Dialetic Physis or Nomos ?

Since the begining of Philosophy, the greek philosophers were challenged to attempt to explain the begining of the cosmos, putting aside the myths and the religious traditions of the time, Inasmuch they had the conviction of studying the nature " Physis" , in order to be able to disclose the mayor questions of the mood that was surronding them.

This philosophers were call the presocratic philosophers, inasmuch they preceded Socrates. Inicially the main focus of the presocratic philosophers was to discover the begining of everythingThey divided themselves as Monists and Pluralists.The Monists established that there was one unique substrate and that by phisical processes it changes in order to established the plurality of everything, whereas the Pluralists established that the substrates that made everything were multiple.Among this two, the pluralists were the ones that had the most skeptical point of views toward myths and religious traditions.
The presocratic philosophers established several opinions about the begining "Arche" . Furthermore They defineded the reality as something eternal. Likewise their vision of nature as a "Physis" was that it is utterly ordinated, under the control of natural laws.


Ancient Skepticism

Eventually another kind of philosophers appeared, they were call the "Sophists".The Sophist instead of focusing in the "Physis" focused isntead on the "Polis" or on the problems of society.Their main features were:

-Their Cirtical Actitude toward the institutions that they claimed were founded with false natural laws.
-Their Skepticism about the capacity of the human understanding; They claimed that if it wasent posible to discern with certainty doubt was the only racional stance.
-Their Relativism about the truth and about the moral values.
-Their relied on their education and it the value of the Rethoric and the Dialetic.
-Their humanist worries about the cosmologic stance of the presocratic philosophers.
-They required a payment for their services.


The Main Reasons for their Skepticism

The Sophists used to established that the natural laws were nothing more than mere conventional realitys.
The Sophists were settled in many other citys and were heavily influenciated by other cultures. Eventually they considered that the natural laws werent clear or understandable. They said that the real laws were only the fruit of an understanding between citizens in order to guarantee the mutual values among themselves.
The sophists then had the necesity to distiguish between the real natural laws "Physis" and between the Human laws "Nomos".
Eventually the discussion among Physis and Nomos had an effect of distrust for the conventional traditions of the time, by putting doubts, a lack of trust and of validiy in the natural laws. They didnt assured the welfare or what was right for men.
The Sophists replaced the "natural laws" for the concept of "usefulness". The distrust of what cannot be grasp by the sense, had derivaded a stance of doing what is consider to be useful for men and for the comunity "Polis".
For exmaple:
- A good physician is the one that know enough, in order to cure the ill persons.
- A good politician is the one can presuade the citizens that justice and right things are the are precisily the ones that are usefull for the state.

So their basic stance was to put aside tradicional religious doctrines and myths, in order to focus in everyone being better, usefull and more virtuous; in order to be better and to contribute to the comunity, inasmuch as it will be good and positive to the altogether comunity.


The Relativism and The Skepticism

Two of the most important Sophists were Protagoras and Gorgias.

Protagoras (Πρωταγόρας) was a contemporany of Plato, and Plato wrote one dialogue with his name. He established that: "Man is the measure of all things". This means that nobody can attribute error to others, inasmuch no opinion has more true than another opinion. Nevertheless he states that some opinion can be better than others, only if a mayority decides it.
For example: If someone is convinced that stealing is good, he will consider it as his truth, so long as he keep believing it.To the mayority of people stealing would be considered as something bad, but they shouldnt try to convice him that stealing is false but they should try to convince him that not stealing it is better than stealing. This are the bases of Relativism.

Gorgias (Γοργίας) was a pupil of Empedocles, Nevertheless he had a very radical skeptic stance. We are able to grasp his thoughts and points of views from his three negative thesis:
1.Nothing exists;
2.Even if something exists, nothing can be known about it; and
3.Even if something can be known about it, knowledge about it can't be communicated to others.


Truths or Opinions

People in different cultures have established their own opinions and their own philosophy about the truth taking in account their mood and the culture in which they were raised, likewise was the case of the greek philosophy. Many established their own school with their own doctrines, However a mere “opinion” cannot became a “truth” unless it is critically enquired in several ways. Nowadays normally people could consider the plurality of opinions as "truths", even if they contradict themselves.
Logicaly there is just one truth that dosent contradict itself , and it must be universal, and not a plurality of mere opinions. Therefore truth itself cannot be reduced to mere opinions.


The Pessimism of the Sophists

The Sophists considered the cosmos and the world a chaos, they had a pessimistic stance about the order of everything. They focused in what can only be grasp by the senses. Eventually their pragmaticism and their relativism, convinced them that everything was negative and pessimist.They didn’t consider the existens of a demiurge or of an order, unlike Plato. Aristotle himself stated (for the art of the sophist is the semblance of wisdom without the reality, and the sophist is one who makes money from an apparent but unreal wisdom);On Sophistical Refutations


Doubt as the Universal Rational Stance

The Sophistical view was, the doubt as the ultimate rational stance over all the things that cannot be explained. Nevertheless, doubt cannot be the unique rational stance because it constantly lead to mistakes or wrong doings. In some cases the positivism of religious traditions is psychologicaly necessary in order to be more committed to virtud and more faithfull to it. knowledge is the end of every being that is able to reasonate and men have his delight in knowledge and in understanding. Just as Aristotle said: All men by nature desire to know. An indication of this is the delight we take in our senses, (Metaphysics). Rational beings are philosophers by nature and they cling to what is consider to be best for themselves. A continuous lack of a stance, with doubts, might not be a satisfying view.

Conclusion

The skeptic reasoning can only be used in order to develope a critical and rational enquirity of different views, in order to be able afterwards to attain the truth, in order to avoid to remain with a variaty of opinions that often conclude with doubts and uncertanties.