Introduction
In Theaetetus, Socrates argues about the matter and essence of knowledge in his dialogue with Theodorus. While the latter believes that knowledge is perception, the former provides another perspective of knowledge, giving examples and refuting the arguments of Theodorus and Theaetetus. In this work, Plato endeavors to show that Socrates does not impose his opinion on the man but merely navigates him to find the truth. As a result, the fallible nature of Theodorus’ point of view and Socrates’ ideas and reasoning complete the dialogue, climaxing in the former’s belief.
The dialogue of Socrates with Theodorus and Theaetetus
At the beginning of the dialogue between the men, Theodorus claimed that knowledge is perception, which led Socrates to analyze the view of Protagoras. The perspective of Protagoras is similar, and it alludes to the same points. However, according to Socrates, the given opinion cannot be regarded as truthful. The philosopher provides the statements of Protagoras: “ … everything is, for me, the way it appears to me, and is, for you, the way it appears to you….” Socrates sees this approach as devoid of truth since “perception is always of what is, and free from falsehood as if it’s knowledge” (Plato 152a). In his example, he says, “when the same wind is blowing one of us feels cold and the other not” (Plato 152b). As a result, such information can be subjective and depends on the individual. In another example, it can be said that beauty can be perceived differently, with one person claiming something to be beautiful and another not perceiving it this way. As a result, to Socrates, perception is based on subjective feelings and focuses on personal experiences, which cannot be false.
Socrates goes further to debate the claims of Protagoras by providing arguments regarding deities and animals. For example, as per Protagoras’ perspective, the perception of any creature is accurate. This leads to the argument that the perceptions of animals are not inferior to the perceptions of people, making them almost equal. Nevertheless, Socrates finds such a view ludicrous since, this way, people are no better than “pig, or a baboon, or some other creature that has perception” (Plato 161c). As a result, the perspective of Protagoras is fallible since people’s perceptions are superior to animals.
Yet, the given fallible argument transcends the mere concept of animals’ equality. As per Protagoras’ point of view, if all perceptions are equal, the perceptions of gods are equal to those held by mortals. Socrates, in his questions to Theaetetus, also refuted this view. For example, Socrates asks whether the man believes that he is “to be no worse in point of wisdom than anyone whatever, man or even god?” ending with another inquiry that such measure “isn’t meant to be applied to gods as much as to men” (Plato 162b). This shows that the Protagorean measure stretches far beyond reality and common sense.
As for the opposite doctrine, it is viewed differently because it rests on the opinion of unchanging natures, which defies knowledge. At this point, it is superior since Socrates argues if the people’s perspective is truthful, “we’ll help them pull us over to their side” (181a). Otherwise, their opinions and knowledge should be avoided if they are fallible. The philosopher implies that assuming that such people can provide reasonable ideas is foolish.
Conclusion
Thus, the dialogue of Socrates with Theodorus and Theaetetus focuses on the nature of knowledge, wherein the former provides arguments against the perspective of Protagoras. According to Theodorus, knowledge is perception, and this view is based on Protagoras’ reasoning. According to Socrates, the views of Protagoras are fallible since if all perceptions are equal, there should be no superiors between humans, gods, and animals. Lastly, Socrates speaks on the opposite doctrine and argues that if someone’s perceptions do not align with ours, people should avoid them.
Work Cited
Plato. (2014). Theaetetus. OUP Oxford.