Hippias Minor - Platonic Dialogue on Lying

 Hippias Minor

Platonic dialogue on lying


The dialogue of Hippias Minor can be roughly divided into two main sections, in the first one Socrates is questioning Hippias on whether or not liars and truth tellers are mutually exclusive to each other, the second part is concerned about if voluntarily lying is better or worse than involuntarily doing it. I will be going over the main arguments put forward in the dialogue to clearly delineate the arguments presented. 


Son of Laertes, sprung from Zeus, resourceful Odysseus, 

I must speak the word bluntly, 

How I will act and how I think it shall be accomplished, 

For as hateful to me as the gates of Hades 

Is he who hides one thing in his mind, and says another. 

As for me, I will speak as it shall also be accomplished. 

(Achilles to Odysseus)


Are liars and truth tellers mutually exclusive?

Hippias, at the start of the dialogue, claims that Homer made Achilles the superior individual compared to Odysseus because Achilles is "truthful and simple" while Odysseus is "wily (skilled at gaining an advantage, especially deceitfully) and a liar".

Socrates being Socrates, questions Hippias whether or not Homer "thought the truthful man was one kind of person, and the liar another, and not the same", therefore establishing the claim that a truthful man is mutually exclusive to being a liar. Hippias takes the position of Homer by defending this claim. 

Socrates questions Hippias and the following premises are established:

  1. Liars have the power to deceive people
  2. Liars are cunning and intelligent
  3. Liars are aware and have the power to lie
  4. Liars are wise and knowledgeable in deception
  5. Someone who does not have the power to lie and is ignorant would not be a liar
  6. Those who know about a specific subject would be the best liars
    1. This argument is elaborated in the dialogue when Socrates asks Hippias on who would be a better liar in subjects such as arithmetic or geometry, the conclusion of the dialogue is that those who are experts in arithmetic or geometry would be much better liars than those who were clueless in the subject. 
  7. Therefore, those who know the truth the best would be the best liars, proving that liars and truth tellers are not mutually exclusive but rather are the same. 
Logically the argument states that if, and only if, someone is a good liar they will be a good truth teller, and vice versa, therefore we cannot have one without the other. 

EUDICUS: Well, Socrates, I don’t think Hippias will need us to plead with him. For that’s not what he said earlier; he said that he wouldn’t flee from any man’s questioning. Right, Hippias? Isn’t that what you said?"
HIPPIAS: I did. But Socrates always creates confusion in arguments, and seems to argue unfairly

Is voluntary lying better or worse than involuntary lying?

  1. Those who run quickly in a race are better than those who run slowly
  2. Those who run slowly voluntarily are better than those who do it involuntarily
  3. In a race those who accomplish bad things such as losing a race, voluntarily, are less worthless i.e. better, than those who lose a race involuntarily. 
  4. Therefore, being able to do bad things voluntarily is less worthless than those who do bad things voluntarily

  1. More power and wisdom -> more ability to do both fine and shameful things
  2. It accomplishes shameful results voluntarily
  3. When the powerful and wise soul does injustice it will do it voluntarily, and the worthless will do it involuntarily
  4. The good man has a good soul and the bad man has a bad soul
  5. Therefore, the good man does injustice voluntarily and the bad man does injustice involuntarily

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Dancing in the Apocalypse

To Think, To See & To Speak

Our Four Selves