Dupréel, _La Légende Socratique_ (1922), p. 428. Dupréel considers (p. 431) that the Protagorean spirit was marked by the idea of explaining the things of thought, and life in general, by the meeting, opposition, and harmony of individual activities, leading up to the sociological notion of _convention_, and behind it, of relativity. Nietzsche was a pioneer in restoring the Sophists to their rightful place in Greek thought. The Greek culture of the Sophists grew out of all the Greek instincts, he says (_The Will to Power_, section 428): “And it has ultimately shown itself to be right. Our modern attitude of mind is, to a great extent, Heraclitean, Democritean, and Protagorean. To say that it is Protagorean is even sufficient, because Protagoras was himself a synthesis of Heraclitus and Democritus.” The Sophists, by realizing that many supposed objective ideas were really subjective, have often been viewed with suspicion as content with a mere egotistically individualistic conception of life. The same has happened to Nietzsche. It was probably an error as regards the greatest Sophists, and is certainly an error, though even still commonly committed, as regards Nietzsche; see the convincing discussion of Nietzsche’s moral aim in Salter, _Nietzsche the Thinker_, chap. XXIV. Footnote 122: I may here, perhaps, remark that in the General Preface to my _Studies in the Psychology of Sex_ I suggested that we now have to lay the foundation of a new casuistry, no longer theological and Christian, but naturalistic and scientific. Footnote 123: Oswald Spengler, _Der Untergang des Abendlandes_, vol. I (1918); vol. II (1922). Footnote 124: In an interesting pamphlet, _Pessimismus?_ Spengler has since pointed out that he does not regard his argument as pessimistic. The end of a civilisation is its fulfilment, and there is still much to be achieved (though not, he thinks, along the line of art) before our own civilisation is fulfilled. With Spengler’s conception of that fulfilment we may, however, fail to sympathise. Footnote 125: See, for instance, W. L. Newman, _The Politics of Aristotle_, vol. 1, p. 201, and S. H. Butcher, _Aristotle’s Theory of Poetry and Fine Art_, p. 119. Footnote 126: