The Advent of Pluralism: Diversity and Conflict in the Age of Sophocles

397 Pages·2011·1.93 MB·English

by  Lauren J. Apfel

OXFORD CLASSICAL MONOGRAPHS
PublishedunderthesupervisionofaCommitteeofthe
FacultyofClassicsintheUniversityofOxford
The aim of the Oxford Classical Monograph series (which replaces
the Oxford Classical and Philosophical Monographs) is to publish
booksbasedonthebestthesesonGreekandLatinliterature,ancient
history, and ancient philosophy examined by the Faculty Board of
Classics.
The Advent of
Pluralism
fl
Diversity and Con ict in the Age of Sophocles
LAUREN J. APFEL
1
3
GreatClarendonStreet,Oxfordox26dp
OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford.
ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship,
andeducationbypublishingworldwidein
Oxford NewYork
Auckland CapeTown DaresSalaam HongKong Karachi
KualaLumpur Madrid Melbourne MexicoCity Nairobi
NewDelhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto
Withofficesin
Argentina Austria Brazil Chile CzechRepublic France Greece
Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore
SouthKorea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam
OxfordisaregisteredtrademarkofOxfordUniversityPress
intheUKandincertainothercountries
PublishedintheUnitedStates
byOxfordUniversityPressInc.,NewYork
#LaurenJ.Apfel2011
Themoralrightsoftheauthorhavebeenasserted
DatabaserightOxfordUniversityPress(maker)
Firstpublished2011
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,
storedinaretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,
withoutthepriorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,
orasexpresslypermittedbylaw,orundertermsagreedwiththeappropriate
reprographicsrightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproduction
outsidethescopeoftheaboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,
OxfordUniversityPress,attheaddressabove
Youmustnotcirculatethisbookinanyotherbindingorcover
andyoumustimposethesameconditiononanyacquirer
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData
Dataavailable
LibraryofCongressCataloginginPublicationData
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2010943360
TypesetbySPIPublisherServices,Pondicherry,India
PrintedinGreatBritain
onacid-freepaperby
MPGBooksGroup,BodminandKing’sLynn
ISBN 978–0–19–960062–5
1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2
To my mother
This page intentionally left blank
Preface
The ancient Greek world displays a striking philosophical tendency
towardsunity:theParmenideanWaytoTruth,thePlatonicForm,the
Aristotelian Mean. Much of subsequent Western theory has been a
product of this desire for uniformity and coherence. We need only
thinkofhistory’smajorthought-movements—monotheisticreligion,
for example, or Enlightenment rationalism—to get a sense of how
enduring an impact these notions have had. Within the last half-
century or so, however, monism has come under sustained attack.
With seeds in the thought of early twentieth-century pragmatists
such as James Dewey and William James, the idea of pluralism
emerged most passionately in the writings of Isaiah Berlin. It has
gained influence as a serious ethical position in recent years as
scholars such as Bernard Williams, John Kekes, John Gray, and
George Crowder have developed Berlin’s historical interest into a
fully articulated theoretical stance. In 2010, it seems, philosophy has
finallycaughtupwiththerealitythatvaluesandperspectivesontruth
areplural,thatconflictbetweenthemisendemic.
But ours is not the first age of pluralism. The philosophy of the
ancient Greek world may have been predominantly monist, the
legacy of Plato overshadowing, but there was a moment in the mid-
to-late fifth century bce when men not only accepted diversity, but
recognizedthefactthatirresolvableconflictisanunexcisableelement
of humanity. Taken separately, the works of Protagoras, Herodotus,
and Sophocles each exhibit proclivities remarkably in tune with
modern thinking. The man-measure statement, the Egyptian logos,
Antigone,forinstance—eachofthesespeaksinitsownwaytoideasof
differenceandmoralcollision.Butitiswhentheyaretakentogether
that we may begin seriously to ask ourselves whether a ‘pluralist’
currentofthoughtexistedinantiquity.
Themajorityofthepluralismunderexaminationisconcernedwith
values,ethicalviewpoints,culturalsystems,andtheconflictsbetween
them. I call this moral pluralism. But related issues such as the
multiplicity of truth also come into play. This I refer to as truth
pluralism. Protagoras’ homo mensura assertion, for example, is con-
cerned with ontological issues, as is Herodotus’ inclusion of
viii Preface
numeroussource-citations.Sotoo,thelackofresolutionattheendof
severalofSophocles’tragediescanbetakenasareflectionofthefact
that, for Sophocles, truth was not something singular or immutable.
The two pluralisms work together to paint an overall picture.
Belief that there is more than one concept of justice or more than
one correct burial practice has implications for truth, when those
two variants are couched in competing ethical arguments that must
be weighed against one another. The question of whose opinion is
‘true’—one man-measurer’s or another’s, the Greeks’ or the Calla-
tiae’s, Antigone’s or Creon’s—is not a straightforward one, because
the question of whose ethical stance is ‘right’ is equally complex. In
the historical section of the book a more embracing pluralism of
method and approach is addressed: this I call methodological plural-
ism. This species of pluralism is similarly supplementary, joining
with moral and truth pluralism to solidify our understanding of
Herodotus.
TheAdventofPluralismoffersanexplorationofhowdiversityand
conflict featured in pre-Platonic Classical Greek thought in the
spheres of philosophy, history, and tragedy. It provides an in-depth
analysisofthreeauthors,contendingthateachdisplays,inmorethan
oneway,apluralistperspective.Indoingso,theambitionofthestudy
istoenrichourunderstandingofacoreperiodofancientintellectual
history,reinforcingscholarlyperceptionoftheperiod,butproviding
anewexplanatoryframeworkinwhichtoviewit.
Acknowledgements
This monograph is an outgrowth of a University of Oxford DPhil.
thesis. My first round of thanks go to all of those at Oxford who
helped in the successful completion of that enterprise in 2005. I was
fortunate during my time there to have been exposed to an array of
academicswhowereabletoshowme,throughtheirownwork,how
diverse and interesting Classical scholarship can be. In particular,
I thank Armand D’Angour for always encouraging me to think
clearly about the big picture and for his friendship. Lesley Brown,
Henry Hardy, Gregory Hutchinson, Chris Pelling, and Richard
Rutherford each offered useful and much-appreciated comments on
draftchaptersatvariouspointsintheprocess.
Scott Scullion and Paul Cartledge examined the thesis with re-
markable thoroughness and insight. I am grateful to them for enga-
ging so seriously with my work and for pointing out avenues of
improvement. An extra thank-you is due to Scott Scullion for over-
seeing the transition from thesis to monograph and for a little
suggestionthathasgonealongway.
Inadditiontoacademicdebts,Iwouldliketoexpressgratitudeofa
more personal nature. To Leah for her camaraderie as a perpetual
student and for genuinely exciting discussion of all things Classical.
ToSusanforbeingmyconstantcompanionintheartofwritingand
alwaystherewhenneeded.ToGillianforbeingthebestbigsister.
Myparents(Mom,Carl,Dad,andDarlene)havemadetheunder-
taking possible by generous financial contributions through the
course of my education. Their continual support has illustrated a
respect for the choices I have made, for which I am deeply grateful.
Thanks of a more fundamental kind go to my mother, Sharon, to
whom this book is dedicated. Without her I can honestly say that
IwouldnotbehalfthepersonIamtoday.
Then thereismyhusband,Adam,whohasbeenby myside from
theinceptionoftheideatothefinal,finalversion.Hehaspickedme
upwhenIwasdown.Hehassuppliedme,inhisownwriting,withan
example of what lucid, rigorous, and stimulating scholarship should