We live in the Age of Protagoreans. But, then, maybe every age is such, with those in power serving as the exemplars of Sophist thinking. In this age, however, we have added entertainers and TV pundits to political figures. Apparently, given the power to influence, all influencers influence all the time. They can claim, and rightly so because the masses allow them, that they have the wherewithal to judge and analyze for the rest. They are, to use the term attributed to Protagoras, “the measure of all.”
But I can’t blame those given the power to influence by virtue of their position in media or in entertainment. They are victims of Sophistry, just as you and I are also victims.
If we were to apply Plato’s Protagoras to our times, we would probably see that we are as self-contradictory as any people ancient, medieval, or modern. We all seem to proclaim the existence of Absolutes; all seem to proclaim the right to self-assessment of what is real or good and thereby what is purely subjective; and all seem to have no problem proclaiming ourselves as the “measure” in support of the latter (relativism). We can see the difference at the level of states in the USA, with some having stricter laws than others, some allowing actions that others prohibit, and still others taking a laissez-faire position with regard to individual freedoms limited only by the country’s overriding Constitution as backed by Supreme Court decisions.
Protagoras appears to be caught in contradictions as Plato portrays him, but aren’t we all? Socrates in Plato’s book discusses one of the reasons for contradiction by equating or relating knowledge and virtue. When one knows, one acts virtuously. Ignorance is the stuff of evil; knowledge, the stuff of good.
Our contradictions seem to be played out daily on pundit shows that pit one side against the other, in most cases the Left vs. the Right. And we daily see what must have taken place thousands of years ago when Protagoras argued before crowds at Olympic games. Yes, there appears to have been a sideshow of the athletically-challenged, but intellectually-astute, orators arguing positions before people gathered at the sports events. It was a preview of what was to come with the advent of TV pundit shows. Were he alive today, Protagoras would be in great demand because he was a great debater—at least he was until he ran into Socrates in Plato’s work.
That brings me to ask whether you consider yourself to be what Protagoras calls the “measure of all.” Is how you perceive the world an ultimate reality, or just a local, personal reality? You have certainly heard others speak of the importance of their opinion. I know I have. “It’s my opinion” is all the justification most need to refute any belief in an Absolute of any kind and to quash opposing arguments. And “my opinion” doesn’t seem to need any supporting information; feeling and perceiving become absolutes for individuals—especially the young.
There’s another reason to excuse the ignorance or confusion of the times and to understand the subjectivity of our age. There’s much we don’t know. Even those who spend their lives seeking scientific “truths” find themselves incapable of pinning down an absolute interpretation. Physical reality beyond Newton’s three laws lies in unknown knowns. We know about atoms and their makeup, for example, but we can’t give them anything more than a mathematical description. We just have difficulty imagining the electron as both wave and particle. We don’t understand Dark Energy or Dark Matter, and we can’t, as Protagoras did in Protagoras, speak certainly about an “origin,” such as the origin of the genus Homo and the rise of consciousness. Yet, in a contradictory vein, we know that we can turn atoms into atomic power, showing that there must be some objective reality beyond our perceptions and opinions. “I don’t believe in atomic power” doesn’t stop a bomb from exploding. And we have some sense that deep in the past a number of Homo species existed simultaneously because we have some of their fossilized remains. We just don’t know their level of consciousness or even their possible relationship to that “First Human Being” some 200 to 300 thousand years ago. And unlike Protagoras, we can’t really say when exactly, where exactly, or how exactly the rudiments of civilization arose.
So, we bounce between being the “measure of all things” to sometimes being measured by some absolute system that exists outside our individual opinion while still knowing that we live in ignorance about the ultimate physical reality of our existence. What’s left? Those arguments about to which we apply perceptions and personal opinions. Political, philosophical, and ethical arguments. And when some Protagoras with skills in rhetoric that exceed those of opponents wins the day in a public argument, we ascribe to his opinion. He (or she) is, after all, a voice heard and respected by many—or by at least one more than half a population.
It is a bit ironic that in their adamant belief in the absolutes of their opinions, so many ascribe to the positions of others and to their perceptions. It is ironic that in an Age of Protagoreans so many who claim a priority for their opinion actually seek the opinions of the most public voices. We are, in our times of TV punditry, largely dependent upon the thoughts of others.
One might think the primary question that someone who holds himself or herself as the “measure of all” might ask is “Who cares what others think on issues I care to care about?” The popularity of TV pundit shows seems to indicate that many people do care about the perceptions of others and that many take what the pundits say as expressions of Absolutes.
We really haven’t progressed much since the fifth century B.C., have we? We’re still making absolute statements about opinions. Still arguing in the public arena. Still running the gamut of self-contradictory positions. Still living in a great deal of ignorance. Still trying to define what is both right and virtuous. And, unfortunately, still imposing rules on ourselves as public perceptions allow.
But I can’t blame those given the power to influence by virtue of their position in media or in entertainment. They are victims of Sophistry, just as you and I are also victims.
If we were to apply Plato’s Protagoras to our times, we would probably see that we are as self-contradictory as any people ancient, medieval, or modern. We all seem to proclaim the existence of Absolutes; all seem to proclaim the right to self-assessment of what is real or good and thereby what is purely subjective; and all seem to have no problem proclaiming ourselves as the “measure” in support of the latter (relativism). We can see the difference at the level of states in the USA, with some having stricter laws than others, some allowing actions that others prohibit, and still others taking a laissez-faire position with regard to individual freedoms limited only by the country’s overriding Constitution as backed by Supreme Court decisions.
Protagoras appears to be caught in contradictions as Plato portrays him, but aren’t we all? Socrates in Plato’s book discusses one of the reasons for contradiction by equating or relating knowledge and virtue. When one knows, one acts virtuously. Ignorance is the stuff of evil; knowledge, the stuff of good.
Our contradictions seem to be played out daily on pundit shows that pit one side against the other, in most cases the Left vs. the Right. And we daily see what must have taken place thousands of years ago when Protagoras argued before crowds at Olympic games. Yes, there appears to have been a sideshow of the athletically-challenged, but intellectually-astute, orators arguing positions before people gathered at the sports events. It was a preview of what was to come with the advent of TV pundit shows. Were he alive today, Protagoras would be in great demand because he was a great debater—at least he was until he ran into Socrates in Plato’s work.
That brings me to ask whether you consider yourself to be what Protagoras calls the “measure of all.” Is how you perceive the world an ultimate reality, or just a local, personal reality? You have certainly heard others speak of the importance of their opinion. I know I have. “It’s my opinion” is all the justification most need to refute any belief in an Absolute of any kind and to quash opposing arguments. And “my opinion” doesn’t seem to need any supporting information; feeling and perceiving become absolutes for individuals—especially the young.
There’s another reason to excuse the ignorance or confusion of the times and to understand the subjectivity of our age. There’s much we don’t know. Even those who spend their lives seeking scientific “truths” find themselves incapable of pinning down an absolute interpretation. Physical reality beyond Newton’s three laws lies in unknown knowns. We know about atoms and their makeup, for example, but we can’t give them anything more than a mathematical description. We just have difficulty imagining the electron as both wave and particle. We don’t understand Dark Energy or Dark Matter, and we can’t, as Protagoras did in Protagoras, speak certainly about an “origin,” such as the origin of the genus Homo and the rise of consciousness. Yet, in a contradictory vein, we know that we can turn atoms into atomic power, showing that there must be some objective reality beyond our perceptions and opinions. “I don’t believe in atomic power” doesn’t stop a bomb from exploding. And we have some sense that deep in the past a number of Homo species existed simultaneously because we have some of their fossilized remains. We just don’t know their level of consciousness or even their possible relationship to that “First Human Being” some 200 to 300 thousand years ago. And unlike Protagoras, we can’t really say when exactly, where exactly, or how exactly the rudiments of civilization arose.
So, we bounce between being the “measure of all things” to sometimes being measured by some absolute system that exists outside our individual opinion while still knowing that we live in ignorance about the ultimate physical reality of our existence. What’s left? Those arguments about to which we apply perceptions and personal opinions. Political, philosophical, and ethical arguments. And when some Protagoras with skills in rhetoric that exceed those of opponents wins the day in a public argument, we ascribe to his opinion. He (or she) is, after all, a voice heard and respected by many—or by at least one more than half a population.
It is a bit ironic that in their adamant belief in the absolutes of their opinions, so many ascribe to the positions of others and to their perceptions. It is ironic that in an Age of Protagoreans so many who claim a priority for their opinion actually seek the opinions of the most public voices. We are, in our times of TV punditry, largely dependent upon the thoughts of others.
One might think the primary question that someone who holds himself or herself as the “measure of all” might ask is “Who cares what others think on issues I care to care about?” The popularity of TV pundit shows seems to indicate that many people do care about the perceptions of others and that many take what the pundits say as expressions of Absolutes.
We really haven’t progressed much since the fifth century B.C., have we? We’re still making absolute statements about opinions. Still arguing in the public arena. Still running the gamut of self-contradictory positions. Still living in a great deal of ignorance. Still trying to define what is both right and virtuous. And, unfortunately, still imposing rules on ourselves as public perceptions allow.
RSS Feed