Euthydemus (dialogue)

Part of the series on: The Dialogues of Plato

Early dialogues:

Apology – Charmides – Crito

Euthyphro – First Alcibiades

Hippias Major – Hippias Minor

Ion – Laches – Lysis

Transitional & middle dialogues:

Cratylus – Euthydemus – Gorgias

Menexenus – Meno – Phaedo

Protagoras – Symposium

Later middle dialogues:

Republic – Phaedrus

Parmenides – Theaetetus

Late dialogues:

Clitophon – Timaeus – Critias

Sophist – Statesman

Philebus – Laws

Of doubtful authenticity:

Axiochus – Demodocus

Epinomis – Epistles – Eryxias

Halcyon – Hipparchus – Minos

On Justice – On Virtue

Rival Lovers – Second Alcibiades

Sisyphus – Theages

Euthydemus (Euthydemos), written 380 BCE, is dialogue by Plato which satirizes what Plato presents as the logical fallacies of the Sophists. It describes a visit paid by Socrates and various youths to two brothers, Euthydemus and Dionysodorus, both of whom are prominent Sophists. The main purpose of Euthydemus is to contrast Socratic argumentation and education with those of Sophism, to the detriment of the latter. As in many of the dialogues, the two Sophists whom Socrates argues against, Euthydemus and Dionysodorus, were indeed real people. Euthydemus was somewhat famous at the time the dialogue was written, and is mentioned several times by both Plato and Aristotle. Likewise, Dionysodorus is mentioned by Xenophon. The dialogue contrasts Socrates' manner with that of the brothers. Throughout the dialogue, Euthydemus and Dionysodorus continually attempt to ensnare Socrates with what are presented as deceptive and meaningless arguments, primarily to demonstrate their professed philosophical superiority.

Eristic argument

Plato defines Euthydemus' and Dionysodorus' argumentation as 'eristic'. This literally means "designed for wrangling" ('eris' meaning 'strife' in Greek). No matter how one attempts to refute eristic arguments, the argument is designed so that any means of refutation will fail. For example, at one point, Euthydemus attempts to prove the impossibility of falsehood.

"Non-facts do not exist do they?" "No, they don't." "And things which do not exist do not exist anywhere, do they?" "No." "Now, is it possible for things which do not exist to be the object of any action, in the sense that things which do not exist anywhere can have anything done to them? "I don't think so." "Well then, when politicians speak in the Assembly, isn't that an activity?" "Yes, it is." "And if it's an activity, they are doing something.?" "Yes." "Then speech is activity, and doing something.?" He agreed. "So no one speaks non-existent things: I mean, he would already, in speaking, be doing something, and you have agreed that it is impossible for non-existent things to have anything done to them by anybody. So you have committed to the view that lies never happen: if Dionysodorus speaks, he speaks facts–that is, truth."

Characters

• Socrates
• Crito
• Cleinias
• Euthydemus
• Dionysodorus
• Ctesippus

Translations

• Benjamin Jowett, 1871 - [1]
• Walter Rangeley Maitland Lamb, 1882 - [2]

External links

• Approaching Plato: A Guide to the Early and Middle Dialogues

See also

• Eristic