Oppositional World Views: Plato & The Sophists

1786 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Phaedo plato

The Sophist views and beliefs originated in Ancient Greece around 400 B.C.E. The Sophists were known as wandering rhetoricians who gave speeches to those who could afford to listen. The Sophists deeply believed in the power of rhetoric and how it could improve one’s life. Plato on the other hand was opposed to all Sophist beliefs. He viewed the Sophists as rhetorical manipulators who were only interested in how people could be persuaded that they learned the truth, regardless if it was in fact the truth. Plato basically opposed every view the Sophists held true and tried to disprove them throughout his many dialogues. The Sophists and Plato held two very contrasting views and this paper will attempt to sift through them all in hopes of illustrating each one. This paper will first focus on each group. It will begin by identifying both the Sophists and Plato and then citing the significant principles associated with each world view. This paper will then focus on how each component of their world views relate specifically to rhetoric. Finally, this paper will focus on illustrating each world view by way of current newspaper editorial.
As noted, the Sophists were rooted in ancient Greece but traveled to many places, giving speeches on rhetoric to those who could afford to listen. Within their teachings, the Sophists focused on rhetorical techniques and how they could be used to successfully argue any side of an argument. They harped on the idea that through their teachings, self improvement could be achieved because those who controlled language had the power. The Sophists were relativists, which means they believed that an individual or society’s beliefs, while true for that particular individual or society, might be untrue for others. (Bizzell P. & Herzberg, B., 2001, pg. 6) The Sophists referred to this as kairos and said that because of it, there could be no absolute truth because the truth was dependent on that particular person’s point of view. They believed that the only knowledge that humans could achieve is knowledge that is probable because absolute knowledge is unattainable. The Sophists feel that this probable knowledge can be boiled down through what they refer to as dissoi logoi. This technique, in which each opposing side of an argument is examined in order to identify the probable truth, was developed by Protago...

... middle of paper ...

..., this would be dusting away the debris (the myths) and uncovering the absolute truth of what really happened. Through rhetoric, probable truths such as McDonalds had to pay three million, are cleared out and absolute truths, McDonalds had to pay $640,000, are uncovered. (Doroshow, J. pg.1-3) This is exactly how Plato would have had it.
To summarize, the Sophists were traveling rhetoricians who were paid to teach people techniques to becoming great arguers and persuaders. They were relativists who believed there was no absolute truth, only probable. This probable truth was discovered through kairos, dependent on a person’s situation, or dissoi logoi, the truth is uncovered by examining opposing arguments. The philosopher Plato was in opposition to virtually every belief the Sophists had. He believed in absolute truth and that rhetoric and discourse should be used to uncover this truth. He also believed that false rhetoric was that of the Sophists. Whether the Sophist view is correct or Plato’s view is, there is some sort of truth out there and maybe one day it can be decided as to which method best uncovered it. But until then, the debate will rage on, as it did within this paper.

Show More
Related

  • Rhetoric In The Novel 'Soften Them Up' By Jay Heinrichs

    458 Words  | 1 Pages

    Heinrichs begins by explaining the art of rhetoric and laying out the basic tools of argument. He emphasizes the importance of using the proper tense to avoid arguing the wrong issue. Furthermore, he introduces logos, ethos and pathos and shows how to “wield” each rhetorical tool. In Part 2, Heinrichs discusses common logical fallacies as well as rhetorical fouls. He remarks rhetoric’s single rule of never arguing the inarguable and demonstrates how ethos helps to know whom to trust. In Part 3, Kairos becomes an important tool for knowing the right time to persuade one’s audience. In Part 4 of the novel, the author provides examples of how to use rhetorical tools previously introduced in the

    Read More

  • Plato's The Apology

    1518 Words  | 4 Pages

    "How you have felt, O men of Athens, at hearing the speeches of my accusers, I cannot tell; but I know that their persuasive words almost made me forget who I was – such was the effect of them; and yet they have hardly spoken a word of truth.” – Plato “The Apology”

    Read More

  • Euthyphro, by Plato

    871 Words  | 2 Pages

    In what is noted as one of Plato first accounts, we become acquainted with a very intriguing man known as Socrates; a man, whose ambition to seek knowledge, inevitably leaves a significant impact on humanity. Most of all, it is methodologies of attaining this knowledge that makes him so mesmerizing. This methodology is referred to as Socratic irony, in literature. In any case, I will introduce the argument that Plato's Euthyphro is extremely indicative of this type of methodology, for the reason being that: Socrates's portrays a sense of intellectual humility.

    Read More

  • Comparison Of The Theaetetus And Skepticism: Mercedes Dreyer

    1684 Words  | 4 Pages

    (160d) Socrates points out the contradicting beliefs that Protagoras would have had in maintaining relative truths, for to do so would be to remove the ability for one man to know more/better than another (161). It seems strange to say then, again coming from Protagoras, that one is more knowledgeable than another, and is worthy of payment to teach men who are less knowledgeable. In addition to this, as discussed above, Protagoras’ account is based on future possibility and thus has no place in discussing what actually is or in the process of becoming. To claim truth based on a future event (that which has not yet come to pass) fails requirement (1) of any definition of knowledge. Similar issues are faced in theories of knowledge and justification that rely heavily on probability. Mainly that the probability of a claim being true cannot provide actual, instant, justification for a belief (which in turn makes the theory that K=JTB

    Read More

  • Isocrates Rhetorical Analysis

    411 Words  | 1 Pages

    Isocrates did not appreciate the teaching methods or claims of the Sophists. When Isocrates wrote Against the Sophists, He was highly critically of the teaching methods of the Sophists. Isocrates used kairos and prepon in his teachings , both of which the Sophists lacked. The textbook indicates Isocrates views on teaching from “ Discourses designed to rally audiences to traditional values, perspectives, and behaviors”. Unlike the Sophists Isocrates felt he was obligated to teach not only his students but also Greece society. For example " he did so in his letters and treatises, such as panegyricus and Aeropagiticus". Both philosophers and sophist influenced Isocrates. In the textbook Isocrates states “ those who profess to teach political discourse. For the latter have no interest whatever in the truth, but consider that they are masters of an art”. In Against the Sophists Isocrates indicates these sophist preach the power of rhetoric but they fail to mention the art form in which it takes to make rhetoric profound. To become a true philosopher one must aim to achieve education that will develop the wisdom needed. The Sophists were never going to give a student the education needed to receive true

    Read More

  • Herodotus: Sacrifice Play In Ancient Greek Religion

    1079 Words  | 3 Pages

    The meaning of sophist, is one who used his smarts to later manipulate reality, and Socrates did that, because many young men learned from Socrates, but Socrates later stated that he knew nothing.

    Read More

  • Plato And Charles Peirce: The Meaning Of Truth, Knowledge And Knowledge

    947 Words  | 2 Pages

    For many years humans have pursued the meaning of truth, knowledge and understanding. For many this pursuit of understanding the meaning of truth doesn’t end until one finds a “truth” that is nourishing to them. Even if this is the case one may choose to look for an alternate truth that may be more satisfactory to them. This pursuit of truth does not always have to follow the same path as there may be different ideas for everyone on how truth is actually obtained and which is a better way to obtain the truth is. Two philosophers of their time, Plato and Charles Peirce had their own methodologies and ideas on how truth and knowledge could be obtained.

    Read More

  • Against The Sophist Analysis

    825 Words  | 2 Pages

    After all the readings that we have had and the assignments that were assigned to the readings, one that did stood out the most to me was ”Isocrates, ‘Against the Sophists’”. Isocrates point of view of the sophist was neatly to show that he was against them. Isocrates contends that these sophists, in any case, make guarantees that are difficult to satisfy, saying that they would all be able to however make divine beings out of men. They put on a show to be searchers of reality keeping in mind the end goal to engage individuals, however they don 't really concentrate on it. I will be argue how isocrates criticism about the sophist can now be seen in modern time.

    Read More

  • College Education Purpose

    1137 Words  | 3 Pages

    To get a sense of what an education was intended for we must look at the ancient Greek society. The philosophers like the Sophist, Socrates, and Plato were a major part of the Greek society and the rest of the world. Take the Sophist for example, these scholars who would, for a fee, travel to give public lectures on such subjects as math, grammar, rhetoric, ethics and science. For the citizens, lectures were not only an educational experience, it was also considered a form of ...

    Read More

  • Plato's Noble Falsehood

    1675 Words  | 4 Pages

    Even today, Noble falsehood is a popular topic. On one hand, people are keen to talk how politicians use those well-intentional lies to achieve some incredible things. On the other hand, people accuse those politicians of divesting people’s right of choice making and intentionally hiding the truth. It seems that people have an alternative feeling towards falsehood. Thus, this essay is aim to discuss why and how in some cases falsehood is such a useful thing in politics, whereas in the others it is a contradiction in Plato’s political project.

    Read More

  • Rhetoric vs. Truth

    2248 Words  | 5 Pages

    To begin, Plato’s view of rhetoric stems from his theory of the nature of reality known as Platonic realism. He argues that there are true forms of ideas that exist in a higher realm of being and thought. Essentially, there is a perfect template for every idea in the universe, including such concepts as good, justice and knowledge. These templates are the true abstract qualities of these ideas that individuals of the material realm cannot directly perceive with the senses, and so everything that exists within the worldly realm is actually a flawed copy or reflection of those perfect ideals, or absolutes. Basically, it is the qualities of an idea that make it what it is. For example, suppose one were to take the qualities of being a chair and deconstruct all the ideas there are about what chairs should be, thereby determining what constitutes “chairness”. This would eventually eliminate all the flaws that a chair could have, and then result in a concept of the perfect chair – or a true template. Furthermore, only someone with a highly trained ...

    Read More

  • The Nature of Rhetoric

    1390 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Plato’s Gorgias, Socrates discusses the nature and uses of rhetoric with Gorgias, while raising moral and philosophical perspective of rhetoric. Socrates believes that rhetoric is a kind of false knowledge whose purpose is to produce conviction, and not to educate people about the true extent of knowledge (Plato 15). On the other hand, Gorgias argues that the study of rhetoric is essential in any other professional fields, in order to provide an effective communication (Plato 19). After their discussion of rhetoric, Socrates seems to understand the true extent of rhetoric better as compared to Gorgias, as he is able to use rhetoric appeals as a device to dominate the conversation. During their discussion, Socrates seems to have use rhetorical appeals, such as ethos appeal and pathos appeal to connect and convince the crowd of audiences, and logos appeal to support his claims. His speeches seems to have shown sarcastic aspects and constantly asking questions in order to keep Gorgias busy, at the same time preparing an ambush. Since rhetoric is the art of effective communication through the form of speaking and writing, with the appropriate knowledge and virtue, it can be used for good purposes. On the other hand, rhetoric also can be used as an act of conviction because rhetorical appeals can be defined as an act of persuasion as well. Learning the true extent of rhetoric can help an individual strengthen their verbal communication skills. Socrates uses rhetorical appeals of ethos, pathos and logos appeal to win his argument against Gorgias, as he is able to get the audiences’ attention through rhetoric and cornered Gorgias into revealing the true extent of rhetoric.

    Read More

  • Plato and Aristotle's Impact on Rhetoric

    1491 Words  | 3 Pages

    Plato and Aristotle are two rhetoricians than had a great impact on the history of rhetoric. Although they were similar in many ways, their use and definition of rhetoric were different. Plato had the more classical approach where he used rhetoric as a means of education to pass down his beliefs and practice of rhetoric to his students. He believed that it should be used to educate the masses, provoking thought, and thereby preserving that knowledge. Plato thought that rhetoric should be used to convey truth, truths already known to the audience, revealed through that dialectic critical thought. Plato also operated on absolute truths, things that are right or wrong, black or white. Aristotle was more modern in that he used rhetoric as a tool of persuasion in the polis. He thought that the main purpose of rhetoric was to persuade, provoking emotions for his audience as a tool of persuasion. Aristotle’s rhetoric was more science based, using enthymemes and syllogism to foster logical thinking. He believed that rhetoric was a means of discovering truth. His rhetoric was highly deliberative since he used it mainly for persuasion. I will discuss their differences in more depth in the following essay.

    Read More

  • The Unity of the World in Plotinian Philosophy

    7584 Words  | 16 Pages

    My paper takes as the starting point for its argument the traditional interpretation (and classic criticism) of Platonic metaphysics as a two worlds view of reality: one world, that which includes this room of people, i.e., the here and now which is characterized by change, disorder, conflict, coming to be and passing out of being, corruption, etc.; and another world, located who knows where, but certainly not identical to what we see around us at present, the realm of changelessness and order, ontological perdurance, harmony, unity: Plato's "plain of Truth", the residence of the forms. In light of these two worlds, the Platonic philosopher's wisdom, whatever it may be, must be a wisdom not of this world. Indeed, did not Plato's Socrates himself say that his life— the philosophical life— was the art of practising death? Should that Socrates— or anyone who professes to be a Platonic philosopher— show up at, let us say, the World Congress of

    Read More

  • Socrates and the Sophists

    675 Words  | 2 Pages

    How would you feel if someone called you a sophist? Before you answer, it's important to know how the meaning of this word has evolved. "During the fifth century, sophists were teachers, speakers, and philosophers who were paid to use rhetoric (Mardner 1)." But many people opposed their style of teaching. Socrates was a philosopher who disagreed with the Sophist's point-of-view. The main differences between the Sophist and Socrates were their views on absolute truth.

    Read More

More about Oppositional World Views: Plato & The Sophists

Open Document