Nietzsche's Reading of the Sophists Author(s): Scott Consigny Source: Rhetoric Review, Vol. 13, No. 1 (Autumn, 1994), pp.

5-26 Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/465777 Accessed: 28/05/2010 00:16
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Rhetoric Review.

http://www.jstor.org

SCOTTCONSIGNY Iowa State University

Nietzsche's Reading of the Sophists1

Until recently, scholars have tended to credit two nineteenth-century thinkers, G. F. Hegel and George Grote, for initiating the modem of "rehabilitation" the sophists.2 But in the past several years, an increasing numberof scholars have begun to draw inspirationfrom the writings of another nineteenth-century figure, Friedrich Nietzsche. Among those taking this "Nietzschean turn," Mario Untersteinerutilizes Nietzsche's conception of the "tragic"in his account of Gorgias's epistemology (101-205), a reading Eric White supplements with Nietzsche's notion of the "dionysian"(38). Victor Vitanza, characterizing Nietzsche as a "dionysian Sophist," draws from Nietzsche's tropological model of language to illuminate the sophists' own rhetoric("Sub/Versions"112; "Notes"131); and David Roochnik contends that Nietzsche's critique of reason illuminates the sophists' own "misology" ("Tragedy" 155, 162). In the sphere of ethics, E. R. Dodds maintains that 50, is Nietzsche's "immoralism" similar to the egoism of Gorgias'sstudentCallicles (387-91), and Daniel Shaw contends that Nietzsche's critique of morality iterates the sophists' notion that "moralvaluations remain matters of opinion" (339). Concerning methodology, John Poulakos argues that Nietzsche's "genealogical" approach is most suited for interpreting the sophists ("Interpreting"219-21); and Susan Jarratt credits Nietzsche's method as of authorizing her own "re-reading" the sophists (xix). But whereas they have drawn on a variety of Nietzsche's ideas and interpretivestrategies to advance of what Jacqueline de Romilly characterizesas a "Nietzscheaninterpretation" the sophists ("Sophists"xi), none of these scholars has systematicallyexamined Nietzsche's own quite specific and extensive writings about the sophists. The untoward result is that we possess a variety of "Nietzscheanreadings"of the sophists that tend to silence Nietzsche's own distinctive voice. This tendency to overlook Nietzsche's own specific remarks about the for sophists is quite understandable, Nietzsche never wrote a systematictreatise on the sophists and instead discussed them in a ratherfragmentarymannerin a varietyof texts over a periodof almost two decades. Further,with the exception of three quite brief passages-in Human,All-Too-Human221, Dawn 168, and the "Ancients,"Twilight of the Idols 2-Nietzsche did not publish any of his remarksabout the sophists, confining his discussions to his 1872-1873 lecture notes in the history of Greek rhetoric ("Descriptionof Ancient Rhetoric"and

RhetoricReview, Vol. 13, No. 1, Fall 1994

5

In this essay I examine Nietzsche's diverse writings on the sophists and attempt to reconstructhis own account of them. nothing that "The most valuable insights are arrived at last. whom he identifies as among the principalenemies of that culture. In his examinationof the sophists in particular.4 But whereas this scholarly neglect is not surprising. in that it undertakesto situate an object of study from a particular perspective. his genealogy is interested or partisan in that it is anchoredin his own interests as a thinker and writer.6 RhetoricReview "The History of Greek Eloquence"). I next examine what Nietzsche delineates as three features of the sophists' teachings: their rhetorical model of language. Nietzsche's "quarrelwith Socrates is part of a vast historical drama which he recounts and which features Socrates as the first villain and Nietzsche himself . whom he champions as the principal adversaries of the "Socratic schools. their critique of epistemology." and several passages collected posthumouslyin The Will To Power. First." As Werner Dannhauser observes. Nietzsche uses a method that he labels genealogical.Nietzsche situates his reading within a projectof cultural renewal designed to affirm "Life"and provide an alternativeto what he saw as the "motley"and "merely decorative" culture of his own time ("UH" 10). to be a source of the modem culturalmalaise.6 Nietzsche portraysthe tragic culture of Greece as a model for such a cultural renewal." I conclude with a discussion of how a "neoNietzschean" reading of the sophists may provide a direction for the "Nietzscheanturn"in sophistic criticism and generate new perspectiveson the sophists. but the most valuable insights are methods"(WP 469). the 1872 essay "Homer'sContest. it is nevertheless unfortunate. it is understandable that scholars have tended to marginalize Nietzsche's own comments about the sophists. Nietzsche's Genealogical Method Perhapsthe first striking featureof Nietzsche's discussion of the sophists is his method. one that suggests avenues of inquiry that scholars have not yet pursued. Nietzsche himself stresses the importanceof method.3Because many of these unpublishedremarks are even more fragmentaryand enigmatic than his published writings and because some scholars have questioned the use of the Nachlass as a reliable source of his views. for Nietzsche advances a complex and provocativereading of the sophists. To this end I first discuss Nietzsche's "genealogical"method of reading. It is in this context of articulatingthe genealogy of the Westernculturalmalaise that Nietzsche discusses the sophists. one that may be seen as an application of his more general "perspectivist" epistemology. one with which he situates the sophists as pivotal figures in the agonistic and creative culture of fifth-centuryGreece.5 Nietzsche's genealogical method is explicitly "partial"in two significant ways. and their "immoralism. and he depicts Socrates and Plato.

his use of rhetoricalfigures.Nietzsche is highly selective in his accounts of Protagoras and Gorgias themselves. Concerning Protagoras. and in his quarrel.and he explicitly excludes Critias from his list of sophists ("DAR" 169). precisely because of its "unscholarly" partisanship and partiality. and The Defense of Palamedes. Nietzsche thus advances an overtly partisan defense of the sophists. and in which he deliberately ignores or suppresses other possible modes of placement. Moreover.7 Equally striking is the fact that Nietzsche does not mention any of Gorgias's extant texts. one Arthur Danto labels "methodologicalmonism" (216). He mentions Agathon and Thrasymachusonly in passing. asserting that "everyadvance in epistemological and moral knowledge has reinstated the Sophists" (WP 428). Stated another way. He insists that "the 'disinterested' action is an exceedingly interesting and interested action" (BGE 220). 171.Nietzsche suggests that the sophists may be seen as his own "co-workers and precursors" (WP 464). 43. and his putative ("DAR"25. and he never pretendsthat his account is in any sense a "disinterested" inquiry. that two opposed accounts are present about everything (D80. namely the claim to "make the weaker argument the stronger"(HGE 215). by focusing his attention almost exclusively on Protagorasand Gorgias. In respect to his treatment of the sophists. Nietzsche never claims otherwise. 91. He contends that we are "not to assume several kinds of causality until the experimentof making do with a single one has been pushed to its utmost limit (to the point of nonsense. and in so doing he ignores Protagoras's famous assertions that the human being is the measure of all things (D80. and he suggests that in his effort "toreplace the improbablewith the more probable. Nietzsche discusses only one extant fragment. and that he is unable to know whetherthe gods exist (D80. if I may say so)-that is a moral of method" (BGE 36).B6a). Nietzsche presents a "genealogy"in which he delineates one pattern of placement and interconnection. without addressing their epistemological or ethical views. Nietzsche uses this principle of selectiveness. Nietzsche's genealogical method is partial in a second sense in that he attends to a limited selection of material. "extemporaneity" scholars have challenged Nietzsche's genealogical method.B4). Nietzsche lauds the sophists as seminal thinkers who have influenced every subsequentadversaryof the Socratic schools. he is simply more "honest"than those scholars who mistakenly think that they are able to be disinterestedand complete in their readings.Nietzsche'sReading of the Sophists 7 as the final hero"(272).B 1). Indeed.possibly one error with another"(GM Pr 4). Many especially in regardto classical philology. 81. HA 221). completely ignoring the arguments of On Nature or Not Being. The Encomium of Helen. and he contends that individuals who construct "systems"betray a lack of integrity in . the Epitaphios. he never mentions Hippias or Prodicus. and instead confining his attentionto Gorgias'spoetic style.8But whereas his account of the sophists may be aggressively partisan and egregiously selective.

that wonderfulphenomenonwhich bears the name of Dionysus. He observes: "I saw their strongest instinct."TI 3).. He notes that It must offend their pride. also their taste. a surplus or plenitude of force. Greek culture was exemplary because of its "noble simplicity" and "quietgrandeur. and he repudiatesthe dogmatist'sassumptionthat "thereshould be a 'truth' which one could somehow approach" (WP451). and ridiculing the notion of "'beautifulsouls. repudiating what he saw as the misguided "Enlightenment" account of Johann Winckelmann." their "calm in greatness. like himself."TI 3).8 Rhetoric Review that they tend to be oblivious of their own interests." qualities manifested not only in its art but in its "writing from the best periods. only interpretations" (WP481).' and other perfection in the Greeks. the will to power. The Genealogy of the Sophists Using his genealogical method. if their truth is supposed to be a truth for everyman-which has so far been the secret wish and hidden meaning of all dogmatic aspirations. Nietzsche insists that "factsis precisely what there is not.. "("Ancients. he praises those "philosophers of the future" who. Nietzsche rejects this reading. but unlike Winckelmann he insists that this art emerged from the Greeks' ability to channel their "rich and even overflowing Hellenic instinct. depicting them as its "advancedteachers" and perhaps most eloquent advocates.' 'golden means. In place of this reading. Consequently." (BGE 43) Unlike the positivist who claims knowledge of the "facts" in themselves. Nietzsche situates the sophists as central figures in fifth-centuryGreek culture. and he maintains that "one does not . have no intention to that articulatea "truth" is for everyone. it is useful first to sketch his view of the culture in which he situates them. In order to understand Nietzsche's account of the sophists. 'My judgment is my judgment':no one else is easily entitled to it-that is what such a philosopherof the futuremay perhapssay of himself. Nietzsche does not deny that the Greeks produced great art and writing. the writings from the Socratic school" (27. it is explicable only in terms of an excess of force" (TI 560).. 45). their noble simplicity . then. According to Winckelmann. Nietzsche insists that Greek culture emerged from a ferocious and often violent energy. considering it a "comedy"to be "exposed"(WP 830). I saw them tremble before the indomitable force of this drive-I saw how all their institutions grew out of preventive measures taken to protecteach other against their inner explosives" ("Ancients. their ideal cast of mind. Nietzsche presents his view of Greek culture in an explicitly polemical manner.

Instead."TI 3). He notes thatearly Greek mythology portraysa world of "cruelty. Nietzsche depicts competition and creativity as correlativefactors in Greek culture. terrible. Nietzsche insists that individual Greeks did not mastertheir explosive energy in isolation."Nietzsche observes that prior to the classical age. as a protection against the genius. One consequence of this correlation of creativity and competition. Rather than seeking the "unconditional" the absolute. and whose artistic works were in turn framed within and conditionedby the protocols of the contests. it desires. according to Nietzsche. then. theognic myths reflect? A life ruled only by the children of Night: strife. to direct and harmonize diverse forces within himself in a productive and creative manner. lust. to show themselves on top ("Ancients. and sought through the institution of the agon to proliferatefurtherperspectives. that the very "soul" of the ancient Greeks was the "personalcontest"(D 175). Rather than seeking a single authority. a tigerish lust to annihilate"("HC"32). old age. Thus Nietzsche argues that all "Greek artists.A further . Nietzsche characterizesas "dionysian" ability of the an individual to establish unity from diversity. In effect. wrote in order to triumph. Nietzsche observes: "Thatis the core of the Hellenic notion of the contest: it abominates the rule of one and fears its dangers. they encourageda multiplicity or of competing voices. In his mature works. another genius" ("HC" 37). Despite its horrors. for example.Nietzsche'sReadingof the Sophists 9 know the Greeks as long as this hidden subterraneanentrance lies blocked" (WP 1051). the Greeks sanctioned a diversity of competing perspectives. the Greeks lived in a world of violence and destruction. and death"("HC"34). every great virtue kindles a new greatness" ("HC" 36). the Greeks joyfully embraced the "terriblepresence of this [violent] urge and considered it justified" ("HC" 35) because it spurredthem into creative agons. that the pre-Homericworld is one in which "only night and terror and an imagination accustomed to the horrible. deceit.he argues that the Greeks were able to master their violent instincts through competition.9But whereas he admires Greek culture for its distinctive individuals. the tragedians.10In the essay "Homer's Contest. their whole art cannot be imagined without competition"(HA 170). that "Everygreat Hellene hands on the torch of the contest.and that it was only through the agon that they were able to channel their drive toward annihilation and violence in creative ways. wherein individuals competed and attainedglory by means of their ingenuity and creativity. was that the Greeks fostered a plurality of competitors and geniuses and refused to countenancethe authorityof any one voice. What kind of earthly existence do these revolting. and that "withfestivals and the arts they also aimed at nothing other than to feel on top. each of which was recognized as emerging from and rendered discernible by the specific constraints of the agon itself. according to Nietzsche. in the institution of the agon or contest.

Commenting on The Birth of Tragedy. in Democritus its natural philosopher . the advanced teacher of antiquity. . Nietzsche characterizestheir adversaries. And just as the youths were engaged through contests.. of necessities. deserves to be baptizedwith the name of its teachers. the Greek knows the artist only as engaged in a personal fight. In the words of one sophist's nephew. It is in the context of this integral relationship between creativity and competition that Nietzsche situates the fifth-century sophists. the sophist. one adumbrated the escapism of the Orphic mystics who expressed a "disgust with existence . . "No one of mortals before discovered a finer art than Gorgias to arm the soul for contests of excellence" (D80.the Sophists"(D 168). as play" ("DAR" 3). "which had in Sophocles its poet." Nietzsche depicts the contentious sophists as the very embodimentof Greekculture... transforming the potential destructivenessof physical combat into a creatively "playful"activity that encouraged contestants to overcome not only their adversaries but their own prior achievements and limits. in Pericles its statesman. Because he sees the sophists as the principal teachers of Greek culture. Insofar as he depicts the sophists as central to Greek culture.. . . . ... Nietzsche thus denigrates the socratic schools as articulating what he characterizes as a "non-Hellenic" in response.Plato and the "Socraticschools. a conception of existence as a punishment and guilt" ("HC"34). He points out that underthe tutelage of the sophists.10 RhetoricReview consequence Nietzsche sees in the institutionof agon is the Greek emphasis on play. Nietzsche asserts that fifth-centuryGreek culture. even of danger. and his "teaching"is one that encourages creativity through competition. Rather than portraying them as marginal figures in a culture whose highest achievement is the "quietgrandeur"and "noble simplicity. their tendency and ability to encompass all of life within the horizon of playful competition." as the enemies of the sophists' positive. In this respect Nietzsche depicts the Greeks as using the agon to "refine"violence.A8). their educators were also engaged in contests with each other.. Nietzsche's sophist is himself a competitive artist. in Hippocratesits physician. He observes that "Whatis unique to Hellenistic life is thus characterized:to perceive all matters of the intellect. meets another sophist." ("HC" 37) In effect. .. Nietzsche remarks that . the "advanced teachers"of Greek culture. life-affirming virtues. Every talent must unfold itself in fighting: that is the command of Hellenic popular pedagogy. of life's seriousness. in the spirit of the contest.

Nietzsche condemns the socratic schools which."He claims: I Wasthe first to see the real opposition: the degenerating instinct that turns against life . Secondly. even to guilt. attempts to repress or escape those very instincts.as a typical decadent. while he praises the sophists for fostering and embodying the best Hellenic instincts. ("BT". while Plato. first..Nietzsche'sReadingof the Sophists 11 The two decisive innovations of the book are. e. there is the understanding of Socratism: Socrates is recognized for the first time as an instrument of Greek against instinct. it belongs to the culture of the Periclean age as necessarily as Plato does not: it has its predecessorsin Heraclitus.Nietzsche notes: The Greek culture of the Sophists had developed out of all the Greek instincts. the high cultureof Thucydides. a Yes-saying without reservation. .even to suffering. its understandingof the Dionysian phenomenonamong the Greeks. circumscribed and diminished life.bom of fullness.EH 2) Iteratingthis pivotal antithesis.g. and all idealism as typical forms) versus a formula for the highest affirmation. (the philosophy of Plato. the sophists channel and encourage the healthiest instincts of Greek culture. of overfullness. "Rationality" "Rationality"at any price as a dangerous force that undermines life. (WP428) Thus. . In his lecture notes on rhetoric. Democritus. in the scientific types of the old philosophy. even to everything that is questionable and strangein existence. The "Rhetorical" Model of Language In his genealogy of the sophists. disintegration. Nietzsche thus vehemently repudiatesthe notion that Plato represents one of the great achievements of the culture. . titled . .The first of these concerns was their emphasis on rhetoric. through theiradvocacy of unconditionaltruthsand dogmatic moral rules." ("BT"EH 1) That is. in the tradition of Orpheus. it finds expression in. .and what may be termedtheir "rhetorical" model of language. insisting that the socratic philosophers exemplify a "non-Hellenic"withdrawal from the Greek affirmationof "Life. Nietzsche delineates three interrelated contributionsthe sophists made to their agonistic and creative culture.

a power which Aristotle calls rhetoric. The power to discover and to make operativethat which works and impresses.the sophists deepened this appreciationfor rhetoric. The sophists' privileging of rhetoric had a second profound effect. attending "the theater in order to hear beautiful speeches" (GS 135). . Nietzsche suggests that the sophists consider every use of language as agonistic. the sophists would insist that every speaker is a rhetor. ("DAR"23. . . Second. for "we have grown unaccustomedto the tonal effects of rhetoric. occurring only within contests between adversaries. Insofar as he depicts them as construing all language as inherently rhetorical. .Nietzsche notes that for the sophists."Nietzsche delineates the pivotal role of the sophists in the teaching and practice of rhetoric. Nietzsche adds: "To no task did the Greeks devote such incessant labor as to eloquence. no longer having sucked in this kind of cultural mother'smilk from the first moment of life" (HA 218). He notes that it is difficult for us to appreciate the enormous importance the Greeks attributedto rhetoric. Hellenic culture and power gradually concentrate on oratorical skill" (HGE 213) Even in their appreciation of tragedy. . As such. . There is obviously no unrhetorical 'naturalness' of language to which one could appeal. guided by the clear light of the understanding. of the artistic means which are already found in language. according to Nietzsche. the Greeks considered rhetoric to be of paramount importance. according to Nietzsche. . "the education of the ancient man customarily culminates in rhetoric: it is the highest spiritual activity of the well-educated political man-an odd notion for us" ("DAR"3). inevitably engaged in a projectof demolishing and potentiallydisplacing his or her adversary's arguments. is. By privileging rhetoric in their curriculum. with respect to each thing. language itself is the result of purely rhetoricalarts. the sophists construe language not as a transparentwindow .12 Rhetoric Review "Descriptionof Ancient Rhetoric"and "Historyof Greek Eloquence. seeing in each use of language a fabrication of a persuasive image or argument designed to persuade an adversary or audience. emphasis added). the rhetorical is a further development. But in the culture of the sophists. providing the apparatusand training needed for eloquent competition. . and their view that excellence in rhetoric constitutes the highest cultural achievement. the essence of language. Unlike the socratic rather than philosophers who present themselves as seeking objective "truth" rhetorical victory. Nietzsche's sophists would consider all language to be inherently creative. . Devotion to oratoryis the most tenacious element of Greek culture and survives through all the curtailments of their condition. at the same time. in that they tended to consider every use of language as inherentlyrhetorical.

which began ca. determinate reality that exists independently of discourse and serves as its "foundation. The tropes in this sense are variations upon other tropes. According to Nietzsche. devices with which a rhetor may fabricate a persuasiveaccountthat may be accepted as "literallytrue."Rather. instead. Nietzsche accounts for the agonistic and poetic aspects of the sophists' model of language with what he identifies as the fundamentalinstrumentsof language. Nietzsche's sophists would maintain that "Whatis called language is actually all figuration"("DAR"25). For the in trope is a "turn" a rhetoricalcompetition. It makes no sense to speak of a 'propermeaning' which is carried over to something else only in special cases" ("DAR" 25). Nietzsche distinguishes two branches of the sophistic movement. the trope acquiresmeaning within each particularagon in which it is used. Nietzsche suggests that the sophists would presumably consider the fundamentallinguistic unit to be a creative maneuverin a verbal agon. a trope does not derive its meaning by referring to an external." Correspondingto what he identifies as the agonistic and creative aspects of the sophistic model of language. synecdoches. Protagoras emphasizes the "combative"aspect of rhetoric. 455 B.C. who emphasizes the importanceof the competitive agon. instructing his students in a dialectical skill thus enabling them to overpowertheir adversariesin any verbal competition on any subject. Stated another way. In this respect the tropes are not alterationsof a stable "literal" language capable of objectively mirroring the world. who emphasizes what Nietzsche characterizes as the dimensionof sophistic eloquence: overtly "artistic" . Nietzsche writes that "Sophism originated with Protagoras'sjourney through the Hellenistic cities. the sophists maintain that "the tropes are not just occasionally added to words but constitute their most proper nature. speech is "literal"only to those people who fail to recognize that they have been captivated by its metaphors. He influenced Attic eloquence much earlier than did the Sicilians. who maintains that the fundamentalunit of language is the "name" or "noun. and metonymes. each of which articulatesits own perspective. He promises to teach to hetto logon kreitto poiein: how one can by means of dialectics help the weaker case to win out" (HGE 215).Nietzsche'sReading of the Sophists 13 through which one may observe an independentand preexisting reality but as an apparatus for weaving elegant and enchanting texts. analogous to a maneuveror "turn" performed by a wrestler in a match. The first branch is representedby Protagorasof Abdera. the tropes. As such. Unlike a member of the "socraticschool" such as Aristotle."a symbol that represents or mirrors "actualthings" existing in the world. and the only criteria for its "proper" are the ultimately arbitraryprotocols of the contest use itself.The second branch of sophistic teaching is that of the Sicilian Gorgias.

wrestling. and so their hostility is too vehement. It is a refreshing pause for a nation of artists. For if enable them to speak "nonrhetorically" is construedas the expression of a rhetor engaged in an agon.Nietzsche observes that the sophist considers rhetoric to be universal in its application. then no speaker is warrantedin claiming that his or her assertions are unconditionally true. Thus. nor of sculpture). have no sense for this activity (for they had no understanding of the art which lived and flourished around them. every assertion and as such is conditioned by his or her own ethos and pathos. Protagoras uses poetic myths as well as logical arguments to convince audiences and defeat interlocutors. This contributionis integrallyrelated to the sophists' rhetoricalmodel of language. a practice he is presentedas exhibiting in Plato's Protagoras. in that his "dialectics was to make all other arts and sciences superfluous:how without being a geometrician one can out argue the geometrician. the practical life of the state"(HGE 215).14 Rhetoric Review Innovation already begins with Gorgias: he came adornedfestively and magnificently-like Empedocles he appeared in a purple garment-with a worldwidereputationand presentedthe epideictic oration:in it one wants to display one's ability.and Gorgias may be seen as using his artistic performances not only to challenge the prevailing tenets of the culture. there is no intention to deceive: the content is not the issue. for once they want to indulge in an exquisite treat in oratory. such as the culpability of Helen of Troy. Pleasure in beautiful discourse acquires a realm of its own where it does not clash with necessity. but also to mock and thought"itself. potentially subvertthe authorityof "rational Sophistic Epistemology The second contributionto Greek culture that Nietzsche attributesto the sophists is in the field of epistemology.however. The philosophers."anchored in the contingencies of specific rhetorical situations. Protagoraswould hold that every use of language is made . Stated another way. In his account of Protagoras."Protagoras is able to undermine the dogmatic claims of every self-styled "expert"to possess privileged discourses or methods that about any subject whatsoever. Using his rhetorical "art. and likewise on naturalphilosophy. for such a model implies that every claim to knowledge is "conditional. (HGE 216) It may be observed that these two branches of sophistry are by no means exclusive and that the agonistic and the artistic are correlativefor Protagorasas well as for Gorgias.

then one is never warrantedin claiming access to an independent "reality. and not by reference to an "independent" universal criterion that governs all games." a "neutral" standpointfrom which to observe the "worlditself. a domain of "Being" that transcendsand is independentof individual rhetoricalsituations. In this respect Nietzsche maintains that Protagorasechoes Heraclitus. an observation that recalls Protagoras'sremark that "humanityis the measure of all things. the "real world"for Protagorasis identical with the "apparent" world.Nietzsche'sReadingof the Sophists 15 within a "game. challenging the possibility of certainty and subvertingprevailing truths about the ultimate nature of the world. As a "synthesis" of Heraclitus and Democritus. and as seeing the world as "utterlywithout reason and instinct." Furthermore. he would presumablyinsist that he is unwarrantedin attributingany ultimate features to the "worldin itself." Protagoras's refusal to countenance claims to unconditional or nonperspectival truths has profound ontological consequences. Nietzsche observes that Gorgias uses his overtly extravaganttropes to overcome the limitations of the prevailing view of "reality. All myths and gods useless" (WPh 6[21]). who "altogetherdenied being" (PTG 51) and who depicted reality as a "flux"or process of "becoming" (PTG 51). In his discussion of Gorgias. In Nietzsche's vocabulary Protagoraswould construeevery assertion as inherentlyperspectival." wherein the validity of any assertion is determined by arbitrary protocols of each game."Stated another way. In this respect Nietzsche observes that for the sophist "in general everything appears only as the speaker's power represents it" (HGE 213)." Nietzsche seems to read Protagorasin this way. eschewing the possibility of a "nonperspectival way of seeing. Protagoras would presumably repudiate as unwarranted any metaphysical claim about an ultimate reality. Protagoras implies that the world of appearanceis itself subject to change. But Nietzsche suggests further that Protagoras's conception of is "becoming" not a metaphysicalclaim about the ultimate natureof reality but rather a statement about humanity's inability to acquire certain knowledge about such a putative "reality. for if every assertion is an articulation of one's own perspective. in that whatever a persuasive rhetor is able to render apparentbecomes "real"for his or her audience." thathas been fabricatedwith a language that his audience one of accepts as a literal representation reality. Nietzsche suggests that the "Western" sophist's artistic rhetoric has significant epistemological and ontological implications. Nietzsche notes: . endless whirled. the latter of whom Nietzsche depicts as challenging the certaintyof sensation. since individuals and the contingent rhetorical situations in which they engage are always changing."Just as Protagorasclaims that he is unable to know anything about such transcendental entities as the gods. claiming that he represents "a synthesis of Heraclitus and Democritus"(WP 428). as they are interpretedby the participantsand or observersof that game.

that In way one gradually learns to step with grace. ." Sophistic Immoralism The third contribution to Greek culture that Nietzsche attributes to the sophists concerns their view of morality. Gorgias's overtly artificial figures of speech serve as self-imposed constraintsthat enable him to overcome the prevailing conception of the "real. For insofar as Gorgias presents his discourse as constructedfrom highly artificial rhetorical figures. This antidogmatism . are themselves "fabrications. one that is integrally related to their rhetorical model of language and their critique of knowledge. and are not to be mistakenas objective. But Nietzsche's notion of "immoralism" it applies to the sophists is very different as from the egoism of Callicles. or the Gorgian figures in Greek rhetoric. dependent upon the contingencies of the participantsand audience." Nietzsche suggests. Instead. the sophist draws attention to his own inescapable presence and thereby underscores the fact that the views he offers are his own. whose sole objective is to advance his own selfish interests. they consequently and articulatedogmatic moral "rules. In an assertion that appears on its face to echo Plato's criticism." affirms "an anti-metaphysicalview of the world-yes." Through his own distinctly personal use of artificial figures. but an artistic one" (WP 1048). To restrict oneself so may appear absurd. (HA 221) That is. despite their persuasiveness. Nietzsche affirms that the in sophists are "immoralists" that they "possessthe courage of all strong spirits to know their own immorality"(WP 428). universal "truths. even on the small bridges that span dizzying abysses. the sophist Throughhis explicitly artificial "performances. and one takes as profit the greatestsupplenessof movement. In this claim Nietzsche seems to acquiesce to Plato's depiction of sophistic morality as the egoism articulatedby Callicles. Since Nietzsche's sophists repudiateevery claim to be able to articulate"objective" nonperspectivaltruths about the natureof or would reject the attendantclaim to be able to discern reality. ."and not literal truths about "reality-in-itself. they would maintain that every assertion is made within a creative rhetorical contest and that its putative "validity"or truth is establishedby its persuasivenessor success in that particularcontest."prescriptionsabout how one "ought"to behave and live. nevertheless there is no way to get beyond realism other than to limit oneself at first most severely (perhapsmost arbitrarily). he suggests that his own discourses. was as importanta training as counterpointand the fugue in the developmentof modem music.16 Rhetoric Review The severe constraint which the French dramatists imposed upon themselves .

"on."TI 3). then the "immoralism"of the sophists would counsel not the affirmationof one's egoistic desires but rathera that encourages an ovenness to transformingone's desires. that affirms "passing away and destroying. but in order to be . They postulate the first truth that a 'morality-in- itself. for he implies that they would reject the notion that the "ego"or the "self"possesses permanence. that it is a swindle to talk of in 'truth' this field.' a 'good-in-itself do not exist.e. . Indeed. The power of form. .Nietzsche'sReading of the Sophists 17 ushers in an "immoralism"in that one recognizes that every moral claim is conditional." would not therebyaffirm a Calliclean egoism wherein each individual strives to satisfy his or her desires. they divine that all attemptsto give reasons for morality are necessarily sophistical." a life of "becoming. . a radical repudiationof being ("Ancients. the first insight into morality:-they juxtapose the multiplicity (the geographical relativity) of the moral value judgments. Not in order to get rid of terror and pity . the will to life rejoicing over its own inexhaustibility even in the sacrifice of its highest types-that is what I called Dionysian. the will to give form to oneself' (WP 94). "self-overcoming" Nietzsche attributessuch a viev/ to the culture of the sophists as a whole in his notion of the "dionysian. If the "self" is a fabrication... i. .along witt.. Nietzsche depicts the sophists as Saying Yes to life even in its strangest and hardest problems. . Nietzsche suggests that the sophists would oppose such an egoism. Insofar as he presents them as the advanced teachers of this culture. anchored in the presuppositionsand values of the speaker. But whereas Nietzsche's sophists would maintain that every moral and that every moral "truth" a swindle. they is pronouncementis "interested." (WP428) In this vein Nietzsche sharply 'distinguishes his own reading from that advanced by George Grote.-they let it be known that every moralitycan be dialecticallyjustified. . And he speaks of the Greek sophistic culture as comprising a "leisure class whose members make things difficult for themselves and exercise much selfovercoming. Thus Nietzsche asserts: The Sophists verge upon the first critique of morality. insisting that "Grote'stactics in defense of the Sophists are false: he wants to raise them to the rank of men of honor and ensigns of morality-but it was their honor not to indulge in any swindle with big words and virtues"(WP429). .just as they repudiate the assertion that any entity may possess a permanent"being"outside the flux of appearance and becoming.

to the authorityof descent) ("WhatI Owe."EH 3) the By affirming "self-overcoming." TI 3). and in this manner achieve a greater degree of excellence. like Socrates and his rationalistfollowers. they use the agon as an opportunityto challenge and therebyto overcome their own limitations. Refusing to countenance the valorization of the socratic thinkers. Stated another way." sophists do not posit their "own"desires or values as invariable or foundational. Nietzsche observes that it is because of the enormoushistorical influence of the socratic schools that the sophists tend to be "pale and ungraspableto us-for now we suspect that it must have been a very immoral culture. and they would presumablyurge individuals to be open to abandoningthose desires that inhibit their freedom and growth. Just as he depicts the sophists' epistemological rivals to be the dogmatic philosophers who privilege their own methodology as providing access to unconditional truths. the counter-movementto the ancient. to the polis. the philosophers are the decadents of Greek culture.18 RhetoricReview oneself the eternaljoy of becoming beyond all terrorand pity-that joy which includes even joy in destroying. In this vein Nietzsche attributesthe "decline"of Greek culture not to the sophists' professed immoralism but to the "theoretical"socratic schools. taste (to the agonistic instinct. for the sophists would see one's desires as being as contingent and conditional as one's most cherished beliefs. Nietzsche's sophists would reject the notion of a permanent"self"lying behind each contingent rhetorical situation and eschew all unconditional rules that inhibit personal development. whom he also considers responsiblefor the demise of Greek tragedy (BT 15). to the value of race. and use the Philistine moralism of the Socratic schools as a clue to what was basically Hellenic! After all." individuals who repudiatethe escapist attempts to flee to a domain of unconditional truth and moral absolutism. And he asserts that "Onecannot insist too strongly upon the fact that the great Greek philosophers representthe decadence of every kind of Greek excellence .as the Germanshave done. Sophistic "immoralism"is in this sense a repudiationof Calliclean selfishness. since Plato and all the Socratic schools fought against it!" (D 168). noble.Nietzsche exclaims that one should not judge the Greeks by their philosophers. Nietzsche depicts the sophists' moral rivals to be those same socratic schools who use dialectic "as a way to virtue (in Plato and Socrates: evidently because Sophistrycounted as the way to immorality)"(WP 578).("BT. Intervening on with the philosophers. instead.Nietzsche depicts behalf of the sophists in their "quarrel" the sophists as champions of "this life.

and how our own values and commitmentsmay enable us to generate new openings into the sophists' texts. and enable us to generate new perspectives on the sophists. in that it may illuminate featuresof Nietzsche's own theory of language. and in this respect a strictly "Nietzschean"reading is precisely the unique interpretation that I have attempted to reconstruct from his specific remarks.e. attending to some fragments of the sophists only cursorily while overlooking others altogether. we must discern the ways in which our readings of the sophists are determined by previous selections and interpretationsof their writings.values."and the ways in which they influence our Unlike neopositivist critics who attemptto articulate"objective" interpretations. In what follows I will delineate several key featuresof a such a neo-Nietzscheanreadingof the sophists. in that it may provide some possible new directions for the contemporary"Nietzscheanturn" among sophistic scholars who have not attendedto Nietzsche's own specific writings on the sophists. An indispensablefeatureof our neo-Nietzschean reading will be the use of a "genealogical"method.. A Neo-Nietzschean Reading of the Sophists I have argued that Nietzsche's reading of the sophists is openly partisan. readingsof the sophists. indicating how he draws upon yet departsfrom the Greek thinkers he praises as his "co-workersand precursors" (WP 464). or "biases. and ethics. too" (BGE 46). epistemology. My reconstructionof his account of the sophists may be of interest to Nietzschean scholars. I suggest. to detach oneself" (WP428).Nietzsche'sReading of the Sophists 19 and make it contagious-"Virtue" made completely abstract was the greatest seduction to make oneself abstract:i. Such a neo-Nietzschean reading is worth articulating. anchored in his assessment of the cultural malaise of his own time and his commitment to cultural renewal and that his reading is highly selective.The account he presents is thus uniquely his own. In Hans-Georg Gadamer'sformulation. excel by overcoming their limits. But reconstructingNietzsche's reading should also be of interest to contemporarystudents of the sophists. and in doing so the sophist distinguishes himself from the "slave. In Nietzsche's reading the sophists' immoralism affirms the healthiest characteristic of Hellenic culture in that it encourages individuals to enjoy struggle. one that encourages us to become aware of our own presuppositions." who "wants the unconditional and understandsonly what is tyrannical. the taste for the unconditional"(BGE 31). in that it may enable us to articulate a "neo-Nietzschean" reading of the sophists that draws upon Nietzsche's method of reading and specific insights into the sophists'while being anchored in our own interests and commitments. affirm their own uniqueness. and insist upon personal freedom. . In this respect the sophist repudiates the moralism of the socratic schools that Nietzsche denigrates as "the worst of tastes.in morals.I submit.

may lead us to explore the ways in which the sophists advanced arguments bearing on gender equality.12 A second feature of our neo-Nietzschean reading concerns our understanding of the culture of fifth-century Greece and the sophists' contributionsto it. but something African. and artists. or Mediterraneansexist-culture of masks and death. Freud himself (and Levi-Strauss'rewriting of the Oedipus legend in terms of primitive myth).the ritual studies of the Cambridge school. attending to the work of twentieth-centuryanthropologists. the Nietzschean reassertion of the Dionysian and of the orgiastic counterreligionof the mysteries. Dodds' The Greeks and the Irrational. perhaps.in the literal sense of the word. As James Aune points out. decisive reversals in classical scholarship (such as the work of George Thompson. Given the diversity of our interests and our textual selections. and above all.20 RhetoricReview circle" wherein "thehistoricityof we are inescapablysituatedin a "hermeneutic our existence entails that prejudices. ritual ecstasies. is "remarkably sanitized. an utterly nonor anticlassical culture to which something of the electrifying . scapegoating.focusing perhaps on Gorgias's advocacy of panhellenism and Hippias'sadvocacy of cosmopolitanism. As Fredric Jameson characterizes this emerging "alternative" pictureof ancient Greece. phallocratic homosexuality. constitute the initial directednessof our whole ability to experience"(9). and disabuse ourselves of what Nietzsche calls the "idolatryof the factual"("UH"8).and consequentlyon the sophists. for example.we must become cognizant of the ways in which our commitmentslead us to select the material we are considering and interpreting. and the newer French classical scholarship). In our neo-Nietzschean reading. Our interest in and commitment to feminism. slavery.psychologists. contemporary aesthetic reinterpretationsof the Greek fact (such as Karl Orffs opera Antigone)-all converge to produce an alternativeGreece. may lead us to attend to the sophists' challenge to Athenocentrism. the illusion that we can account for independently existing "facts themselves" in their entirety.and our interest in overcoming the misperceptions that perpetuate conflict between different peoples. Correlatively. not that of Pericles or the Parthenon." in that it retains many of the tenets of the Enlightenment reading of Greek culture that Nietzsche repudiated (122). many of whom have themselves been inspired by Nietzsche's suggestions. in contrast. most contemporaryscholarship on Greek rhetoric.1' Our commitment to multiculturalism. our neoNietzschean interpretations will presumably differ in many respects from Nietzsche's own.we may draw upon and augment Nietzsche's account of Greek culture.

14 And pursuing the suggestions of Martin Bemal in Black Athena.Nietzsche'sReading of the Sophists 21 otherness and fascination. and following the lead of Richard Lanham and Roger Moss. for example. examining the connections between the model of language and their challenge to conventional sophists' "rhetorical" "philosophical" inquiry. we may pursue Nietzsche's insight into the differences between Protagoras and Gorgias. we may further explore the sophists' role in the "ancient quarrel" between philosophy and rhetoric. we may explore the ostensible affinity of some nomadic Sophists for "African"and "Oriental" cultures. we may situate Gorgias in a mannerthat underscoreshis awarenessof the power of irrationalityand the limits of logos. James Coulter.16 In these inquiries we may draw upon and supplement Nietzsche's notion that the sophists perceived speech and writing as a form of play. we may supplement Nietzsche's account of the sophists' conception of language and rhetoric. the legal apology. plays with traditional myths. generating entirely new "genealogical" interconnections. we may examine the ways in which the sophist challenges the "reality" fabricated in such established genres or discourses as the Eleatic treatise. Drawing on specific studies of the linguistic conventions of these genres undertaken by G. B. has been restored. 13 Drawing on the studies by RichardEnos of the violent and unstable culture of fifth-centurySicily. Attending to the mythological beliefs and magical practices of colonial Sicily."Specifically. say. who attendto the sophists' playful use of parodyand paradox. Kerferd. Using a genealogical method and attending to the sophists' roles in Greek culture in these ways. Drawing on recent discussions of play. Nicole Loraux. of the Aztec world.One approachmay be to draw upon Nietzsche's notion of the "tragic"to explore the thought of some of the sophists. Arthur Adkins. adopting the persona of the mythical inventor of games. we Nietzsche's suggestion that Gorgias uses figurationto overcome the may pursue constraints of "realism. we may explore such texts as the Defense of Palamedes. we may situate individual sophists in novel ways. we may examine specific ways in which Gorgias appears to appropriate and subvert established conventions. exploring their respective views of knowledge and morality. the discourse on Helen of Troy. who characterizes Gorgias as a "tragic"philosopher. in which Gorgias. and the Athenian funeral address. In this we may follow Mario Untersteiner. and we may develop Eric . and with the values and beliefs of his audience. we may delineate the possible connections between Gorgias's writings and revolutionaryupheaval.15Concerning the deploymentof figures of speech.17 Concerning the epistemology and ethics of the sophists. and others. With Samuel Ijsselling and David Roochnik. the conventions of the legal apologia.(151) Drawing upon these studies.

Ochs 39-40. we may generate neo-Nietzschean readings that are faithful to the spirit if not the letter of Nietzsche's own interpretation. "Hegel"160-71. UntimelyMeditations.All-Too-Human(HA). "Descriptionof Ancient Rhetoric" ("DAR")." Arion.see Sidgwick 323-71.in Philosophyand Truth. Kerferd5-10. Beyond Good and Evil (BGE). Schia!pa 3-12. associating him with the Sicilian comic playwright Epicharmus and examining the sophist's to knowledge. Guthrie 10-13. we may find that an equally fruitful reading would place Gorgias in the comic tradition. in FriedrichNietzsche on Rhetoricand Language. in The Portable Nietzsche. in Basic Writings.I would also like to thankDavid Roochnik. ThePortable Nietzsche. The Genealogy of Morals (GM). Human. 2 For discussionsof the seminal role of Hegel and Grote in the modem "rehabilitation" the of sophists. Poulakos.Thomas Kent. "OnThe Use and Disadvantages Historyfor Life"("UH"). in Basic Writings."19 In respect to ethics. interests and selection of texts will presumably differ from his. Philosophyin the TragicAge of the Greeks(PTAG).22 Rhetoric Review White's contention that Nietzsche's conception of the dionysian illuminates Gorgias's epistemology. And following Eric White. .18 Another approach may be to pursue "carnivalesque" approach the inquiries of Marcel Detienne and Jean-Pierre Vernant. Our interpretations of the sophists' conceptions of knowledge and morality may differ dramatically from Nietzsche's own. Conversely. Twilight of the Idols (TI). of in Daybreak(D). given that our values. in Friedrich Nietzsche on Rhetoric and Language. and Michael Mendelsonfor sharingwith me theirviews of the sophistsandthe historyof rhetoric. Jarratt1-6. in "WePhilologists("WPh"). we may explore the nature of what Nietzsche calls sophistic "immoralism" in a variety of specific texts. Notes i I would like to thankEdward commentson Schiappaand RichardLeo Enos for theirinstructive an earlierdraftof this article. With Roger Moss we may examine the ways the sophists refine their "violence" and "barely suppressed aggression" through the use of such tactics as paradox and parody (216). of of I cite Nietzsche'swritingswith an abbreviation the Englishtranslation the title followed by the sectionnumber: "ThePhilosopher" ("P"). who draw on Nietzsche's notion that the sophists' reliance upon cleverness and cunning suggests a conception of knowledge that is antithetical to a platonic or scientific quest for "certainty. in Basic Writings. "TheHistoryof GreekEloquence" (HGE). Yet insofar as we acknowledge our own perspectives and articulate compelling genealogies of the sophists. in "Homer's Contest" ("HC"). The Gay Science (GS). we may inquire into the ways that individual sophists such as Gorgias are able to overcome their personal limitations by "recreating" themselves in agonistic and epideictic performances (38). TheBirthof Tragedy(BT). in Basic Writings. Ecce Homo (EH).

Cambridge JohnsHopkinsUP. see Jarratt 63-79. Strong 135-85. and Clark 25-27. 1974. "Old Quarrel"225-46. Valadier 247-61. andSuzuki 13-15. "Helen" 1-16. and Nussbaum19. Schiappa. Nehamas 100-13. Bernal. "Magic" 3-21. Philosophy.Albany:StateU of New YorkP. Faraone3-32.or Nietzsche'sAppropriation an AestheticNorm. Kerferdl 156-60. "Styles" 43-53. 107-28. For an alternativereadingof this see 1-15. Schiappa. 9 For a discussionof Nietzsche'smaturenotionof the dionysian. Baltimore: Use Philosophyand Rhetoric25 (1992): 281-97."Gorgias's of the Epideictic. Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization. and 238-57. Guthrie160-63.andWinkler214-43.Scott. Poulakos. Strong 149-52.Guthrie sophisticthoughtmaybe foundin Untersteiner 193-95. Aune. Dannhauser. 19The sophists' of cunningintelligenceor metis is discussedby Detienneand Vernant39. Consigny." JohnAntonand AnthonyPreus. Kerferd139-62. Arthur. 14 For discussionof the politicalcontextof the sophists' 321-50. 11 Ancient Greek attitudestoward women have been examined by Pomeroy and Keuls."Rhetorike" 16For a discussionof Gorgias'suse of style to adaptto and challengeestablished conventions. 215-17. 1987. Martin. 1991.The Older Sophists. Essays in Greek Philosophy. Lain Entralgo32-107.Review of BlackAthena. and Hunt 5969. 310. Scarborough 138-74.see Granier 190-200. Untersteiner 283-84. White 24-31. 5 For a discussionof Nietzsche'sgenealogicalmethod. "Form and Content in Gorgias' Helen and Palamedes: Rhetoric. Cole. Ithaca. Thomas. Ed. 13 Recentdiscussionof Greekmagic that bearon the sophistsmay be found in Romilly. Coulter 31-69. 1990. Adkins 107-28. 281-97. 42. 1983. and of by 8 Accounts of the debate over Nietzsche'scontributionsto classical philology are providedby "Introduction" BT. Guthrie writing.see Untersteiner Enos 41-90. Citations of of follow the originalarrangement numbering the fragments Diels andKranz.Pease 27-42. to Kaufmann.New York:Macmillan. Inconsistencyand InvalidArgumentin Some Greek Thinkers. A defenseof a judicious use of the Nachlas is advancedby Nehamas9-10. Nietzsche'sViewof Socrates. 7 Translations fragments the OlderSophistsare fromSprague. Enos. "Epistemology"35-51.The Origins of Rhetoricin AncientGreece.NJ: RutgersUP. Consigny. White 14-15."Dionysian Classicism. and Roochnik. and Hall 161-62. For towardwomen. Lanham1-20. specific discussionof the sophists'attitudes 12For discussionof the sophists' and see advocacyof panhellenism cosmopolitanism.and 15The sophists'seminalrole in the "ancient betweenphilosophyand rhetoricis discussed quarrel" by Ijsselling 7-33. J.Lloyd-Jones1-15. quarrel. Schrift 169-98. 18The is Norwood83-113. 10Nietzsche'sconceptionof agon is discussedby Lloyd-Jones 6-7.NY: CornellUP. Untersteiner 194-205."Examination" "Epideictic" 17Discussionof the role of play in 163-65. Strong 109-85. .see Smith 335-59. and Del Caro589-605.Arthur. and Del Caro593by 96. QuarterlyJournal of Speech 79 (1993): 119-22. and Roochnik 155-76. of Del Caro.see Kaufmann 281-82. UP.Adrian. NietzscheAs Philosopher."Journal of the History of Ideas 50 (1989): 589-605. 4 Scholarswho criticize the use of the Nachlas in an interpretation Nietzsche include Magus of 218-35." . andCole. New Brunswick. Danto.1965. section2. Loraux 225-30. "TheStyles of Gorgias. 6 Discussions of Nietzsche'sconception of a cultural renewal inspiredby Greek culture are undertaken Tejara1-32. Volume I: The Fabrication of Ancient Greece 1785-1985. W. and Schrift15-16.Maudemarie.Breazealexxiii-xxvii.Nietzsche'sReading of the Sophists 23 The WillTo Power (WP). Works Cited Adkins. Nietzsche on Truthand Philosophy.James." RhetoricSociety Quarterly22 (1992): 43-53. 135-64.Cambridge: Clark. andLloyd-Jones3-15. Lloyd 81-102. 103-14.and Hoy 20-38. and Demand placementof Gorgiasin the comic tradition suggestedby 453-63. use 307.

New York:OxfordUP.1869. Nietzsche. Berkeley:U of CaliforniaP." Southern Speech Communication Journal 38 (1972): 27-38. Gronbeck.WilliamArrowsmith. "The Use and Abuse of The Will To Power. Greek Magic and Religion. TheSophists.Trans. "Epicharmus Gorgias. Hoy. "TheCase for Sophistry. Demand. 1991. David B. Gadamer. Cambridge Lloyd-Jones."'Trans. Yirmyahu Yovel. Lanham.Walter.Nietzsche:Life as Literature. Enos.Eva C. Roger. and P 1979. Chapel Hill: U of NorthCarolinaP.24 RhetoricReview and AmericanJournal of Philology 92 (1971): 453-63.IL. Friedrich. 1982. Antichrist. SouthernIllinois Jarratt.CT: Yale UP.Susan. Dodds.AtlanticHighlands. Cambridge: . Reason and Experience: Studies in the Origins and Developmentof Greek Science. Bemd. Bruce. Faraoneand Dirk Obbink. Lloyd. Chicago:U of ChicagoP. Walter Kaufmann.NJ: PrincetonUP. Nietzsche: Philosopher. 1959.Cunning Intelligence in Greek Culture and Society. and RobertHelm.Hugh.The Hague:Martinus The and Jameson. Robert 0. and Interpretation. Ed. Psychologist. Trans. The SophisticMovement. Guthrie." Reading Nietzsche. 1970. 1991. Center Rhetoric Revalued. 1989.The Therapyof the Wordin Classical Antiquity. 1979. Human. Die FragmenteDer Vorsokratiker. G. 1984. Christopher 1991.Lincoln:U of Nebraska P. 190-200. Hermann. . 1993.Hume and the Genealogical Method.Alexander. 1989.MarionFaberand StephenLehmann. . Berkeley:U of CaliforniaP.Samuel. Kaufmann. Ed. Nehamas." for Medievaland EarlyRenaissanceStudies. .Fredric. Vol.NJ: Humanities International. 1989. Higgins. 1986. "Gorgias on Rhetoric and Poetic: A Rehabilitation. and ed. R. Nijhoff. David E. 1982. Brian Vickers. and trans. "Perspectivism York:Dell. UP.Ed. London:JohnMurray.Cambridge.New York:OxfordUP. Cambridge: UP.New Haven.The Motivesof Eloquence. Berlin:Auguste Raabe. Cambridge .New York: Oxford UP.Jean."Marxism Historicism. 1976.1966. "Nietzsche. and ed. Ratherand JohnM." Detienne. MA: Harvard UP.Daybreak." New Nietzsche. Oxford:Clarendon."Magika Hiera: Ancient Faraone. J. Hunt. 1976. Ed.CT: Yale UP."Studies in Nietzsche and the Classical Tradition. Ed. Trans." Ideologies of Theory: Essays 1971-1986.SanderGilman. New York:OxfordUP. 218-35. 1971.1991.Nietzscheand the Origin of Virtue. Leo. 1977. Timothy Seller.:Waveland.Philosophical Hermeneutics. David Parent.ProspectHeights.Christopher. Ijsseling. Magus.London:Routledge. K.Inventingthe Barbarian. Ed. Arion 1 (1974): 279-380. U Minneapolis: of MinnesotaP.Daniel Breazeale. 1977. TheReign of the Phallus.eds.W. Princeton.All-Too-Human. C. 1985.Ed. Edith. Grote. "Nietzscheand the Study of the Ancient World. and Jean-PierreVernant. GreekRhetoricBeforeAristotle. and WaltherKranz. 207-24.Cambridge: Cambridge Hall. Allison. Sharp.R. Philosophy and Truth:Selectionsfrom Nietzsche's Notebooks of the Early 1870's. FriedrichNietzsche on Rhetoricand Language. Dordrecht: Nijhoff. trans. David Couzens. Trans. 1988.Basic Writings of Nietzsche. 1988. Binghampton: Moss. Plato's Gorgias.Trans. Solomonand KathleenM. Lain Entralgo. 1979.New Haven.CaroleBlair.George.Pedro. 1-15. Ed. Kerferd. J.Nancy.Cambridge: Cambridge Keuls. E. R. "Notesfor 'We Philologists. Hollingdale. Marcel.1993. UP.New York: ModernLibrary.Lester.L. Carbondale: UP. 1974. 2. UP. ."Nietzsche as Affirmative Martinus Thinker.Rhetoricand Philosophyin Conflict. Magic. Richard "TheAgonisticContextof EarlyGreek BindingSpells. E. Linge.1990. New The Granier. 3-32.Richard.Hans-Georg.A Historyof Greece. G. B. Diels. Rereading the Sophists: Classical Rhetoric Refigured. James O'Flaherty.

"TheJournal of Philology 8 (1872): 288-307. Trans. Trans.WalterKaufmann. Rhetoric Review 6 Vitanza. Gorgias.Greek Comedy.V." Classical Philology 21 (1926): 27-42. 1962. Pease. Ed.London:Methuen. Daniel C. "ThePharmacology Sacred Plants. 1975. The WillTo Power.Columbia:U of South CarolinaP.Trans. Martinus Tejera. 223. Washington. 1977. Nietzscheand the Questionof Interpretation.Oxford:OxfordUP. Strong. "Interpreting SophisticRhetoric:A Reply to EdwardSchiappa. 1990.The Fragility of Goodness.Paul.1775. Untersteiner.New York:Vintage.Tracy. of John. Trans. Donovan. "CriticalSub/Versionsof the Historyof PhilosophicalRhetoric. and .DC: Regnery. "Hegel'sReceptionof the Sophists. M. New York:Routledge.or Nietzsche'sAppropriation an Aesthetic Norm. 214-43. 1991. of Winkler. 12 PRETFEXT (1991): 238-57. WithoutHonor. Magic and Rhetoricin Ancient Greece. New York:Viking.Trans. Sophistic.W. 1954. What'sin a Name'? Towarda RevisedHistoryof EarlyGreekRhetorical "Rhetorike: Theory. John Faraoneand DirkObbink."Gorgias' .1931.New York:OxfordUP." QuarterlyJournal of Speech 78 (1992): 1-15. Friedrich Nietzsche and the Politics of Transfiguration."Critical Review 5 (1991): 225-46. Nietzscheand Greek Thought.KathleenFreeman. The Older Sophists.Nietzsche's Reading of the Sophists 25 . Nussbaum. 1991.Ancient GreekMagic and Religion. Ed."TheSophists.Cambridge: UP.The Sophists. White.Kaironomia. Lamb." .John. New York: Dell. Trans.New York:OxfordUP. 247-61. 5 . 1987." Ithaca.Gilbert. Herbsand Roots. Cambridge. 1992. Schrift. JohnFaraoneand DirkObbink. Sprague.David.NY: CornellUP. 1986. 13874. Towarda 'Third' Argumentation (1991): 117-39. Ed.Gedankenuber die Nachamungder grieschen Werke. GreekMagic and Religion. ."MagikaHiera:. Arthur Stanley. 1954."Journal of the History of Ideas 50 (1989): 589-605. J. Romilly. "Dionysian of Classicism.ProtagorasAnd Logos. Cambridge Ochs. 1990. MarianneCowan. "An Examination and Exculpation of the Composition Style of Gorgias of Leontini. Roochnik. The Tragedyof Reason.Edward.EricCharles. 1968."Things Plato.Jacqueline The Great Sophists in Periclean Athens. Philosophy in the Tragic Age of the Greeks. Johann. Encomiumto Helenandthe Defense of Rhetoric."'Some More'Notes.Martha. Allison." Rhetorica 1 (1983): 1-16.:A Study in Greek Philosophsy Rhetoric.Columbia:U of SouthCarolinaP. as Shaw. 1987."RhetoricSociety Quarterly21 (1991): 39-42.ed.RosamundKent." (1987): 41-66. Norwood. de.Ancient Scarborough.Berkeley:U of CaliforniaP.WalterKaufmann R. Sidgwick. 1991."TheConstraints Eros."Magika Hiera:.Alan." New Nietzsche. "Nietzsche Sophist:A Polemic."Westertl Journal of Speech Communication54 (1990): 160-71.1967. Heinemann.Dordrecht: Nijhoff.London:Wm. 1975.Henry. Mario. The Valadier. New York:Routledge. David B. and cited by AdrianDel Caro." Philosophy and Rhetoric23 (1990): 218-28. 27 and 45. ."InternationalPhilosophical Quarterly26 (1986): 331-39. "StanleyFish and the Old Quarrel Between Philosophy and Rhetoric. R. MA: Harvard UP. and Schiappa. Poulakos. Hollingdale. 1990. "DionysusVersusthe Crucified."Reviewof Protagoras and Logos. Winckelmann. Victor. The Portable Nietzsche.John. Oxford:Basil Blackwell.

GuestEditor. Phelps Duane H. Covino SharonCrowley FrankJ. Gorgias and the Subversion of Logos" in PRE/TEXT. MichaelHalloran PatriciaHarkin BruceHerzberg WinifredBryanHomer BrianHuot Lee A.J. Submita computer -spaced.notes. MLA style. Lunsford Steven Mailloux DonaldA. Manuscripts disk (MicrosoftWord.Carolina English Teacher. and "Sophistic Freedom. Bloom StuartC.doubled languageat all levels. Zappen He-PingZhao . Lauer YamengLiu AndreaA.with notes in current or ASCIItext format)or threepapercopies with a selfWordPerfec. Murphy JasperNeel RobertT. Miller JamesJ. Oliver Sean O'Rourke Louise W. Scott JackSelzer JamesF. of FrancisMarionUniversity. Roen Mike Rose MurielSaville-Troike EdwardSchiappa JohnSchilb RobertL.descriptions classroom and strategies-in shortanythingthatmightbe of interestto teachersof literature shouldbe typed. JimmieKillingsworth JaniceM. Carolina English Teacher Journal the SouthCarolina of Councilof Teachersof English Call for Contributors: 1995-96 Special Issue Creative Writing as a Teaching Tool of Carolina English Teacheracceptsarticles. Christopher Burnham RobertJ. We thankthe following RRpeerreviewersof manuscripts: Don Abbott Paul Bator CharlesBazerman PatriciaBizzell LynnZ. D'Angelo PeterElbow Leo Enos Richard David Foster Richard Fulkerson JohnGage Alan G. Ross Winterowd GeorgeYoos RichardYoung JamesP. Slevin IraShor JamesStratman JohnTrimbur Lynn QuitmanTroyka Arthur Walzer E. "Gorgias's Use of the Epideictic" in Philosophy and Rhetoric. stampedenvelopeto David Starkey." in Rhetoric Society Quarterly. unformatted addressed.reviews.Florence. McQuade CarolynMiller ThomasP. Brown BarryBrummett C. SC 29501-0547. White ThomasWillard W. Jacobus DavidJolliffe Nan Johnson M. Gross S.26 RhetoricReview Scott Consigny's recent publications include "The Styles of Gorgias. JohnWarnock Tilly Warnock IrwinWeiser Welch Kathleen EdwardM.Corbett Jim W. kindergarten through college. Corder WilliamA. He teaches the history and theory of rhetoric at Iowa State University. Department EnglishandMass Communications. Connors EdwardP.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful