PROTÁGORAS (490 - 420 a.C.)
It was a Pre-Socratic Greek philosopher from Thrace in northern Greece, although he made his name as a teacher
and advisor in Athens.
Along with his rough contemporary Gorgias, he is considered one of the major figures in
the philosophical school of Sophism, and Plato credits him with having invented the role of
the professional Sophist or teacher of virtue. He is also sometimes known as the father
of Relativism and of Agnosticism.
Life
Protagoras (pronounced pro-TAG-er-as) was born
in Abdera, Thrace,
in northern Greece.
Hints in Plato's dialogue "Protagoras"
suggests a date of birth not later than 490 B.C., although exact
information is unavailable.
He travelled around Greece
for some years earning his living primarily as a teacher and advisor,
before settling in Athens.
He was well-known there, and became a friend of the prominent Athenian
statesman Pericles (c. 495 - 429 B.C.) and other rich and influential
Athenians. Pericles apparently invited him to write the constitution for
the newly-founded Athenian colony of Thurii in 444 B.C.
Protagoras was probably the first Greek to earn
money in higher education and he was notorious for the extremely high
fees he charged. His teaching included such general areas as public
speaking, criticism of poetry, citizenship and grammar.
His teaching methods consisted primarily of lectures, including model
orations, analyses of poems, discussions of orthoepeia (the
meanings and correct uses of words), and general rules of rhetoric and oratory.
His audience consisted mainly of wealthy men from Athens' social and
commercial elites.
Many later legends developed around the life of
Protagoras (which are probably false), including stories concerning his
having studied with Democritus, his trial for impiety and Atheism, the burning of his books, his flight from Athens to
Sicily and his death by drowning.
In Plato's dialogue "Menos",
Protagoras is said to have died at about the age of 70, after 40 years as a
practicing Sophist, which would put his death circa 420 B.C.
Work
Protagoras apparently wrote many works, the two
of which we have definite knowledge being "Alethia" ("Truth")
and "Peritheon" ("On the Gods").
Unfortunately, none of his works have survived the destruction of
the ages. What we know of his works are just a few fragments quoted in
the writings of other philosophers, particularly Plato, Aristotle, Diogenes Laërtus and Sextus Empiricus.
Although almost a contemporary of Socrates, Protagoras is considered a Pre-Socratic thinker, as he followed more the Ionian
tradition of criticism, rather than the more demonstrative method
of Socrates and his followers, Plato and Aristotle. However, he did contribute to philosophy a method of
finding a better argument by discarding the less viable one
(known as "antilogy"). His claim to be able to "make the worse
case the better" was a useful oratorical skill in the
extremely litigious quasi-democracy of Athens, but it also had the potential for
promoting what most Athenians considered injustice or immorality,
and led to an increasing distrust of Sophism.
Although quoted out of context in a later work,
his most famous saying is originally from his "Truth":
"Man is the measure of all things: of things which are, that they are, and
of things which are not, that they are not". Another line of Protagoras
quoted in Diogenes Laërtus' "Lives of Eminent Philosophers"
is: "There are two sides to every question". These are both succinct
statements of the doctrine of Relativism (that nothing is exclusively good or bad, true or false, and
that there is no general or objective truth), and more specifically Moral Relativism. His notion that judgments and knowledge are in some
way relative to the person judging or knowing (and indeed that there are
as many distinct scales of good and evil as there are individuals
in the world), which has come to be known as Ethical Subjectivism, has been very influential and is still widely
discussed in contemporary philosophy.
In his lost work "On the Gods",
Protagoras wrote: "Concerning the gods, I have no means of knowing whether
they exist or not or of what sort they may be, because of the obscurity of the
subject, and the brevity of human life". This rather bald admission of Agnosticism, was no doubt quite shocking in his day.
Protagoras (fl. 5th c. B.C.E.)
Protagoras of Abdera was one of several fifth century Greek thinkers (including also
Gorgias, Hippias, and Prodicus) collectively known as the Older Sophists, a group of
traveling teachers or intellectuals who were experts in rhetoric (the science
of oratory) and related subjects. Protagoras is known primarily for three
claims (1) that man is the measure of all things (which is often interpreted as
a sort of radical relativism) (2) that he could make the "worse (or weaker) argument appear the
better (or stronger)" and (3) that one could not tell if the gods existed
or not. While some ancient sources claim that these positions led to his having
been tried for impiety in Athens
and his books burned, these stories may well have been later legends.
Protagoras' notion that judgments and knowledge are in some way relative to the
person judging or knowing has been very influential, and is still widely
discussed in contemporary philosophy. Protagoras’ influence on the history
of philosophy has been significant. Historically, it was in response to
Protagoras and his fellow sophists that Plato began the search for transcendent
forms or knowledge which could somehow anchor moral judgment. Along with the
other Older Sophists and Socrates, Protagoras was part of a shift in
philosophical focus from the earlier Presocratic tradition of natural
philosophy to an interest in human philosophy. He emphasized how human
subjectivity determines the way we understand, or even construct, our world, a
position which is still an essential part of the modern philosophic tradition.
1. Life
Surprising little is known of Protagoras' life with any certainty. Our main sources of
information concerning Protagoras are:
1.
Plato (427-347 B.C.E.): Protagoras is a leading character
in Plato's dialogue Protagoras
and Protagoras' doctrines are discussed extensively in Plato's Theaetetus. Plato's dialogues, however, are
a mixture of historical account and artistic license, much in the manner of the
comic plays of the period. Moreover, Protagoras died when Plato was quite young
and Plato may have depended on not entirely reliable second-hand evidence for
his understanding of Protagoras.
2.
Diogenes Laertius (third century C.E.):
Diogenes' Lives of the Philosophers
is probably our single most extensive source for many early Greek philosophers'
works and biographies. Unfortunately, his work was compiled over six hundred
years after Protagoras' death and is an uncritical compilation of materials
from a wide variety of sources, some reliable, some not, and many hopelessly
garbled.
3.
Sextus Empiricus (fl. late 2nd century C.E.): Sextus Empiricus
was a skeptic of the Pyrrhonian school. Sextus wrote several books criticizing
the dogmatists (non-skeptics). His treatment of Protagoras is somewhat
favorable, but since his purpose is to prove the superiority of Pyrrhonism to
all other philosophies,we cannot trust him to be "objective" in a
modern sense; moreover, like Diogenes, he wrote several hundred years after
Protagoras' death and may not have had completely reliable sources.
The first step in understanding Protagoras is to define the general
category of "sophist," a term often applied to Protagoras in
antiquity. In the fifth century, the term referred mainly to people who were
known for their knowledge (for example, Socrates, the seven sages) and those
who earned money by teaching advanced pupils (for example, Protagoras,
Prodicus) and seemed to be a somewhat neutral term, although sometimes used
with pejorative overtones by those who disapproved of the new ideas of the
so-called "Sophistic Enlightenment". By the fourth century the term
becomes more specialized, limited to those who taught rhetoric, specifically
the ability to speak in assemblies or law courts. Because sophistic skills
could promote injustice (demagoguery in assemblies, winning unjust lawsuits) as
well as justice (persuading the polis to act correctly, allowing the
underprivileged to win justice for themselves), the term "sophist"
gradually acquired the negative connotation of cleverness not restrained by
ethics. Conventionally, the term "Older Sophist" is restricted to a
small number of figures known from the Platonic dialogues (Protagoras, Gorgias,
Prodicus, Hippias, Euthydemus, Thrasymachus and sometimes others). Whether
these figures actually had some common body of doctrines is uncertain. At times
scholars have tended to lump them together in a group, and attribute to them
all a combination of religious skepticism, skill in argument, epistemological
and moral relativism, and a certain degree of intellectual unscrupulousness.
These characteristics, though, were probably more typical of their fourth
century followers than of the Older Sophists themselves, who tended to agree
with and follow generally accepted moral codes, even while their more abstract
speculations undermined the epistemological foundations of traditional
morality.
When we separate Protagoras from general portraits of
"sophistic", as most scholars (for example, the ones listed below in
the bibliography) recommend, our information about him is relatively sparse. He
was born in approximately 490 B. C. E. in the town of Abdera in Thrace and died
c. 420 B. C. E. (place unknown). He traveled around Greece
earning his living primarily as a teacher and perhaps advisor and lived in Athens for several years,
where he associated with Pericles and other rich and influential Athenians.
Pericles invited him to write the constitution for the newly founded Athenian
colony of Thurii in 444 B. C. E. Many later legends developed around the life
of Protagoras which are probably false, including stories concerning his having
studied with Democritus, his trial for impiety, the burning of his books, and
his flight from Athens.
2. Career
If our knowledge of Protagoras' life is sparse, our knowledge of his
career is vague. Protagoras was probably the first Greek to earn money in
higher education and he was notorious for the extremely high fees he charged.
His teaching included such general areas as public speaking, criticism of
poetry, citizenship, and grammar. His teaching methods seemed to consist
primarily of lectures, including model orations, analyses of poems, discussions
of the meanings and correct uses of words, and general rules of oratory. His
audience consisted mainly of wealthy men, from Athens' social and commercial elites. The
reason for his popularity among this class had to do with specific
characteristics of the Athenian legal system.
Athens was an extremely litigious society. Not only were
various political and personal rivalries normally carried forward by lawsuits,
but one special sort of taxation, know as "liturgies" could result in
a procedure known as an "antidosis" (exchange). A liturgy was a
public expense (such as providinga ship for the navy or supporting a religious
festival) assigned to one of the richest men of the community. If a man thought
he had been assigned the liturgy unfairly, because there was a richer man able
to undertake it, he could bring a lawsuit either to exchange his property with
the other man's or to shift the burden of the liturgy to the richer man. Since
Athenians had to represent themselves in court rather than hiring lawyers, it
was essential that rich men learn to speak well in order to defend their
property; if they could not do so, they would be at the mercy of anyone who
wanted to extort money from them. While this made the teachings of Protagoras
extremely valuable, it also led a certain conservative faction (for example,
the comic playwright Aristophanes) to distrust him, in the same way that people
now might distrust a slick lawyer.
3. Doctrines
Protagoras' doctrines can be divided into three groups:
- Orthoepeia: the study of the correct use of words
- Man-measure statement: the notion that knowledge is relative to the knower
- Agnosticism: the claim that we cannot know anything about the gods
a. Orthoepeia
Perhaps because the practical side of his teaching was concerned with
helping students learn to speak well in the courtroom, Protagoras was
interested in "orthoepeia" (the correct use of words). Later sources
describe him as one of the first to write on grammar (in the modern sense of
syntax) and he seems interested in the correct meaning of words, a specialty
often associated with another sophist, Prodicus, as well. In the Protagoras,
the Platonic dialogue named after the famous sophist which has both Protagoras
and Prodicus as participants, Protagoras is shown interpreting a poem of
Simonides, with special concern for the issue of the relationship between the
writer's intent and the literal meanings of the words. This method of
interpretation was one which would be especially useful in interpreting laws
and other written witnesses (contracts, wills, and so forth) in the courtroom.
Unfortunately, we don't have any actual writings by Protagoras on the topic.
b. Man-Measure Statement
Of the book titles we have attributed to Protagoras, only two,
"Truth" (or "Refutations") and "On the Gods" are
probably accurate. Of Protagoras' works, only a few brief quotations embedded
in the works of later authors have survived. (The quotations of and reports
about Protagoras below are referred to by their 'Diels-Kranz,' or 'DK' number, the usual way of referring to such fragments and testimonia. The
Diels-Kranz numbering system is explained here.) Of Protagoras' ipsissima verba (actual words, as
opposed to paraphrases), the most famous is the homo-mensura (man-measure)
statement (DK80b1): "Of all things the measure is man, of the things that
are, that [or "how"] they are, and of things that are not, that [or
"how"] they are not." This precise meaning of this statement,
like that of any short extract taken out of context, is far from obvious, although
the long discussion of it in Plato's Theaetetus
gives us some sense of how ancient Greek audiences interpreted it. The test
case normally used is temperature. If Ms. X. says "it is hot," then
the statement (unless she is lying) is true for her. Another person, Ms. Y, may
simultaneously claim "it is cold." This statement could also be true
for her. If Ms. X normally lives in Alaska and
Ms. Y in Florida,
the same temperature (e. g. 25
Celsius) may seem hot to one and cool to the other. The
measure of hotness or coldness is fairly obviously the individual person. One
cannot legitimately tell Ms. X she does not feel hot -- she is the only person
who can accurately report her own perceptions or sensations. In this case, it
is indeed impossible to contradict as Protagoras is held to have said
(DK80a19). But what if Ms. Y, in claiming it feels cold, suggests that unless
the heat is turned on the pipes will freeze? One might suspect that she has a
fever and her judgment is unreliable; the measure may still be the individual
person, but it is an unreliable one, like a broken ruler or unbalanced scale.
In a modern scientific culture, with a predilection for scientific solutions,
we would think of consulting a thermometer to determine the objective truth.
The Greek response was to look at the more profound philosophical implications.
Even if the case of whether the pipes will freeze can be solved
trivially, the problem of it being simultaneously hot and cold to two women
remains interesting. If this cannot be resolved by determining that one has a
fever, we are presented with evidence that judgments about qualities are
subjective. If this is the case though, it has alarming consequences.
Abstractions like truth, beauty, justice, and virtue are also qualities and it
would seem that Protagoras' dictum would lead us to conclude that they too are
relative to the individual observer, a conclusion which many conservative
Athenians found alarming because of its potential social consequences. If good
and bad are merely what seem good and bad to the individual observer, then how
can one claim that stealing or adultery or impiety or murder are somehow wrong?
Moreover, if something can seem both hot and cold (or good and bad) then both
claims, that the thing is hot and that the thing is cold, can be argued for
equally well. If adultery is both good and bad (good for one person and bad for
another), then one can construct equally valid arguments for and against
adultery in general or an individual adulterer. What will make a case triumph
in court is not some inherent worth of one side, but the persuasive artistry of
the orator. And so, Protagoras claims he is able to "make the worse case
the better" (DK80b6). The oratorical skills Protagoras taught thus had
potential for promoting what most Athenians considered injustice or immorality.
c. Agnosticism
While the pious might wish to look to the gods to provide absolute moral
guidance in the relativistic universe of the Sophistic Enlightenment, that
certainty also was cast into doubt by philosophic and sophistic thinkers, who
pointed out the absurdity and immorality of the conventional epic accounts of
the gods. Protagoras' prose treatise about the gods began "Concerning the
gods, I have no means of knowing whether they exist or not or of what sort they
may be. Many things prevent knowledge including the obscurity of the subject
and the brevity of human life." (DK80b4)
4. Social Consequences and Immediate Followers
As a consequence of Protagoras' agnosticism and relativism, he may have
considered that laws (legislative and judicial) were things which evolved
gradually by agreement (brought about by debate in democratic assemblies) and
thus could be changed by further debate. This position would imply that there
was a difference between the laws of nature and the customs of humans. Although
Protagoras himself seemed to respect, and even revere the customs of human
justice (as a great achievement), some of the younger followers of Protagoras
and the other Older Sophists concluded that the arbitrary nature of human laws
and customs implies that they can be ignored at will, a position that was held
to be one of the causes of the notorious amorality of such figures as
Alcibiades.
Protagoras himself was a fairly traditional and upright moralist. He may
have viewed his form of relativism as essentially democratic — allowing
people to revise unjust or obsolete laws, defend themselves in court, free
themselves from false certainties -- but he may equally well have considered
rhetoric a way in which the elite could counter the tendencies towards mass
rule in the assemblies. Our evidence on this matter is unfortunately minimal.
The consequences of the radical skepticism of the sophistic
enlightenment appeared, at least to Plato and Aristophanes, among others, as
far from benign. In Aristophanes' play, the Clouds,
a teacher of rhetoric (called Socrates, but with doctrines based to a great
degree on those of the Sophists, and possibly directed specifically at
Protagoras or his followers) teaches that the gods don't exist, moral values
are not fixed, and how to make the weaker argument appear the stronger. The
result is moral chaos -- the main characters (Strepsiades and his son
Pheidippides) in Clouds are
portrayed as learning clever tricks to enable them to cheat their creditors and
eventually abandoning all sense of conventional morality (illustrated by
Pheidippides beating his father on stage and threatening to beat his mother).
Although no one accused Protagoras himself of being anything other than honest
-- even Plato, who disapproved of his philosophical positions, portrays him as
generous, courteous, and upright -- his techniques were adopted by various
unscrupulous characters in the following generation, giving sophistry the bad
name it still has for clever (but fallacious) verbal trickery.
5. Influence
Protagoras' influence on the history of philosophy has been significant.
Historically, it was in response to Protagoras and his fellow sophists that
Plato began the search for transcendent forms or knowledge which could somehow anchor
moral judgment. Along with the other Older Sophists and Socrates, Protagoras
was part of a shift in philosophical focus from the earlier Presocratic
tradition of natural philosophy to an interest in human philosophy. He
emphasized how human subjectivity determines the way we understand, or even
construct, our world, a position which is still an essential part of the modern
philosophic tradition.
6. References and Further Reading
a. Primary sources
- Aristophanes. Clouds. Intro. and trans. by Carol Poster. In Aristophanes 3, ed. David Slavitt and Palmer Bovie. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999: 85-192.
- Diels, Hermann. Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. Rev. Walther Kranz. Berlin: Weidmann, 1972-1973.
- Diogenes Laertius. Lives Of Eminent Philosophers. Trans. R. D. Hicks. 2 vols. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1959.
- Plato. Plato II: Laches, Protagoras, Meno, Euthydemus. Trans. W. R. M. Lamb. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1967.
- Plato. Plato VII: Theaetetus, Sophist. Trans. H. N. Fowler. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1925.
- Sextus Empiricus. Sextus Empiricus. Trans. R. G. Bury. 4 vols. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1953-59.
- Sprague, Rosamund Kent, ed. The Older Sophists: A Complete Translation by Several Hands. Columbia SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1972.
b. Secondary sources
- Guthrie, W. K. C. The Sophists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971
- de Romilly, Jaqueline. The Great Sophists In Periclean Athens. Trans. Janet Lloyd. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1992.
- Kennedy, George. The Art Of Persuasion In Greece. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963.
- Kerferd, G. B. The Sophistic Movement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.
- Rankin, H. D. Sophists, Socratics & Cynics. London: Croom Helm, 1983.
- Schiappa, Edward. Protagoras and Logos. Columbia S.C.: University of South Carolina Press 1991.
Author Information
Carol PosterEmail: cposter@english.fsu.edu
Florida State University
U. S. A.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário