CLASSICAL PHILOSOPHY: SOCRATES TO MAIMONIDES
(Stumpf, Samuel Enoch & Fieser, James. 2008. Socrates to Sartre: A History of
Philosophy, pp. 28ff.)
N. B. These notes are intended to supplement the Lehberger Notes on History of Ancient
(Western) Philosophy.
Contents Page
PART 1: ATTIC PHILOSOPHY: SOCRATES, PLATO, ARISTOTLE
Socrates and the Sophists: The Problems of Truth and Certitude 3
A. The Sophists 3
1. Protagoras 5
2. Gorgias 6
3. Thrasymachus 7
B. Socrates
1. Life 8
2. Socrates as a Philosopher 9
3. Theory of Knowledge (Intellectual Midwifery: Maieusis) 10
3.1 Definition 11
3.2 Two Levels of Knowledge 12
4. Ethics 13
5. Socrates’ Trial and Death 14
C. Plato 16
1. Philosophical Setting 16
2. Life 17
3. Works: Plato’s Dialogues 19
4. Theory of Knowledge 20
4.1 The Allegory of the Cave 20
4.2 The Divided Line 22
4.3 Imagining 23
4.4 Belief 24
4.5 Thinking 25
4.6 Perfect Intelligence 26
5. The Platonic Theory of Forms or Ideas 26
5.1 The Nature of the Forms 27
5.2 Existence of the Forms 28
5.3 Relation of Forms to Things 29
5.4 Relation Among the Forms 29
5.5 Knowing the Forms 30
6. Plato’s Moral Philosophy (Ethics) 30
1
, 6.1 Concept of the Soul 31
6.1.1 Three Parts of the Soul 31
6.1.2 The Cause of Moral Evil 32
6.1.3 The Purpose of Moral Life 34
6.2 Virtue as Fulfillment of Function 35
6.2.1 Kinds of Virtues 36
7. Political Philosophy 37
7.1 The State as Man Writ Large 37
7.2 The Philosopher-King 38
7.3 The Virtues in the State 39
7.4 The Decline of the Ideal State 40
8. Cosmology 42
8.1 The World of Forms is the Real World 42
8.2 The Role of the Demiurge 43
8.3 Physical Evil as Imperfection 45
D. Aristotle 45
1. Life 45
1.1 Discipleship and Breakaway from Plato 46
1.2 Social and Political Connections 47
2. The Lyceum or Peripatetic School 47
3. Logic 48
3.1 The Categories 48
3.2 The Syllogism 50
4. Metaphysics 52
4.1 The Problem of Metaphysics Defined 54
4.2 Substance as Primary Source of Things 54
4.3 Matter and Form 55
4.4 The Process of Change: The Four Causes 56
4.5 Potentiality and Actuality 57
4.6 The Unmoved Mover 58
4.7 The Place of Man 59
4.7.1 Physics 59
4.7.2 Biology 59
4.7.3 Psychology 60
4.7.4 Human Rationality 61
5. Ethics 62
5.1 Types of Ends 62
5.2 The Function of Man 63
5.3 Happiness as the End 63
5.4 Virtue as the “Golden Mean” 64
5.5 Deliberation and Choice 65
5.6 The Virtues 66
5.7 Contemplation 66
6. Politics 66
6.1 Types of States 67
2
, 6.2 Differences and Inequalities 67
6.3 Good Governance and Revolution 68
7. Philosophy of Art 69
________________________________________________________________________
SOCRATES AND THE SOPHISTS: The Problems of Truth and Goodness
Introduction
The first Greek philosophers (Thales, etc.) had focused their attention upon
nature, the stuff on which the universe was made. The Sophists and Socrates shifted the
concerns of philosophy to the study man; thus, from cosmology to anthropology, from
matter to mind.
Instead of asking the large cosmic questions about the ultimate principle of things,
philosophy became preoccupied with questions relating more directly to man’s behavior.
This transition from predominantly scientific concerns to basic ethical questions is due to
the ff.:
1. Failure of pre-Socratic philosophy to arrive at a uniform conception of the
cosmos. Inconsistent interpretations of nature had been proposed, and there appeared to
be no way of reconciling them.
1.1 Heraclitus had said that nature consists of a plurality of substances
and that everything is in a process of constant flux, whereas
1.2 Parmenides took the opposite view, arguing that reality is a single,
static substance, the One, and that motion and change are illusions cast upon our senses
by the appearances of things.
2. As it was, the controversy over the ultimate principle mood of skepticism
about the ability of human reason to discover the truth about nature. But this very mood
of skepticism provided the impulse for a new direction for philosophy, for skepticism
itself became the subject of serious concern.
Instead of debating about other theories of nature, the thinkers now addressed
themselves to the problem of human knowledge. Was it possible for the human mind to
discover any universal truth. For cultures between various races and peoples differ. Thus
this question of knowing became implicated with the problem of goodness. If it was not
possible for man to know any universal truth, could there be any universal concept of
goodness. The principal protagonists to this new debate were the Sophists and Socrates.
A. THE SOPHISTS
The three most outstanding Sophists who emerged in Athens sometime during the
5th c. were Protagoras, Gorgias and Thrasymachus. They were part of a group who had
come to Athens either as traveling teachers or, as in the case of Hippias of Elis, as
ambassadors, and they called themselves Sophists or “intellectuals.” Coming as they did
from different cultures: Protagoras from Abdera in Thrace, Gorgias from Leontini in
3
, southern Sicily, and Thrasymachus from Chalcedon, they took a fresh look at Athenian
thought and customs and asked questions about them.
Thus, they became the great spokesmen of the Greek enlightenment by forcing
the Athenians to consider whether their ideas and customs were founded upon truth or
simply upon conventional ways of behaving. Was there distinction between Greeks and
barbarians, they asked as well as that between masters and slaves, based upon evidence or
simply upon prejudice. They also had gathered a wide fund of information based upon
the observation of a multitude of cultural facts. This encyclopedic knowledge of different
cultures made them skeptical about the possibility of attaining any absolute truth by
which a society might or its life.
They forced upon thoughtful Athenians the question whether Hellenic culture was
based upon man-made rules or upon nature, whether their religious and moral codes were
conventional and, therefore, changeable or natural and, therefore, permanent. In a
decisive way, the Sophists set the stage for a more deliberate and careful consideration of
the nature of man, how he acquires knowledge, and how he might order his behavior.
The Sophists were primarily practical men, and the circumstances of Athenian
democracy under Pericles were such that their practical skills were quickly put to use. It
was their interest and competence in prose and grammar as well as their skill in discourse
that made them uniquely pertinent to the current scene. Under Pericles, the aristocracy
had been replaced by democracy, and this had the effect of intensifying political life in
Athens by drawing the free citizens into political discussion and making them eligible for
leadership. But the older aristocratic education had not prepared men for the new
conditions of democratic life, for that education had been founded for the most part upon
family tradition.
There had been no disciplined and theoretical training in the areas of religion,
grammar and the careful interpretation of the poets. The Sophists moved into this
cultural vacuum, and their practical interest in teaching filled an urgent need. They
became popular lecturers and were the chief source of the new education. What them
particularly sought after was that they professed, above all, to teach the art of rhetoric, the
art of persuasive speech. The power of persuasion had become a political necessity in the
democratic Athens for anyone who hoped to rise to the level of leadership. With their
extensive knowledge of grammar and their fund of information about various cultures as
well as their wide experience derived from their travels and teaching in many places, the
Sophists possessed all that was needed to train the emerging new Athenian citizen.
The reputation of the Sophists was at first very favorable. They gave an immense
service by training men to present their ideas clearly and forcefully. Clear speech and the
power of persuasion were especially indispensable in a popular assembly where it would
be disastrous to permit debate among unskilled speakers who could neither present their
own ideas effectively nor discover the errors in their opponents’ arguments. But rhetoric
became somewhat like a knife in that it could be employed for good or ill use, to cut
bread or to kill. One who possessed the power of persuasion could use that power either
to cut through a difficult problem and through psychological resistance to a good idea in
which he had a special interest, the intrinsic goodness of which was questionable. The
shift from the one use of rhetoric to the other was greatly facilitated by the inherent
skepticism of the Sophists.
4
(Stumpf, Samuel Enoch & Fieser, James. 2008. Socrates to Sartre: A History of
Philosophy, pp. 28ff.)
N. B. These notes are intended to supplement the Lehberger Notes on History of Ancient
(Western) Philosophy.
Contents Page
PART 1: ATTIC PHILOSOPHY: SOCRATES, PLATO, ARISTOTLE
Socrates and the Sophists: The Problems of Truth and Certitude 3
A. The Sophists 3
1. Protagoras 5
2. Gorgias 6
3. Thrasymachus 7
B. Socrates
1. Life 8
2. Socrates as a Philosopher 9
3. Theory of Knowledge (Intellectual Midwifery: Maieusis) 10
3.1 Definition 11
3.2 Two Levels of Knowledge 12
4. Ethics 13
5. Socrates’ Trial and Death 14
C. Plato 16
1. Philosophical Setting 16
2. Life 17
3. Works: Plato’s Dialogues 19
4. Theory of Knowledge 20
4.1 The Allegory of the Cave 20
4.2 The Divided Line 22
4.3 Imagining 23
4.4 Belief 24
4.5 Thinking 25
4.6 Perfect Intelligence 26
5. The Platonic Theory of Forms or Ideas 26
5.1 The Nature of the Forms 27
5.2 Existence of the Forms 28
5.3 Relation of Forms to Things 29
5.4 Relation Among the Forms 29
5.5 Knowing the Forms 30
6. Plato’s Moral Philosophy (Ethics) 30
1
, 6.1 Concept of the Soul 31
6.1.1 Three Parts of the Soul 31
6.1.2 The Cause of Moral Evil 32
6.1.3 The Purpose of Moral Life 34
6.2 Virtue as Fulfillment of Function 35
6.2.1 Kinds of Virtues 36
7. Political Philosophy 37
7.1 The State as Man Writ Large 37
7.2 The Philosopher-King 38
7.3 The Virtues in the State 39
7.4 The Decline of the Ideal State 40
8. Cosmology 42
8.1 The World of Forms is the Real World 42
8.2 The Role of the Demiurge 43
8.3 Physical Evil as Imperfection 45
D. Aristotle 45
1. Life 45
1.1 Discipleship and Breakaway from Plato 46
1.2 Social and Political Connections 47
2. The Lyceum or Peripatetic School 47
3. Logic 48
3.1 The Categories 48
3.2 The Syllogism 50
4. Metaphysics 52
4.1 The Problem of Metaphysics Defined 54
4.2 Substance as Primary Source of Things 54
4.3 Matter and Form 55
4.4 The Process of Change: The Four Causes 56
4.5 Potentiality and Actuality 57
4.6 The Unmoved Mover 58
4.7 The Place of Man 59
4.7.1 Physics 59
4.7.2 Biology 59
4.7.3 Psychology 60
4.7.4 Human Rationality 61
5. Ethics 62
5.1 Types of Ends 62
5.2 The Function of Man 63
5.3 Happiness as the End 63
5.4 Virtue as the “Golden Mean” 64
5.5 Deliberation and Choice 65
5.6 The Virtues 66
5.7 Contemplation 66
6. Politics 66
6.1 Types of States 67
2
, 6.2 Differences and Inequalities 67
6.3 Good Governance and Revolution 68
7. Philosophy of Art 69
________________________________________________________________________
SOCRATES AND THE SOPHISTS: The Problems of Truth and Goodness
Introduction
The first Greek philosophers (Thales, etc.) had focused their attention upon
nature, the stuff on which the universe was made. The Sophists and Socrates shifted the
concerns of philosophy to the study man; thus, from cosmology to anthropology, from
matter to mind.
Instead of asking the large cosmic questions about the ultimate principle of things,
philosophy became preoccupied with questions relating more directly to man’s behavior.
This transition from predominantly scientific concerns to basic ethical questions is due to
the ff.:
1. Failure of pre-Socratic philosophy to arrive at a uniform conception of the
cosmos. Inconsistent interpretations of nature had been proposed, and there appeared to
be no way of reconciling them.
1.1 Heraclitus had said that nature consists of a plurality of substances
and that everything is in a process of constant flux, whereas
1.2 Parmenides took the opposite view, arguing that reality is a single,
static substance, the One, and that motion and change are illusions cast upon our senses
by the appearances of things.
2. As it was, the controversy over the ultimate principle mood of skepticism
about the ability of human reason to discover the truth about nature. But this very mood
of skepticism provided the impulse for a new direction for philosophy, for skepticism
itself became the subject of serious concern.
Instead of debating about other theories of nature, the thinkers now addressed
themselves to the problem of human knowledge. Was it possible for the human mind to
discover any universal truth. For cultures between various races and peoples differ. Thus
this question of knowing became implicated with the problem of goodness. If it was not
possible for man to know any universal truth, could there be any universal concept of
goodness. The principal protagonists to this new debate were the Sophists and Socrates.
A. THE SOPHISTS
The three most outstanding Sophists who emerged in Athens sometime during the
5th c. were Protagoras, Gorgias and Thrasymachus. They were part of a group who had
come to Athens either as traveling teachers or, as in the case of Hippias of Elis, as
ambassadors, and they called themselves Sophists or “intellectuals.” Coming as they did
from different cultures: Protagoras from Abdera in Thrace, Gorgias from Leontini in
3
, southern Sicily, and Thrasymachus from Chalcedon, they took a fresh look at Athenian
thought and customs and asked questions about them.
Thus, they became the great spokesmen of the Greek enlightenment by forcing
the Athenians to consider whether their ideas and customs were founded upon truth or
simply upon conventional ways of behaving. Was there distinction between Greeks and
barbarians, they asked as well as that between masters and slaves, based upon evidence or
simply upon prejudice. They also had gathered a wide fund of information based upon
the observation of a multitude of cultural facts. This encyclopedic knowledge of different
cultures made them skeptical about the possibility of attaining any absolute truth by
which a society might or its life.
They forced upon thoughtful Athenians the question whether Hellenic culture was
based upon man-made rules or upon nature, whether their religious and moral codes were
conventional and, therefore, changeable or natural and, therefore, permanent. In a
decisive way, the Sophists set the stage for a more deliberate and careful consideration of
the nature of man, how he acquires knowledge, and how he might order his behavior.
The Sophists were primarily practical men, and the circumstances of Athenian
democracy under Pericles were such that their practical skills were quickly put to use. It
was their interest and competence in prose and grammar as well as their skill in discourse
that made them uniquely pertinent to the current scene. Under Pericles, the aristocracy
had been replaced by democracy, and this had the effect of intensifying political life in
Athens by drawing the free citizens into political discussion and making them eligible for
leadership. But the older aristocratic education had not prepared men for the new
conditions of democratic life, for that education had been founded for the most part upon
family tradition.
There had been no disciplined and theoretical training in the areas of religion,
grammar and the careful interpretation of the poets. The Sophists moved into this
cultural vacuum, and their practical interest in teaching filled an urgent need. They
became popular lecturers and were the chief source of the new education. What them
particularly sought after was that they professed, above all, to teach the art of rhetoric, the
art of persuasive speech. The power of persuasion had become a political necessity in the
democratic Athens for anyone who hoped to rise to the level of leadership. With their
extensive knowledge of grammar and their fund of information about various cultures as
well as their wide experience derived from their travels and teaching in many places, the
Sophists possessed all that was needed to train the emerging new Athenian citizen.
The reputation of the Sophists was at first very favorable. They gave an immense
service by training men to present their ideas clearly and forcefully. Clear speech and the
power of persuasion were especially indispensable in a popular assembly where it would
be disastrous to permit debate among unskilled speakers who could neither present their
own ideas effectively nor discover the errors in their opponents’ arguments. But rhetoric
became somewhat like a knife in that it could be employed for good or ill use, to cut
bread or to kill. One who possessed the power of persuasion could use that power either
to cut through a difficult problem and through psychological resistance to a good idea in
which he had a special interest, the intrinsic goodness of which was questionable. The
shift from the one use of rhetoric to the other was greatly facilitated by the inherent
skepticism of the Sophists.
4
