Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Urging righteousness and virtue: Socrates, Gorgias and the nature of moral argument

By Peter Woolcock


In the Gorgias Socrates claims that it is worse to be a wrong-doer than to be the victim of\ud wrong-doing. His adversaries, Polus and Callicles, regard this position as preposterous.\ud In this paper, I argue that, from the viewpoint of what it is rational to urge others to do,\ud then Polus and Callicles are the ones acting irrationally, at least when the urging takes\ud place in a consensual, as opposed to a coercive, argument situation between autonomous\ud and competent rational agents. They are guilty of a pragmatic practical paradox, even if\ud what they say may be rational enough to believe when held as a theoretical view about\ud a third party. My analysis also demonstrates that rationality favours the urging of most\ud of the other startling judgements that Socrates endorses, with particular consideration\ud given to the centrality of shame in showing the irrationality of urging some courses of\ud action rather than others

Topics: Greek research, Greece, Australia
Publisher: Modern Greek Studies Association of Australia and New Zealand (MGSAANZ)
Year: 2013
OAI identifier:

Suggested articles

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.