Protagoras and Logos

Edward Schiappa

Description

Reassesses the philosophical and pedagogical contributions of Protagoras

Protagoras and Logos brings together in a meaningful synthesis the contributions and rhetoric of the first and most famous of the Older Sophists, Protagoras of Abdera. Most accounts of Protagoras rely on the somewhat hostile reports of Plato and Aristotle. By focusing on Protagoras's own surviving words, this study corrects many long-standing misinterpretations and presents significant facts: Protagoras was a first-rate philosophical thinker who positively influenced the theories of Plato and Aristotle, and Protagoras pioneered the study of language and was the first theorist of rhetoric. In addition to illustrating valuable methods of translating and reading fifth-century B.C.E. Greek passages, the book marshals evidence for the important philological conclusion that the Greek word translated as rhetoric was a coinage by Plato in the early fourth century.

In this second edition, Edward Schiappa reassesses the philosophical and pedagogical contributions of Protagoras. Schiappa argues that traditional accounts of Protagoras are hampered by mistaken assumptions about the Sophists and the teaching of the art of rhetoric in the fifth century. He shows that, contrary to tradition, the so-called Older Sophists investigated and taught the skills of logos, which is closer to modern conceptions of critical reasoning than of persuasive oratory. Schiappa also offers interpretations for each of Protagoras's major surviving fragments and examines Protagoras's contributions to the theory and practice of Greek education, politics, and philosophy. In a new afterword Schiappa addresses historiographical issues that have occupied scholars in rhetorical studies over the past ten years, and throughout the study he provides references to scholarship from the last decade that has refined his views on Protagoras and other Sophists.

Sujets

• Philosophie
• Philosophie de la religion
• Philosophie et théologie
• Encomium (álbum)
• Sofrosina
• Protágoras
• Thomas Kuhn
• Theory of Forms
• Philosophy
• Callicles
• Metaphorical extension
• Eristic
• Multitude
• Philosophical language
• Episteme
• Encomium
• George Grote
• Quintilian
• Dialectic
• Semantics
• Rhetoric
• Philosophy of religion
• Ontology
• Empiricism
• Ad hominem
• Sophrosyne
• Les Mots et les Choses
• Religion
• Imre Lakatos
• Logos
• Argumentum ad hominem
• Protagoras
• Thomas Samuel Kuhn

Informations

• Publié par: University of South Carolina Press
• Date de parution: 14 juin 2013
• Nombre de lectures: 1
• EAN13: 9781611171815
• Langue: English

Extrait

Studies in Rhetoric/Communication Thomas W. Benson, Series Editor
PROTAGORAS AND LOGOS
A Study in Greek Philosophy and Rhetoric
Second Edition
Edward Schiappa

University of South Carolina Press
© 2003 Edward Schiappa
Paperback original edition published by the University of South Carolina Press, 2003 Ebook edition published in Columbia, South Carolina, by the University of South Carolina Press, 2013
www.sc.edu/uscpress
22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13     10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
The Library of Congress has cataloged the paperback edition as follows:
Schiappa, Edward, 1954–
Protagoras and logos : a study in Greek philosophy and rhetoric / Edward Schiappa.—2nd ed.
p. cm.—(Studies in rhetoric/communication)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 1-57003-521-0 (pbk. : alk. paper)
1. Protagoras—Contributions in rhetoric. 2. Rhetoric, Ancient. 3. Rhetoric—Philosophy. I. Title. II. Series.
B305.P84 S35 2003
183'.1—dc22
2003016687
ISBN 978-1-61117-181-5 (ebook)
For Jacqueline Jean
CONTENTS
Preface to the Second Edition
Preface to the First Edition
Acknowledgments
Translations and Abbreviations
Part I     PROLEGOMENON TO THE STUDY OF EARLY GREEK RHETORICAL THEORY
CHAPTER 1  Why a Study of Protagoras?
Defining “Sophist”
Protagoras' Significance
CHAPTER 2  Interpreting Ancient Fragments
Problems Facing the Modern Interpreter
Literacy and Greek Philosophy
Four Hermeneutic Principles
CHAPTER 3  The “Invention” of Rhetoric
Did Plato Coin Rhêtorikê?
The “Invention” Myths Reconsidered
Sophistic Teaching Reconsidered
CHAPTER 4  Toward an Understanding of Sophistic Theories of Rhetoric
Historical Reconstruction and Contemporary Appropriation
Poulakos' Sophistic Definition of Rhetoric
Toward Individualistic Studies of the Sophists
Part II     ANALYSIS OF THE MAJOR FRAGMENTS OF PROTAGORAS
CHAPTER 5  The Two -Logoi Fragment
The Subjective and Heraclitean Interpretations
The Advancement of Heraclitean Thought
Translation and Interpretation
CHAPTER 6  The “Stronger and Weaker” Logoi Fragment
The Pejorative Interpretation
The Positive Interpretation
The Evidence of Aristophanes' Clouds
Protagoras' Influence on Plato and Aristotle
CHAPTER 7  The “Human-Measure” Fragment
Reconsidering the Standard Translation
The Fragment as a Response to Parmenides
A Defense of Relativity
CHAPTER 8  The “Impossible to Contradict” Fragment
Competing Interpretations of Ouk Estin Antilegein
Positive Contributions of Ouk Estin Antilegein
CHAPTER 9  The “Concerning the Gods” Fragment
Agnosticism or Anthropology?
Two More Protagorean Fragments
Part III       PROTAGORAS AND EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHY AND RHETORIC
CHAPTER 10  Protagoras and Fifth-Century Education
The Mythic-Poetic Tradition
Providing a Logos of Logos
Protagoras and Civic Aretê
CHAPTER 11  Protagoras, Logos , and the Polis
Protagoras and Periclean Democracy
Protagoras' Vision of the Polis
CHAPTER 12  Protagoras “versus” Plato and Aristotle
The Refutation of Protagoras
Rejection or Assimilation?
CHAPTER 13  Protagoras' Legacy to Rhetorical Theory
Summary of Contributions
Conclusion
                       Afterword
Rhetorical Salience and Role of Theory
Plato, Rhêtorikê , and the Sophists
Appendix A: Chronology of Protagoras' Life
Appendix B: Data from the TLG Search for
Appendix C: Three Spurious Attributions
Bibliography
Index
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION
I begin by expressing my gratitude to the University of South Carolina Press for publishing this revised edition of Protagoras and Logos. My sincere thanks to Tom Benson and Barry Blose for their support of this project, and to Wilfred E. Major and John T. Kirby for their helpful suggestions for revisions.
The changes in the book from the first edition can be described as follows. First, I have corrected errors in translation that slipped through the first time and made minor wording changes to claims in the first edition that were unclear or misleading. Second, in my discussion of different research approaches to the Sophists, I have replaced the phrase “rational reconstruction” with “contemporary appropriation”—a phrase somewhat less likely to be misunderstood. Third, I have added an afterword that addresses certain historiographical issues that have been a persistent source of discussion among scholars in rhetorical studies over the past decade.
Although I have not attempted to incorporate all of the scholarship on Protagoras that has appeared since the first edition, I have incorporated into the footnotes of each chapter references to work that has altered or clarified my views on Protagoras and the Sophists. I want to take this opportunity to draw the reader's attention to work that resonates with this project. The same year in which this book originally appeared also saw the publication of Thomas Cole's important book The Origins of Rhetoric (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991). While I do not agree with Cole's attempt to elide the distinction between rhetorical theory and practice, there is much in his book that has encouraged scholars to reconsider the role of the Sophists in early rhetorical theory. I am particularly encouraged by Michael Gagarin's essay “Did the Sophists Aim to Persuade?” ( Rhetorica 19 [2001]: 275–91) and a follow-up paper, as yet unpublished, titled “What Did the Sophists Teach? The Sophists and the Art of Words.” Gagarin takes seriously the idea that “rhetoric” may not be the best word to describe what the Older Sophists taught, and he is building a careful case for a redescription of their educational program. Two books recently have been published devoted to the sophist Gorgias of Leontini: Bruce McComiskey's Gorgias and the New Sophistic Rhetoric and Scott Consigny's Gorgias, Sophist and Artist . Interest in the Sophists continues, and it is exciting to see the growing sophistication of methodological and theoretical frameworks brought to bear in such scholarship.
For me, the most important part of this book is the reading I provide of the surviving fragments of Protagoras. My sense is that part II and part III of the book generally have proven useful to those interested in the historical reconstruction of Protagorean thought. By far, the most controversial portion of the book has been part I. In particular, my arguments concerning the origins of the Greek word for rhetoric— rhêtorikê —and how a revised dating of that term may challenge our understanding both of the Sophists and of early rhetorical theory have provoked considerable discussion. Readers interested in these issues may benefit from my 1999 monograph, The Beginnings of Rhetorical Theory in Classical Greece . In many respects that book picks up where this book leaves off. I have attempted to reply to criticisms of the arguments made in this book, both in the opening chapters of Beginnings and in the afterword of this edition.
It is said that the worst fate for a book is if it is ignored. Whatever else I might think about the various receptions of this book, I cannot complain that it has been ignored. To my various interlocutors, supportive and otherwise, I owe a tremendous debt of thanks.
Minneapolis, December 2002
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION
A new full-length study of Protagoras and his contribution to early Greek thought is long overdue. Although there is a sizable amount of excellent scholarship concerning Protagoras, much of it tends to be hobbled by one or more problems. Many studies begin with such hostile assumptions about the Sophists that a reasonably productive picture of Protagoras is impossible. Too many studies have relied exclusively on Plato for their understanding of Protagoras, thereby privileging Plato's dramatic interpretations over the Sophist's surviving fragments. Studies that attempt to examine Protagoras' own words, his ipsissima verba , have typically focused only on one or another of his surviving fragments and hence have missed the larger picture. Few studies of Protagoras have taken seriously the fact that Greece in the fifth century BCE was in transition from a predominantly oral to a predominantly literate culture. As a result, many translations and interpretations of Protagoras' fragments have missed the influence of changing syntax and word usage.
The purpose of this book is to defend a reconstruction of Protagoras' contributions to ancient Greek philosophy and rhetoric that is more complete than is currently available. In order to accomplish that purpose it is necessary to construct a picture of Protagoras' world view based on all of his significant fragments, using the assumption that Protagoras and his fellow Older Sophists were serious and important thinkers. It is my hope that what follows will encourage resistance to the Platonic tradition of treating the Sophists of the fifth century BCE as rarely—if ever—capable of philosophically important ideas or of a morally acceptable rhetoric, and will stimulate future full-length studies of the Older Sophists. It is through such efforts that these interesting figures of the Greek enlightenment can be more fully appreciated for the depth and breadth of their contributions to the history of philosophy and rhetoric.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The following study began as my doctoral dissertation at Northwestern University. I wish to thank Leland M. Griffin for chairing my committee and for providing needed encouragement. Thanks also to Michael J. Hyde, Charles Kauffman, and David Zarefsky for serving on my committee and providing challenging and beneficial feedback.
The first section of chapter 3 , “Did Plato Coin Rhêtorikê? ,” originally appeared, in a slightly different form, in the American Journal of Philology 111 (1990): 460–73. I am grateful for permission to include it here; and for George A. Kennedy's valuable editorial suggestions. chapter 3 benefited from advice from Robin Smith, Michael Cahn, Tony M. Lentz, and