Out one café window, it was raining. Out the other, it was not. I swung my head one way and then the other, trying to make sense of it. The barista watched me out of the corner of her eye, wondering what new variety of strange behaviour she had to witness. But it was true: sunny one way and showering the other. Cross the street and you were dry. She shrugged and knocked the grounds out of her portafilter.
Life is a game of adaptation. Before I take the girls to school, I check the skies; I check the forecast; I gather our rain gear. I gauge the movements of the clouds. I time our exit like a surfer catching a wave, hoping the lull in the rain lasts just long enough for our trip. I have developed a fine barometric sensitivity for rain. I smell it coming. I search the skies continuously like a fugitive.
A skill is a measure of change. It was formed as a response to the world. The human, as a bundle of skills, is the measure of all things.
It was Protagoras who first said, “Man is the measure of all things.” He was a sophist, according to the historians. In two different dialogues written by Plato, Protagoras the Sophist was put in his place by Socrates, the Non-Sophist. I’m sceptical of the labels. I’m also sceptical about Plato’s Socrates. I don’t think it detracts from Plato’s incredible achievement to admit that he very likely created a version of Socrates that fit into his program.
This is what I think about the sophists. They have come down to us in historical record as somewhat despicable figures, having lost the long-term propaganda war. They are portrayed as relativists, if we can be allowed borrow a modern pejorative.
It’s not enough to accept the caricature. Young men wanted what they had to teach. In societies in which business and policy were decided in the marketplace and the forum, rhetoric was a necessary skill. The thrust of their teaching was skill-building: rhetoric and applied logic. Skills teachers focus on problem-solving and the solutions are pragmatic, not theoretical. Skills teachers focus on pushing boundaries and asking questions. They all had their different methods and their different styles, but they agreed on empowering students to handle debate, public speaking, and critical thinking. Several made extravagant claims about their own knowledge. Imagine, a teacher who lives on tuition fees bragging about his knowledge!
Let’s compare now the Socratic method, setting aside the conclusions that Plato forced Socrates to reach. The method consisted of questioning, defining terms, pushing boundaries, and applying logic. The outcome? He was charged in the courts of impiety and the corruption of the youth of Athens. I think the line between Socrates and his competition is less categorical and more one of branding. He was perhaps just the best of the sophists, after all, not the alternative to the sophists.