THE GOLDEN AGE OF GREEK PHILOSOPHY The Sophists.—After their victory over the Persians, the Greeks experienced something similar to the change of general outlook that was brought about by the great World War centuries later. The desire for the good things of life spread among wider circles of people. And there was an increased desire for knowledge, at once as a good thing in itself, as a social and political aid, and possibly as a means to a new orientation after the shock to traditional beliefs and habits which is generally caused by a great upheaval like a war. The general demand for knowledge naturally produced a supply of popular teachers. And so the Sophists came into being. These "wise men," or teachers of wisdom. rendered valuable services to the cause of general education. They not only helped to create a wider interest in philosophical and other problems but by their criticisms compelled greater thinkers to probe more deeply into the questions raised. Except among reactionaries, who, then, as always, showed hos tility to the enlightenment of the people, the Sophists enjoyed a good repute among their contemporaries; it was only long after wards that the term Sophist became derogatory. The most famous of the Sophists were Protagoras, Georgias, Hippias, and Prodicus. As teachers of the art of debate it was their business to show how to make the best of even a weak case. In order to make a public display of their own skill in the art of defence it would have been futile merely to defend generally accepted views—anybody might do that. They could give much better proof of their skill by defending lost causes, paradoxes, views that seemed strange or even absurd at first—they had to "make the worse case appear the stronger," as Aristophanes complained. The effect of all this was sure to be demoralizing upon some of the young Athen ians. And their criticism of existing social and political institu tions was no doubt distasteful to some of the propertied and influential people. Hence their unpopularity with some. In the history of philosophy their importance consists mainly in the interest which they aroused in ethical problems and in problems of knowledge. The most important doctrine associated with their name is that enunciated by Protagoras in the dictum : "Man is the measure of all things." By this he meant that there is no such
thing as universally valid knowledge. Different people have different views, and for each person that is true which he, honestly and to the best of his ability, believes to be true. Similarly with moral goodness. In a world of merely relative standards, some of the Sophists maintained, it was no good pursuing truth; better to adapt oneself to the practical needs of life in the environment in which he finds himself. (See SOPHISTS.) Socrates (469-399 B.c.) was counted by his contemporaries among the Sophists. For he, too, was interested in educating young people by means of discussions (though he taught without pay) ; he also was interested in problems of human conduct rather than in problems about the ultimate nature of reality; and he also did not see absolute truth in the opinions commonly entertained. But, unlike the Sophists, he did believe in the possibility of knowledge, provided it were pursued in the right way. And the way which he proposed is that known subsequently as the Socratic Method (q.v.). This method consisted essentially in checking one's ideas by constant reference to relevant instances until they are transformed into universally valid concepts or ideas. In essence it is an inductive method proceeding by elimi nation, though Socrates applied it to a sphere of problems in which the relevant data could be obtained by merely cross examining people. Ideas checked and corrected in this way so as to agree with the relevant facts are true, and altogether above the merely fluctuating opinions of men based on bare sense-percep tion, or tradition, or hearsay. So convinced was Socrates of the possibility of real knowledge, and so impressed with its im portance, that he based all else upon it, identifying moral good, or virtue, with knowledge. By thus identifying virtue with knowledge, he may have thought that he also cured morality of the mere relativity which the Sophists had found in it. Yet he was con demned as a corrupter of the young, and died as the first known martyr in the cause of philosophy. (See SOCRATES.) The Successors of Socrates.—As Socrates had never given formal instruction and, moreover, left no writings behind him, it was easy and natural for different people to have different impres sions of his teaching.