Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Protagoras's attempt to persuade others to accept relativ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Protagoras's attempt to persuade others to accept relativism is pragmatically self-refuting

    Philosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Protagoras's act of persuasion presupposes that his arguments have truth-tracking force capable of rationally moving interlocutors toward relativism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If all truths are relative to the individual, then Protagoras's arguments cannot possess the intersubjective rational authority that persuasion requires.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore Protagoras must tacitly invoke an absolute standard of argumentative validity that his own doctrine prohibits, undercutting the enterprise from within.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.As Plato demonstrates in the Theaetetus (169d–171c), the Protagorean doctrine entails that those who disagree with relativism are correct relative to their own measure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If dissenters are by relativism's own lights correct, then Protagoras's attempt to replace their view with his constitutes an action his doctrine renders rationally unjustifiable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Engaging in rational persuasion thus commits Protagoras to the existence of mind-independent evaluative standards—precisely the objectivism he denies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Defending a philosophical position commits one to attempting to convince interlocutors of the superior value of that position
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The relativist cannot assume that her arguments are good for persuading others
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore the relativist cannot make the standard dialectical commitment required by argumentation
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    SkepticismPhilosophy of Language

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge2 linked

    Related

    As Plato demonstrates in the Theaetetus (169d–171c), the Protagorean doctrine en...Defending a philosophical position commits one to attempting to convince interlo...Engaging in rational persuasion thus commits Protagoras to the existence of mind...If all truths are relative to the individual, then Protagoras's arguments cannot...
    +5 moreShow less
    If dissenters are by relativism's own lights correct, then Protagoras's attempt ...Protagoras's act of persuasion presupposes that his arguments have truth-trackin...The relativist cannot assume that her arguments are good for persuading othersTherefore Protagoras must tacitly invoke an absolute standard of argumentative v...Therefore the relativist cannot make the standard dialectical commitment require...

    Similar

    Alethic relativism is self-refuting89%If Protagoras genuinely believes in relativism, arguing for relativism...83%Therefore arguing for relativism is self-undermining81%Protagoras, under the cogent-reasoning reinterpretation of his relativ...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: relativism
    View source passageHide passage
    Plato’s argument, as it stands, appears to be damaging only if we assume that Protagoras, at least implicitly, is committed to the universal or objective truth of relativism. On this view, Plato begs the question on behalf of an absolutist conception of truth (Burnyeat 1976a: 44). Protagoras, the relativists counter, could indeed accept that his own doctrine is false for those who accept absolutism but continue believing that his doctrine is true for him. He could also try to persuade others to
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit