Protagoras Reading II Taylor Hoogendoorn 3.6.14 Plato’s Protagoras pits Socrates against the sophist Protagoras in a series of debates. Today’s reading dealt with the debate over whether or not virtue can be taught, but resolved itself into a bit of a meta-analysis on how arguments should be structured. Protagoras initially asserts that one of the primary points of value in the sophists’ work is their ability to teach virtue and citizenship throughout their work. Socrates disagrees. He winds Protagoras through an argument in which Socrates draws distinctions and contradictions between the fulfillments of a number of different virtues in an effort to make them appear un-teachable. In my prior coursework, I have found virtues to not be strictly teachable. However, the best way to learn virtue is to replicate the actions of another person. So although there is no “teaching” required for a student to become virtuous, the teacher can serve as an example of virtuous living. Additionally, I agree with Protagoras’ argument that one can provide a series of punishments and incentives that push a person toward a virtuous life. I, again, would not consider this to be a strict form of teaching, as there is no direct knowledge being conferred, but it is certainly a way that one person can make another a better, more virtuous citizen. At the end of the discussion, Socrates becomes frustrated with how long Protagoras’ arguments have become. He says that one must speak louder when talking to a deaf man, so one must also speak in shorter speeches to a forgetful man. The ultimate point, which I espouse, is that one has to adapt the form of one’s arguments to the audience.