

6As vvas to be expected of a Sopl;rist, Hippias was not

with his knowledge. He had a high estimation of his

as a teacher and his fees for professional service vms

high. He was proud to say that while other

had made an amazing amount of maney as teachers, he

made more money than any other two Sophists together.7

Like his fellow Sophists, Hippias had a devoted coter ie of

among \\Thorn he had a reputation for profound wisdom.

8

would expound to them on a surprising divers i ty of topics .s fame overspread the bounds of his immediate circ le of admir

rs and carried in i t s wake the noisy devotion of nhoi polloe". 9

cautious Spartans bowed to his wisdom as to a master; no

owed his conquest of these more s to l id Greeks to his

10nimble vvit . The honor which he won from those

Page 37: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 37/52

33

outside his own ci ty was no greater than tha t which his fellow

citizens rendered to him. Plato himself has Hippias t e l l us

that vvhenever Elis had any business to t ransact with any of

the s ta tes , she always came to Hippias f i r s t of a l l her ci t izens

and chose him as envoy, believing him the ables t judge in

pol i t ica l af fa i r s . He took great pride in the fact tha t the

diJ:'ficul t missions to the suspicious Spartants v1ere consis tent ly

ntrusted to him.11

I f there was any one thing which more than

else would account fo r Hippias' well-nigh universal

it vras his reputation for wide learning.

Vihen vve -consider the range of Hippias ' knowledge as pre-

to us by Plato, it i s l i t t l e wonder tha t among some of

he moderns, uHippias i s celebrated as the representat ivie of

education, universal i ty of culture, manual t ra ining,

not what else" . 12 He wa,s expert in geometry, 13

in calcul&ting;14

he probed the processes of thought,1

the value of l e t t e rs and syl lables and rl;_ythms and har

Great as was his knowledge of these subjects , he ex-

17in the science of astronomy; in this f ie ld he was

thout a peer. In addit ion to being a sc ient is t he was a poet

cr i t i c of the poets. In the Protagoras he commends

exposition of a poem of Simonides and volunteers to

a ready-made, elegant discourse on the same subject . In

he Lesser l i ippias he i s mentioned giving a grandiloquent

on the I l l i ad and Odyssey, even responding accurately

Page 38: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 38/52

34

to Socrates ' questions about detai ls of the poerns .18 In order

o have a subject of in teres t to the Spartans, he learned by

and pract iced thorouehly the genealogies of men and heroes

n d the foundations of c i t ies and about ant iqui ty in general .1

9

had more than a pract ica l r ~ n ' s knowledge of pol i t ics , for

i n t e l l ec t compassed both p ri vu.. te and p1j.blic aff.::iris.20

in one of such genius we are surprised to find a t a lent for

clothes; yet that i s vrhat we \Jitness in the case of

, · , ~ e are told that once when he vvent to OlympiC:t., eveery-

he had on his person was h is ovm work--his r ing, his seal ,

s t r i g i l and an oi l - f lask . He made his sandals and vmve his

and tunic . Hi·s girdle , which \Vas l ike the Iers ian girdles

f the cos t l ies t kind, and which drew the admiration of a l l ,

21the \i'lork of his own hands. I t i s probably adding l i t t l e

o such a long l i s t of achievements Hhen we say that he had

the t r icky rules of et iquet te .22

His lmovvledge of a l l

subjects was ·the more easi ly grasped and retained due to

is excel lent memory. Once heard he could remember f i f ty names. )3vronder

that in tlie dialogues Hippias is called wise, learned,

he wisest of men in the greates t nu: ,ber of ar t s , so famous for

a l l the Greeks.24 He is even cal led a f inished

man.25 Can we wonder t ha t such a man had a fear less

in h is in te l lec t ; he t e l l s Socrates , "Naturally,

I am in this s ta te : for since I began to contend a t

he Olympic games, I have never yet met any one bet ter than

Page 39: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 39/52

35

l f. h ' 26 . . .1n anyt 1ng." I t i s 1Ilpplas' overween1ng pride of

nte l lec t which seems to chafe Plato most.

Hippias ' knowledge did not 12e dormant, since he had a t his

c o r . ~ a n d an instrument by which he could turn it to convenient

that i s , he was the master of a sophist ic species of

and rea l oratory. In speaking of rhetoric Socrates

him in the same breath with Protagoras, Gorgias, and

a l l of whom attained a certain e ~ i n e n c e due to the i r

m.Ehiner of speaking. In the. P r o t a g o r a ~ Plato gives us

speech of Hippias in which he descants on the opposition of

and law and is prodigal of synonyms and f lor id imagery.

speaks of an noverprecise, maticuluous, mincing, and logic-

dialect ic" . He cautians Protagoras les t he "sa i l

on the vast sea of eloquence with a l l canvas unfurled".

n argumentation he ins is ted that he was anybody' s match. He

up rather poorly under Socrates ' barrage of ~ u e s t i o n s ,ut th is i s because Socrates is too ins i s ten t on accuracy of

and is too narrovr-minded, seeking only tha t the rea l

might appear. Hippias ' idea of correct argumentation

in manner and in purpose. He was sa t i s f ied i f he was

and with the parry and quick with the "coup de grace".

pruposed befogging the real issue and was oontertt i f his

were convinced of a falsehood undetected. 'ilhen

fears tha t his l i s teners wil l find faul t with one of

is arguments, Hippias i s a t hand to suggest, nperhaps, Socrates

Page 40: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 40/52

36

things might s l ip past the man unnoticed. n27

Hippias re

his ovm mind in these vvords from the Greater Hip-pias:

But novv, Sd>crates, what do you think a l l this q_uestioning

to? I t i s mere scrapings and shavings of discourses,

s I said a while ago, divided into bi t s ; but that other abi l i ty

s beaut i fu l and of great Vlorth, the abi l i ty to produce a dis-

vvell and beaut i f l ly in a court of law or a council-house

r before any other public body before which the discourse may

delivered, tili convince the audience and to carry off , not

he smallest , but the greatest pr izes, the salvat ion of one

one's property, and one's fr iends. For these things,

one must s t r ive , renouncing these petty arguments,

one may not , by busying oneself , as a t present, with mere

28and nonsense, appear to be a fool." Here he shows

he differed from Plato; he sal l ied forth to verbal

Plato was constrained by the t ru th .29

We glean another character is t ic of our subject from the

in which Hippias i s lured into discussion with i l l -

f l a t t e ry . Hippias is revealed as an affected genius,

esthetein the sense tha t he was a pretender to f ine tas te

d ar t i s t i c culture.30

During the discussion, Hippias remonstr

with Socrates, for his t rained ears are shocked a t Socrates

examples. "Quite r ight , my f r iend," says Socrates, "for

t would not be appropriate for you to be f i l led up with such

you vvho are so beaut i ful ly clad, so beaut i ful ly shod,

Page 41: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 41/52

37

nd so famous for wisdom among a l l the Greeks.n31

The presence

f others cramped the subtle vrorkings of his mind. "1Jhen he i s

loss fdr an answer to one of Socrates ' questions he says,

I know tha t i f I should go away into soli tude and meditate

by myself, I could t e l l i t to you with the most perfect32

Socrates responds vd tll gibes he has been saving

many passages of the dialogue, "Ah, don' t boast,

t ''

Pla to ' s sketch of the Sophist from Elis has clear out-

"de see Hippias as a man of many ta lents for an amazing

of tasks, both in te l lec tua l and manual. understand

the Greeks considered him the best of the Greeks a t the

number of a r t s , he w ~ s a sc ien t i s t , ar t i s t , poet,

rhetorician, teacher, and man oi' affa i rs . His vanity

s obnoxious, his search fo r t ru th was very l imited in i t s

His manner, in spi te of i t s being affected, won the

"hoi pollo i" . Plato was·bi t ter ly disappointed

one of such ta lents should f r i t t e r them avvay. He expresses

in the l as t l ines of the Lesser H±ppias: "I go

up and davvn, and never hold the same opinion; and tha t I

any ordinary man, go astray i s not surpris ing; but i f you

men likevvise go astray, that i s a te r r ib le thing for us

also, i f even when we have come to you we are not to cease from

33

Page 42: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 42/52

Notes to Chapter ££ Hippias

. Cf. Shorey, ~ P l a t o Said, pp. 89, 470.

. Cf. Protagoras, 357.E; Greater Hippias, 28).C, 284.A.

Greater Hipptas, 284.C.

Frotagoras, 318.E.

Greater Hippias, 287.A.

. Lesser Hipnias, 364.D.

Cf. Apology, 19.E; Greater Hippias, 281.B, 282.E.

. Cf. Frotagoras, 315.C; Lesser Hinpias, 363.A.

· Greater Hippias, 28l.C; Lesser Hippias, 346.B.

0. Greater Hippias, 284.C.

1. Greater Hippias 128l •.A.

2. Shorey, .Ql?.• c i t . , p. 15.

3. Greater Hi nuias, 285.C; Lesser Hippias, 367.E.

4. Lesser Hippias, )66.D.

5. Greater Hippias, 285.C.

6. " "n

38

7. Protagoras, 315.C; Greater Hippias, 285.C; Lesser Hippias,)68.A.

8. Protagoras, 347.A; Lesser Hippias, 364.E.

9. Greater Hippias, 285.D.

. Greater Hippias, 2an.B.

. Lesser Hippias, 368.B.-

2. Lesser Hippias, 364,D.

3. Greater Hippias, 285 .D, E.

Page 43: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 43/52

24· Cf. P r o t a ~ o r a s , 314.c, 337.C; G r ~ a t e r H i p ~ i a s , 28l.A,283.C, 28 ,E, 29l.A; Lesser H i p p ~ a s , 364.fi, 368.B.

25· Greater Hippias, 28+, B.

6. Lesser Hippias, 364.A.

· Greater Hippias, 298.B.

Greater Hippias, 304.A, B.

39

For references to Hippias' rhetoric and dialectic cf.Phaedrus, 267.B; Protagoras, 337.C, 347.A, 348.E; GreaterHippias, 285.C, 286,A, 2S7.A, 288.A, 298.B, 300.C, 30l.B, D,304.A, B, C; ~ e s s e r Hippias, 363.A, c.

. Cf. Greater Hippias, 288.D, 290.E, 29l.A, 292.C, 295.A;

Lesser Hippias, 364.D.

Greater Hippias, 29l.A.

Greater Hippias, 295.A.

· Lesser Hippias, 376.c.

Page 44: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 44/52

Chapter VII.

Plato 's Criticism of Sophistry as a ~ u a s i - P h i l o s o : p h y .This chapter is to serve as a supplement and a summary.

t wil l serve as a supplement in so far as we shal l consider

might be called the :philosophy of the Sophists, using

he word in the scient i f ic sense. This wil l be in contrast

o a summary of what we might term the Sophists ' :philosophy

f l i fe or :philosophy of values. In the foregoing :portion of

40

we have avoided, as foreign to our purpose, any

of :philosophy as such, admitting :philosophical con

only in so far as they were i l lus t ra t ive of

Consequently, in order to round off our consider-

of the Sophists as Plato saw them, we should mention the

things he has to say of the Sophists :philosophy. We shal l

that we have already considered the Sophists ' :philosophy

f l i fe when we studied Plato 's :pen sketches of Protagoras,

Prodicus, and Hi:p:pias. I t wil l serve a useful :purpose

f we gather from these sketches what appears to be COI!1."Tlon to

quasi-philosophy, Sophistry.

The fundamental weakness of the Sophists ' :philosophy

s in their epistemology. I t is epitomized in Protagoras'

th-'3. t "Man i s the measure of a l l things. " l This destrys

he notion of an objective and universal t ruth. " ' ~ l l t ruth is

subjective and relative--hence scepticism. Frotagoras

this view with a superf icial psycological observation,

Page 45: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 45/52

41

namely, tha t the same thing makes an entirely different im

pression on dif ferent persons. He also appealed to the faulty

ut convenient metaphysics of Heracl i tus, "a l l things are in

From what we learn of the Sophists from the Platonic

we must say that the Sophists did not carry out the i r

thei r logical conclusions. They are the mouth-

not the corrupters of public opinion. St i l l , we do

them saying tha t virtue i s power, or in other words, the i r

of ethics approached dangerously close to that re la t iv i ty

2o which thei r premises should have led them. Protagoras

a mater ia l i s t ic , almost a the is t ic , a t t i tude , which i s

a t in other places, when he says, "I exclude the question of

the i r existence or non-existence, from a l l discussion,

or writ ten."3

Finally, in a passage of the Protagoras,

seems to a t t r ibute hedonism to the Sophists.4 Protagoras

not wish opnely to avow this doctrine, but neither he nor

is fellovr SOl)hists seem anxious to refute i t ; quite the con-

Plato himself has seen f i t to summarize his opinions about

he Sophists c:.nd the i r a r t . Of the Sophist he says, "Firs t , he

s a paid hunter af t e r the young and wealthy. Secondly, a kind

f merchant in ar t ic les of knowledge for the soul . Thirdly, a

of his own productions of knowledge. Fif thly , an athlete

of words, who makes for his own a r t the a r t of

Sixthly, a purger of souls, who removes opinions

Page 46: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 46/52

obstruct learning."5 He describes the a r t of such a man

s "The imit::ttive kind of t.he dissembling par t of the a r t of

and belongs to the fantast ic class of image

ar t , and is not divine, but human, and has bee defined

n arguments as the juggling part of productive act iv i ty--he

42

says tha t the t rue Sophist i s of th is descent and blood wil l

n my opinion speak the exact truth.rr6

Upon examination, this

to be fa i r ly accurate summary of what Plato said to us

the Sophists ~ n d the manner of l i fe which they professed

d taught.

Plato accueses the Sophists of exploit ing tha t which he

most, philosophy. Vlhence he cal l s the Sophists , "hire-

huntsmen of r ich young men". He says that the Sophists ,

of whom were foreigners in Athenian eyes, imported sp i r i t -

al wares and peddled the same. For them, certainly, knowledge

not i t s ovm end. Then of those things for which they could

some original i ty , l ike Hippias, they were peddlers, not

expositors; they made debate an end in i t se l f , approach

ng it as a game, not an ar t , whence they are called, "athle tes

f er i s t i c debate." When they are called "purgers of souls"

are not to be mistaken for t rue philosophers whom they re

as the wolf resembles the dog. In a l l these cri t icisms

does not seem to be absolutely object ive. \Je see the

Plato passing s t r ic ture as a person not as an objective

When, however, he accuses the Sophists of being

Page 47: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 47/52

43

object ively the poison of Sophistry, a l l personal venom put

His chief cr i t ic ism of Sophistry is tha t according to i t

are more to be esteemed than t ru ths , and it

small things great and e;reat things small by the power of7 Truth in Sophist hands becomes pros t i tu te . For Plato,

s we know him through his dialogues, t:u.uth Wf!S his goddess.

he has an added gr ief . The Sophists vmre not content with

t ru th themselves. They juggled the opinions they held

n such wise tha t they won the minds of the ...:ithenians, young

nd old, and fashioned an i r ~ g e so seductive that it lured the

from the i r t rue goddess to whom Plato meant to draw

That was the s in of Sophistry, it professed to give man

it actual ly made man sat is f ied with a welter of opinions

nd the shallow mask of rhetor ic . "I:Ien come to you Sophists",

Socrates, "for guidance; but i.f you, vase though you be,

astray, tha t i s a te r r ib le thing, i f even when they have

to you they are not to cease from the i r straying."8

Page 48: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 48/52

44Notes to Chapter VII.

1. Theaetetus, 152.A f f .

2. Meno, 73.0.

3. Theaetetus, 162.E.

4• Protagoras, 361.A, B; cf. Shorey, ££• c i t . , p. 131.

5. Sophist, 231.D.

6. Sophist, 268.D.

7. Phaedrus, 267.A.

8. Lesser Hippias, 367.0.

Page 49: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 49/52

45

.APPENDIX

A consideration of this thesis raises a concomitant

question. Granted that we now know what Plato said about the

Sophist , in how far is Plato 's picture accurate? Does Plato

represent the Sophists as theyactually were, or does he ex

aggerate his picture out of a l l proportion? In other words,

in how far does Plato 's subjective view of the Sophists coin

cide with objective real i ty?

A decisive answer to this question might well be the work

of another thesis . I t was only natural , however, that in the c rs

of our study of Plato 's dialogues, we should come to our own

opinion as to the objective validi ty of Plato ' s representation

of the Sophists and Sophistry. To round off the work of this

thesis , we wil l give our reasoned opinion here.

For many reasons, it seems to us that the Platonic idea

of the Sophists which we have presented in the preceding

chapters i s objectively valid. In the f i r s t place, Plato was

speaking about that which he knew. The Sophists were Plato ' s

contemporaries; Plato read the writings of the Sophists. When

are determining the t ruthof a thing which we know from

uman testimony, the f i r s t thing we ~ o is to attempt to find

witness of the fact . Plato was an immediate

of Sophistry. On the face of i t , then, Plato ' s t es t i -

bears more weight than that of witnesses of our times,

such as Gomperz and Grate--especially when we remember that

Page 50: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 50/52

most of our f i rs t-han d knowledge of the Sophists comes from

Plato.

Furthermore, Plato was a competent witness. He was

indisputably qualif ied from an in te l lec tual point of view.

The philosophical writ ings of Plato render th is point beyond

cavil . Vfuat is oftentimes los t sight of i s the fact that

P+ato was tempermentally and emotionally better f i t ted than

his modern cr i t ic s . ·;/hy? Because Plato was a f i f th-century

Greek. As such, he was capable of a keen appreciation of the

temper of the Sophists ' philosophy, and of i t s effect on a

people with whom he was one in environment, upbring, and

sympathies. Classical scholars t e l l us that i f we are to

understand anything Greek, we must see it through Greek eyes.

vre are often told to orientate ourselves. As a consequence

we must see that Plato is a more than acceptable witness of

Sophistry, since he was a Greek putt ing Greeks to the scrut iny.

Finally, Plato was an honest witness. His honesty seems

established, f i r s t ly , because of the quali ty of the man we

glean from his writings; secondly, because of the si lence of

other Greeks who would cer ta in ly have sprung to the defence ofthe Sophists had Plato not painted them t rue, a t l eas t in

general contour; and, thirdly, because Plato had nothing to

gain by not being honest. Some might impugn this l a s t argu-

m.ent. They might say tha t Plato used the Sophists, and in such

vvise as to extol his master, Socrates. To us also i t appears

Page 51: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 51/52

Plato does exaggerate his picture in the Sophist and in

he Hippias dialogues. Nevertheless, it seems clear to us,

of a l l the arguments vve have brought forward, that ,

Plato may be guil ty of some exaggeration, his por t ra i t

f the Sophists is fundamentally correct and honest.

In conclusion, le t i t be said that the pen-pictures we

presented in the preceding chapters, dravm as they were

the dialogues of Plato, serve primarily to reveal to us

facet of the Platonic mind. Furthermore, because of

he reasonings we have advanced in this appendix, they appear

o serve as well to give us a fundamentally sound and object

rea l view of the Sophists.

Page 52: Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

7/27/2019 Sophists and Sophistry in Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sophists-and-sophistry-in-plato 52/52

Bibliography

Campbell, Lewis, Religion in Greek Literature; London, LongmansGreen, and Co., 1898.... Theaetetus of Plato; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2nd edit ion,

1883.

Diels, Hermann, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker; Berlin:Weidmann, 3 vols, 4th edit ion, 1922.

Gomperz, Theodor, Greek Thinkers; t ranslated by Laurie I:1.lagnus;London: John I.'!urray, 1901.

Grote, George, Plato and the Other Companions of Socrates; Lond n:John Murray, 3 vols. , --r875.

Jowett, Benjamin, The Dialogues of Plato; Oxford; ClarendonPress, 5 vols . , 3rd edit ion, 1892.

Leclere, Albert , La Philosophie GreQue avant Socrate; Faris :Librairie Bloud e t Cie. , 1908.

Loeb Classical Libraty, texts and t ranslat ions of the dialog-ues of Fla to : Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press,11 vols . ,

xford University Texts of Plato; London: Oxford University

Press.

Constantin, The Essence of Plato ' s Philosophy; t ran-.s lated by Adam Altes; London: G . . l l e n and Unwin, 1933.

• • • Platen; Hunchen: Beck, 1910.

3horey, Paul, Vlhat Plato Said; Chicago: University of ChicagoPress, 1 ~ 3 z : - - - - - -

Prinsterer , Platonica F r o s o p o g r a p h i a ~ Lugduni Batavorum:

H. w. Hazenberg, 1823.

eller , Eduard, Outlines of Greek Philosophy; London: Longmans,Green, and Co., 1886.