Two versions of Peri tou mē ontos ptmo by Gorgias, related by an Anonymous Author MXG and by Sextus Empiricus SE, have been alternatively accredited by scholars according to their disposition to seek a doctrine or a rhetorical- communicational dimension respectively with the first tendency prevailing. Comparing the ptmo to the rest of Gorgiasʼ works, we verify and clearly demonstrate how SE manages to convey a precise modus argumentandi. In effect, SE shows Gorgias’ demonstrative reasoning as employing: 1 the application (...) of demonstrandum and quod erat demonstrandum typical of Gorgiasʼ speeches, reinforced by a substantial and abundant use of verbs of explanation and demonstration, especially in comparison to the rest of the same Against the Logicians’ section. Otherwise, MXG reduces this lexicon to the more generic phēmi; 2 the continuous employment of the reductio ad absurdum, like in all of Gorgias’ works; 3 a very refined formulation of the principle of non-contradiction §67, similar to the one seen in Pal. 25. In addition, MXG is accurate in the discussion of some arguments as in the third kephalaion, however, presents as an overcorrected interpreter, more interested in questioning Gorgias than reporting his original text, also directly referring to Zeno, Melissus, and Leucippus. The context of the ptmo in SE’s work the structure presented leads us to believe that SE had the text or at least an accurate summary of the ptmo different from MXG. The aims of this paper are: 1 to demonstrate that SE shows well the Gorgianic demonstrative reasoning and, for this specific reason, he is reliable and valuable resource for us; 2 to hypothesise that SE’s version is based on and independent as yet unknown source. (shrink)

The two extant versions of Gorgias’ Peri tou mē ontos have been preserved by an anonymous author and by Sextus Empiricus. Both versions have been differently interpreted by scholars who examine either the doctrine or the rhetorical-communicational dimen­sion. When comparing the PTMO with the rest of Gorgias’ works, the present paper aims to demonstrate that S.E. offers a more precise account of Gorgias’ modus argumentandi. Thus, S.E. shows the following, typical features of Gorgias’ demonstra­tive reasoning: 1) application of demonstrandum and (...) quod erat demon­strandum, 2) continuous employment of reductio ad absurdum and 3) a refined formulation of the principle of non-contradiction. The MXG, on the other hand, is accurate in the discussion of particular arguments, but presents an interpreter who is more interested in questioning Gorgias rather than doing justice to his thought. Hence, this article concludes that it was S.E., who had the text or at least a relatively accurate summa­ry of the PTMO. (shrink)