Abstract
Plato’s Protagoras plays off the genre of Greek comedy in its expression of its philosophical meaning. This dialogue at points invites us to re-envision Socrates against the backdrop of Aristophanes’ criticisms of Socrates and the sophists. The Protagoras follows some of the conventions of Greek comedy but interrupts its form with moments of lengthier rational discussion absent in Greek comedy. The dialogue’s logos and antilogos lead to aporia, but this aporia shows a limit to reason that recognizes human incompleteness without leading to misology. In contrast to performed drama, the written form of the dialogue both engages its audience’s emotions while allowing the reader to return to the text and to continue their rational assessment of the arguments.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
While some commentators take this myth to present Protagorean ideas, whether this is the case or not is difficult to know. Regardless, we can safely assume that the myth both represents something of Protagoras’ beliefs, at least as Plato understood them, and that the myth as written includes a creative Platonic element in its particular presentation.
- 2.
This paper was originally presented as part of a longer keynote speech at the Symposium of the Philosophy and Poetry Project at the University of Bergen, Norway, in June 2014. I am grateful to Vigdis Songe-Møller and Knut Ågotnes for their invitation and for the many helpful comments by conference participants. My particular thanks especially go to Olof Pettersson for his comments and feedback on this essay, which is revised from the form of its original presentation.
- 3.
I am indebted to Andrea Nightingale’s work on the relation of Platonic dialogue to earlier Greek genres, including comedy.
- 4.
Capra argues that Plato is not following the conventions of Greek comedy more generally here, but only that more specifically of Aristophanes’s Clouds. I agree that the Protagoras seeks to play off of the Clouds in particular, but here we also see in the Protagoras play with larger structural features of comedy. The similarity is not only between characters or specific dramatic moments; rather, the larger structure and order of the Protagoras has continuities with Comedy, while also deliberately replacing some comical elements with specifically Platonic inventions. (I discovered Capra’s work, published solely in Italian, only after presenting this talk at the Bergen conference and thank Hayden Ausland for pointing me to it.)
- 5.
Here I depart from Capra, who argues that Socrates descends to the level of the sophists in order to take up their ways, much like a descent into the cave of the Republic to be with the prisoners. Instead, I want to maintain that the structural differences of the dialogue from comedy, and Socrates’ response to aporia, distinguish Socrates from the sophists.
- 6.
Thanks to Olof Pettersson for raising the problem for me of what the relationship between beauty and aporia might be, given the Phaedrus’ approach to beauty as that which produces awe.
References
Burgess, Watson S. 2014. Living Poets. Durham. https://livingpoets.dur.ac.uk/w/Euripides,_Iphigenia_at_Aulis_1211-1215. Accessed 2 Apr 2014.
Capra, Andrea. 2001. Il “Protagora” di Platone tra eristica e commedia, Il Filarete: Pubblicazioni della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia dell’Università degli Studi di Milano, 197. Milan: LED, Edizioni Universitarie di Lettere Economia Diritto.
Dyson, M. 1976. Knowledge and Hedonism in Plato’s Protagoras. Journal of Hellenic Studies 96: 32–45.
Gonzalez, Francisco J. 2014. The Virtue of Dialogue: Dialogue as Virtue in Plato’s Protagoras. Philosophical Papers 43: 33–66.
Griswold, Charles. 1999. Relying on Your Own Voice: An Unsettled Rivalry of Moral Ideals in Plato’s Protagoras. Review of Metaphysics 53: 283–307.
Grote, George. 1973. Plato and the Other Companions of Sokrates, vol. 2. London: J. Murray. reprint New York: Ben Franklin.
Hackforth, R. 1928. The Hedonism in Plato’s Protagoras. Classical Quarterly 22: 38–42.
Hemmenway, Scott R. 1996. Sophistry Exposed: Socrates on the Unity of Virtue in the Protagoras. Ancient Philosophy 16: 1–23.
Henderson, Jeffrey. 1990. The Demos and Comic Competition. In Nothing to Do with Dionysos? Athenian Drama in its Social Context, ed. John J. Winkler and Froma I. Zeitlin, 271–313. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Irwin, Terence. 1977. Plato’s Moral Theory: The Early and Middle Dialogues. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
McCoy, Marina. 1998. Protagoras on Human Nature, Wisdom, and the Good: The Great Speech and the Hedonism of Plato’s Protagoras. Ancient Philosophy 18: 21–39.
McCoy, Marina. 1999. Socrates on Simonides: The Use of Poetry in Socratic and Platonic Rhetoric. Philosophy and Rhetoric 32: 349–367.
Nightingale, Andrea. 2000. Genres in Dialogue: Plato and the Construct of Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nussbaum, Martha. 2001. The Fragility of Goodness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Robinson, David. 1912. The Life of the Ancient Greek. Classical Weekly 5(8): 59.
Russell, Daniel. 2000. Protagoras and Socrates on Courage and Pleasure: Protagoras 349d ad Finem. Ancient Philosophy 20: 311–338.
Schultz, Ann-Marie. 2013. Plato’s Socrates as Narrator: A Philosophical Muse. Lanham: Lexington Books.
Weiss, Roslyn. 1990. Hedonism in the Protagoras and the Sophist’s Guarantee. Ancient Philosophy 10: 17–39.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
McCoy, M. (2017). Plato’s Protagoras, Writing, and the Comedy of Aporia. In: Pettersson, O., Songe-Møller, V. (eds) Plato’s Protagoras. Philosophical Studies Series, vol 125. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45585-3_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45585-3_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-45583-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-45585-3
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)