Epistemic democrats claim democracy is superior because it maximises aggregated knowledge, thus offering the best chance of arriving at correct political decisions. This argument is most commonly defended philosophically, but the ancient Greeks are said to provide historical support. This paper challenges that claim. First, it suggests that the evidence for the view that the ancient Greeks defended democracy on epistemic grounds is inadequate. Next, it examines the distinction between knowledge (epistêmê), understood as information that exists independently of our will, and judgment (gnomê or krisis), understood as a view inextricably linked to particular willing agents, and shows that the ancient Greeks understood political decision-making in terms of the latter. Finally, taking the Athenians’ relations with the Melians and the rise of Macedonia as examples of serious political problems, it argues that the standard ancient Greek approach shows a better grasp of the inherently creative character of political action.