The Use Of Sophists In Plato's The Republic

After a deep reading of The Republic book I, and after analyzing how Plato criticized the sophist by attacking Thrasymachus, I will start this by paper by defining a sophist and then I will be developing in this paper the contrast in the aims and methods of philosophers and sophists.

Broadly, sophist is known to be a person who is a great public speaker who is capable to persuade and affect other people’s thoughts. Sophists used to cities to find rich people, and as soon as they find they, they convince them that they need a sophist to teach their children on how to become good public speakers and good leaders. Sophists used to do so because they thought that teaching the children of those wealthy people gives them more fame and makes them

You take hold of the argument in the way you can work it the most harm” (The Republic, 338 d). Thrasymachus is aware that Socrates is trying to humulate him and harm him. At this point of the conversation, Thrasymachus was getting upset everytime he was questioned about his definition, and he was also aware that Socrates was intending to ham him in his question about the infallibility of the ruler.” To defend himself, Socrates says: “Do you suppose I ask what I asked because I’m plotting to do harm to you in the argument?” Thrasymachus then replies “I don’t suppose, I know it well, But it won’t profit you”. (The Republic 341 b). Thrasymachus here is showing Socrates that he won’t let him profit from the humiliation he is trying to do. What proves that Thrasymachus is someone who likes to give long speeches to persuade people and that he is not really interested in discovering the true definition of justice nor in having the authentic knowledge is that he is getting angry everytime someone questions him. Thrasymachus is already convinced that he has the ultimate knowledge and he doesn’t like when Socrates tries to prove him that the definition he has is wrong or that he doesn’t know exactly what justice