Euthydemus (dialogue)

Part of a series on
Platonism
Plato from Raphael's The School of Athens (1509–1511)
Early life Epistemology Idealism / realism Demiurge Theory of forms Theory of soul Transcendentals Form of the Good Third man argument Euthyphro dilemma Five regimes Philosopher king Plato's unwritten doctrines political philosophy
The dialogues of Plato
Early: Apology Charmides Crito Euthyphro Hippias Minor Ion Laches Lysis Transitional and middle: Cratylus Euthydemus Gorgias Menexenus Meno Phaedo Protagoras Symposium Later middle: Parmenides Phaedrus Republic Theaetetus Late: Critias Laws Philebus Sophist Statesman Timaeus Of doubtful authenticity: Axiochus Clitophon Demodocus Epinomis Eryxias First Alcibiades Halcyon Hipparchus Hippias Major Minos On Justice On Virtue Rival Lovers Second Alcibiades Sisyphus Theages Other works of doubtful authenticity: Definitions Epigrams Epistles
Allegories and metaphors
Atlantis Ring of Gyges The Cave The Divided Line The Sun Ship of State Myth of Er The Chariot
Related articles
Commentaries The Academy in Athens Socratic problem Middle Platonism Neoplatonism and Christianity Allegorical interpretations of Plato Socratic fallacy
Philosophy portal

Euthydemus (Greek: Εὐθύδημος, Euthydemos), written c. 384 BC, is a dialogue by Plato which satirizes what Plato presents as the logical fallacies of the Sophists. In it, Socrates describes to his friend Crito a visit he and various youths paid to two brothers, Euthydemus and Dionysodorus, both of whom were prominent Sophists from Chios and Thurii.

The Euthydemus contrasts Socratic argumentation and education with the methods of Sophism, to the detriment of the latter. 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.

As in many of the Socratic dialogues, the two Sophists against whom Socrates argues 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.

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
• Clinias
• Euthydemus
• Dionysodorus
• Ctesippus

Translations

• Thomas Taylor, 1804
• Benjamin Jowett, 1892 *
• Edwin Gifford, 1905 *
• Walter Rangeley Maitland Lamb, 1924 *
• Robin Waterfield, 1987
• Rosamond Kent Sprague, 1993
• Gregory A. McBrayer and Mary P. Nichols, 2011 *

External links

• Original Greek (with English translation)
• Works related to Euthydemus at Wikisource
• Approaching Plato: A Guide to the Early and Middle Dialogues
• Euthydemus public domain audiobook at LibriVox