Abstract

The cause or reason for wrong action may, thus, be lack of courage as well as lack of wisdom, or lack of any of the other excellences. In the light of this possibility, putative examples of people knowingly doing wrong are discussed, and speculations are offered about the reasons for such wrong-doing. It is suggested that Plato may be presenting a Socrates who argues ineffectively because he does not understand that excellence cannot be produced by the refutations produced by his elenctic method of teaching. It is also suggested that Plato may be presenting a Protagoras who is more interested in reputation and honor than in genuine teaching and learning, and that this is the reason why, in the end, Protagoras refuses to co-operate with Socrates in a search for the truth about virtue and knowledge. ;The view that Plato is presenting this as an aporetic dialogue is discussed and rejected. Also discussed and rejected is the suggestion that it is presented as an exercise in dissoi logoi. Plato might be taken to be presenting two equally effective methods of teaching and two equally acceptable conceptions of human excellence. It is argued, however, that it is more likely that Plato's intention was not to present such a balanced comparison and contrast, but to blacken the image of the sophist and to show why Socrates and at least a few other Athenians were quite right to regard Protagoras and his teachings as dangerous. ;Close examination of the context of the arguments shows that some virtues other than, and additional to, knowledge are required for courageous action. Hence virtue cannot be reduced to knowledge. The one thing that is virtue cannot be knowledge. Rather, the one thing the various virtues conjointly comprise is virtue itself. This one being is a composite of courage and holiness, justice, judiciousness, and wisdom. Correspondingly, in the act that truly is exemplary of human excellence, each of the virtues will be manifested. ;Disagreement over the relation between courage and knowledge is shown, initially, to be a disagreement over whether the focus of the discussion should be on criteria for judging an action good or on the causes of right action. To challenge Protagoras' belief that the human excellence manifested in good action may have diverse causes, Socrates appears to be seeking to show that knowledge is always necessary for right action. He argues that wrong action is due to ignorance . But from this it does not necessarily follow that knowledge is sufficient for right action. ;The arguments of Plato's Protagoras are presented and examined seriately. Wisdom and holiness, and judiciousness and wisdom are shown to be much closer in resemblance or sameness of kind than Socrates' logical arguments would seem to have shown. Points are drawn from the Great Speech to show that Socrates and Protagoras really are in agreement on the sameness of kind of these excellences