This paper explores the role the Panhellenic centers played in facilitating the circulation of wisdom in ancient Greece. It argues that there are substantial thematic overlaps among practitioners of wisdom , who are typically understood as belonging to different categories . By focusing on the presence of σοφοί at the Panhellenic centers in general, and Delphi in particular, we can acquire a more accurate picture of the particular expertise they possessed, and of the range of meanings the Greeks attributed to (...) the word σοφία. This approach seeks to challenge the conventional categories of modern scholarship and to offer a broader and more inclusive interpretive framework in its stead. One such thematic overlap is the way in which many σοφοί are described as exerting an almost uncanny, yet highly conventional ability to attract listeners and enchant them with their verbal performances. There is plenty of material to support the view that σοφοό, through tapping into the repository of σοφία that Delphi constituted and by aligning themselves with its authority, were seen as themselves being a conduit for a similar type of charismatic speech. (shrink)

The Protagoras is a contest of philosophical methods. With its mix of μῦθος and λόγος, Protagoras’ Great Speech stands as a competing model of philosophical discourse to the Socratic elenchus. While the mythical portion of the speech clearly impresses its audience—Socrates included—one of its central claims appears to pass undefended. This is the claim that the political art cannot be distributed within a community as the technical arts are. This apparent shortcoming of the Great Speech does not seem to trouble (...) philosophical commentators: it is a myth, after all, and it seems reasonable to suppose that the sly sophist slips certain claims into his myth precisely to avoid having to defend them. Nevertheless, it is worth subjecting the claim to philosophical scrutiny. What could be the reason that the political art had to be distributed differently than were the technical arts, as the myth insists? (shrink)

Starohelenska etika nosila je u svom predanju protivrjecan odnos u razumjevanju vrline kao kljucnog pojma na kojem se zasniva polis i politika. Na izostravanju i objelodanjavanju ove protivrjecnosti umnogome je doprinjela sofistika koja je mjerilom racionalnosti uocavala ona filosofski nedovoljno razjasnjena mjesta u starohelenskoj slici svijeta. Da bi razrjesio protivrjecnost nastalu iz nacelnog tradicionalnog stava da se vrlina ne moze nauciti i stava da je vrlina povezana sa znanjem, Platon uvodi u razmatranje pojam sjecanja. Sjecanje postaje sredisnja tacka u Platonovom (...) prevazilazenju navedene protivrjecnosti. Razmatraju se dva oblika sjecanja, ono koje je univerzalno ali i time samo potencijalno dato, i ono koje je djelatno i koje vodi do teorije ideja koja odredjuje sta jeste vrlina. PR Projekat Ministarstva nauke Republike Srbije, br. 179049. (shrink)

This article seeks to present a detailed textual analysis of Protagoras’ Great Speech in Plato'sProtagoras. I will argue that the concept of ἀρετή as it appears in the Great Speech is whittled down to a vague notion of civic duty. In this respect, Protagoras is bringing himself in line with the democracy, but in doing so the ἀρετή he claims to teach loses much of its initial appeal, particularly in the eyes of his aristocratic clientele. Nevertheless, if thecontentof Protagoras’ Great (...) Speech overlooks the abilities required to rise to political prominence, theformmost assuredly does not. As one would expect from Plato's Protagoras, his speech is replete with just that oratorical prowess his students might expect to acquire from him. This, in turn, has a number of interesting and important implications in the broader context of theProtagoras, in particular regarding the contrast or conflict between long speeches and short-answer dialectic. Moreover, although it has long been noticed that Protagoras neglects rhetoric and personal pre-eminence in his account, as far as I know there has not been any serious attempt to analyse the stylistic aspects of this masterful speech. Accordingly, both this and my attempt to interpret it within the economy of the dialogue are original. (shrink)