In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

193 193 9 Traveling with Socrates: Dialectic in the Phaedo and Protagoras Gerard Kuperus In this essay, I argue that Socratic or Platonic1 dialectic is not a method that follows rigid structures as is suggested by, for example, the model of the elenchus.2 Although the Greek word mevqodo~ (meta hodos) refers to the established or public road (hodos), a road that is already there, I argue that unlike this traditional methodos, Platonic dialectic is a method that is open; it does not develop through a specific plan. There is not a blueprint or a standard formula that is used by either Socrates or Plato. Encountering a dialogue therefore requires flexibility of the interlocutors , and most of all of the reader. In the following, I discuss the Phaedo and the Protagoras, two dialogues that do not follow the model of the elenchus. The method of the Protagoras might appear as a variation of the elenchus, but is in fact a radically different model: Socrates and Protagoras exchange positions. Their discussion evolves around the question of which method to use in that very discussion. As I will argue, the exchange of positions that takes place during this dialogue is related to the change in method: the sophistic method of monologues and a method that involves dialogue, respectively. The other main dialogue discussed in this essay is the Phaedo, in which—if we want to use this term—a complete reversal of the model of the elenchus is at work. For, it is not Socrates who proves that his interlocutors’ definition of x is false; the interlocutors themselves show the limitations of their own theory. Instead of using the model of the elenchus, I will provide an alternative terminology with which dialectic can be described as what I call an “open” method. More precisely, the Platonic corpus itself offers us such an alternative terminology in metaphors that refer to labyrinths and navigation, metaphors that in the Phaedo and the Protagoras—as I will argue—symbolize the Platonic method.3 Both navigators and philosophers deal with “things” that are not ready to hand (navigators with stars, the wind, and the days of the year, the philosopher with the ideal 194 G E R A R D K U P E R U S forms), and both are dealing with these eternal truths within a world that is characterized by change or flux. In relating philosophy and navigation , the guiding question will be: What exactly is the similarity between navigating through the sea and navigating through a dialogue? The metaphor of the labyrinth refers to difficulties in finding a way.4 The labyrinth appears implicitly in the Phaedo in a reference to the myth of Theseus and the Minotaur. As I argue, the labyrinth is a symbol for philosophical issues discussed in the dialogue. The architectural structure of the labyrinth is (re)constructed by different arguments and gestures made by the participants of the dialogue, as well as by the narrative structure. We, as readers of the Platonic dialogue, enter this labyrinth of ways and non-ways, through which we somehow have to find our way. In discussing this second metaphor I will provide a brief account of some of the arguments of the Phaedo, focusing upon the methodological proceedings. As I will argue, the construction and reconstruction (through the reader) of a dialogue is similar to building a labyrinth. Likewise, finding a way through the arguments of a dialogue is comparable to finding a way through a labyrinth. Finding a Method: From Sophistry to Socratic Dialectic in the Protagoras The Protagoras is one of the few Socratic dialogues dealing explicitly with method. Socrates’ discussion with the sophist Protagoras leads us, in the middle of the dialogue, into a crisis about which method is going to be used. Although this is the pinnacle of the discussion, the issue of method is already foreshadowed from the very beginning of the dialogue. Prior to the meeting with Protagoras, Socrates warns Hippocrates , who wants to take classes with the famous sophist, against the dangers of sophistry and asks Hippocrates his famous “what” question: “About what does the sophist make one a clever speaker?”5 This is a question Hippocrates cannot answer, and with which Socrates points to the heart of the problem: the sophist is not concerned with any issue in particular , but simply makes one a clever speaker. His technique or method, “the how” of his teachings, is not different from what he teaches. The sophist...

Share