Homework Help is Here – Start Your Trial Now!
Social Science
History
Who were 'The Sophists'? What role did they play in society and what did they aim at accomplishing? Did the sophists differ in anyway from the philosophers? If so, how? In your estimate were these people 'good'? Where they a positive element in society? How do you think Socrates/Plato felt about them?

Who were 'The Sophists'? What role did they play in society and what did they aim at accomplishing? Did the sophists differ in anyway from the philosophers? If so, how? In your estimate were these people 'good'? Where they a positive element in society? How do you think Socrates/Plato felt about them?

icon
Related questions
Question

Who were 'The Sophists'? What role did they play in society and what did they aim at accomplishing? Did the sophists differ in anyway from the philosophers? If so, how? In your estimate were these people 'good'? Where they a positive element in society? How do you think Socrates/Plato felt about them?   

<Course 8:45 0 W.T. Jones - Who were the Sophists? [8... A < Document W.T. Jones - The Sophists.pdf 2 THE PHILOSOPHICAL HERITAGE Hellas was Ancient Greece tural pattern: educators teach the young how to do, or to get, the things which their parents value. In the society of the fifth century B.C. the old values of a tightly knit warrior class were no longer highly regarded because they no longer brought men the kind of pre-eminence which they had once assured; the new values were essentially political and secular in nature, and the new education reflected this change. THE SOPHISTS Sophism a Product of the Times From Pythagoreanism we turn to a move- ment of thought in almost every respect its antithesis. The Pythagoreans were mystics and mathematicians who lived in a religious frater- nity and cultivated the sciences to improve their souls. The Sophists were neither scientists nor philosophers. They were educators who traveled through Hellas from city to city, wherever they could find pupils. And like modern teachers they expected to be paid for their services. The very fact that there was now room in Greek life for paid teachers is itself significant of the change in conditions. In the old days the masses of the population had not, of course, been con- sidered worth bothering about; the sons of the great noble houses had been brought up-as Achilles had been brought up by Phoenix-on stirring accounts of their illustrious and di- vine ancestors, whose deeds furnished a model in virtue and refinement for succeeding genera- tions to emulate. But after the economic up- heavals of the eighth and seventh centuries B.C., a class of "new rich" arose: persons without the legendary heritage of the old nobility, people who had made money in "trade"-in the new industries and in the growing commerce which were fostered by the relations of the mother city the and her colonies. This new aristocracy wanted to learn how to live well and could afford to pay for what it learned. Moreover, as the franchise broadened in cities. like Athens, political leadership was no longer an inevitable birthright; it now entailed being able to please the electorate. And with a juridi- cal system which put the courts' decisions in the hands of an ignorant mob, success in law- suits depended more and more on being able to move the jury. i.e. emotionally 57 loyalty, personal honor, and moderation to an emphasis on facility in debate, oratorical skill, and demagogic appeal. Educational practice naturally conforms closely to the dominant cul- Thus, not only the range of education ex- panded, but its scope changed radically from an emphasis on the knightly virtues of courage, Sophistic Concept of Virtue The Sophists said that they taught "virtue," but the virtue they taught was the technique of success in a fifth-century democracy. "How to Win Friends and Influence People" was the sub- stance of their morality. Beyond this it is im- possible to generalize about the Sophistic cur- riculum. What they taught-what they believed were the rules for success and virtue-depended. to a considerable extent on their differing tem- peraments. Thus a conservative like Protag- oras 38 could teach that the way to success was. a careful and prudent acceptance of the laws and customs of the community one lived in, while a radical like Thrasymachus 30 could openly advocate that might is right, and the devil take the hindmost. The New "Enlightenment" We can say, then, that while the Sophists did not form a closely knit group teaching a com- mon doctrine, they were united by a common. hostility toward the traditional beliefs of their compatriots. The Sophists felt themselves to be "enlightened." By this they meant that they had liberated themselves from the chains of super- stition and ignorance which still bound less for- tunate men, and that they would be glad-for a price to set others free. 38 See pp. 60-61. 39 See pp. 63-65. the new, anti-establishment or non-traditional class of thinkers THE CLASSICAL MIND 58 The Sophists naturally met with a mixed Reasons for Scepticism reception. The avant garde received them with open arms, and bright young men sat at their feet in rapt attention. But in the middle of the fifth century B.C. the bulk of the population was still devout and superstitious. This was true even at Athens, where "society" was doubtless sceptical and progressive but where the mass DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL SCIENCE It will be useful, therefore, to inquire why the Sophists, and the society of which they were a part, should have come to be so cynical and sceptical about beliefs the masses still held dear. Partly it was simply a result of social changes : + < RA KY
Transcribed Image Text:<Course 8:45 0 W.T. Jones - Who were the Sophists? [8... A < Document W.T. Jones - The Sophists.pdf 2 THE PHILOSOPHICAL HERITAGE Hellas was Ancient Greece tural pattern: educators teach the young how to do, or to get, the things which their parents value. In the society of the fifth century B.C. the old values of a tightly knit warrior class were no longer highly regarded because they no longer brought men the kind of pre-eminence which they had once assured; the new values were essentially political and secular in nature, and the new education reflected this change. THE SOPHISTS Sophism a Product of the Times From Pythagoreanism we turn to a move- ment of thought in almost every respect its antithesis. The Pythagoreans were mystics and mathematicians who lived in a religious frater- nity and cultivated the sciences to improve their souls. The Sophists were neither scientists nor philosophers. They were educators who traveled through Hellas from city to city, wherever they could find pupils. And like modern teachers they expected to be paid for their services. The very fact that there was now room in Greek life for paid teachers is itself significant of the change in conditions. In the old days the masses of the population had not, of course, been con- sidered worth bothering about; the sons of the great noble houses had been brought up-as Achilles had been brought up by Phoenix-on stirring accounts of their illustrious and di- vine ancestors, whose deeds furnished a model in virtue and refinement for succeeding genera- tions to emulate. But after the economic up- heavals of the eighth and seventh centuries B.C., a class of "new rich" arose: persons without the legendary heritage of the old nobility, people who had made money in "trade"-in the new industries and in the growing commerce which were fostered by the relations of the mother city the and her colonies. This new aristocracy wanted to learn how to live well and could afford to pay for what it learned. Moreover, as the franchise broadened in cities. like Athens, political leadership was no longer an inevitable birthright; it now entailed being able to please the electorate. And with a juridi- cal system which put the courts' decisions in the hands of an ignorant mob, success in law- suits depended more and more on being able to move the jury. i.e. emotionally 57 loyalty, personal honor, and moderation to an emphasis on facility in debate, oratorical skill, and demagogic appeal. Educational practice naturally conforms closely to the dominant cul- Thus, not only the range of education ex- panded, but its scope changed radically from an emphasis on the knightly virtues of courage, Sophistic Concept of Virtue The Sophists said that they taught "virtue," but the virtue they taught was the technique of success in a fifth-century democracy. "How to Win Friends and Influence People" was the sub- stance of their morality. Beyond this it is im- possible to generalize about the Sophistic cur- riculum. What they taught-what they believed were the rules for success and virtue-depended. to a considerable extent on their differing tem- peraments. Thus a conservative like Protag- oras 38 could teach that the way to success was. a careful and prudent acceptance of the laws and customs of the community one lived in, while a radical like Thrasymachus 30 could openly advocate that might is right, and the devil take the hindmost. The New "Enlightenment" We can say, then, that while the Sophists did not form a closely knit group teaching a com- mon doctrine, they were united by a common. hostility toward the traditional beliefs of their compatriots. The Sophists felt themselves to be "enlightened." By this they meant that they had liberated themselves from the chains of super- stition and ignorance which still bound less for- tunate men, and that they would be glad-for a price to set others free. 38 See pp. 60-61. 39 See pp. 63-65. the new, anti-establishment or non-traditional class of thinkers THE CLASSICAL MIND 58 The Sophists naturally met with a mixed Reasons for Scepticism reception. The avant garde received them with open arms, and bright young men sat at their feet in rapt attention. But in the middle of the fifth century B.C. the bulk of the population was still devout and superstitious. This was true even at Athens, where "society" was doubtless sceptical and progressive but where the mass DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL SCIENCE It will be useful, therefore, to inquire why the Sophists, and the society of which they were a part, should have come to be so cynical and sceptical about beliefs the masses still held dear. Partly it was simply a result of social changes : + < RA KY
Search 8:43 <course 0 W.T. Jones - Who were the Sophists? [8... A < Document W.T. Jones - The Sophists.pdf 3 the new, anti-establishment or non-traditional class of thinkers THE CLASSICAL MIND 58 The Sophists naturally met with a mixed Reasons for Scepticism reception. The avant garde received them with open arms, and bright young men sat at their feet in rapt attention. But in the middle of the fifth century B.C. the bulk of the population was still devout and superstitious. This was true even at Athens, where "society" was doubtless sceptical and progressive but where the mass of the citizenry was as conservative intellectually as it was radical politically. In the people's mind, indeed, opposition to the Sophists' teachings be- came associated with the defense of political democracy. This is not surprising since many of the enlightened pupils of the Sophists were, as a matter of fact, opponents of the people's rule. Hence it was easy, even in Pericles' day, and still more. so in the period of mob rule which followed his death, for innovators to be tried for atheism and treason at the same time, without a distinction being made between the two charges. for example, with Socrates Estimate of the Sophists As between such extreme evaluations it is hard today to make a fair assessment of the Sophists. Though they certainly performed a useful social function in sweeping away the cobwebs of superstition, they had nothing posi- tive to put in the place left vacant by the dis- appearance of mythology. They are important not for any positive theories they developed, for they developed none, but for the way in which they drew out, formulated, and then passed on to the next generation the negativism implicit in the intellectual structure of the times. It will not do simply to condemn the Sophists as a destructive force; they merely extracted an es- sence which was already there and which sooner or later had to be drained off before real prog- ress could be made. From this point of view, indeed, their role was positive. They are im- portant not only because they hastened the end of an era by spreading scepticism and relativism, but because their views, taken in themselves and apart from their impact on the subsequent de- velopment of theory, are "signs of the times." THE the supposedly god-given moral codes inherited from our ancestors. The more we travel in other lands the more we see that in the diversity of men's customs and laws there is but one com- mon element the conviction of each group that DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL SCIENCE It will be useful, therefore, to inquire why the Sophists, and the society of which they were a part, should have come to be so cynical and sceptical about beliefs the masses still held dear. Partly it was simply a result of social changes which made the old valu values no longer significant in achieving success. Partly it was the result of back to Solon's or to Hesiod's time, we find a the thinking of the natural scientists. If we go deep-seated conviction that law had its source in divine authority. Zeus, the son of Cronos, had decreed a line of conduct for men to fol- low and, sooner or later, those who failed to live up to these rules would be punished. More- over, these rules were by implication absolute. Since there was but one Zeus, there was but one justice. Justice, as Zeus's decree, must be everywhere the same. These admirable but naïve notions could hardly survive a period of scientific study. If Iris turned out to be a natural phenomenon like a rainbow, the same argument would inevitably be applied to the other gods and to Zeus him- self. And if Zeus is no more, what happens to the law of justice he is supposed to have pro- mulgated? As Aristophanes remarked, when Zeus is uncrowned, chaos succeeds to his place, and whirlwind rules. If Xenophanes' insight, that every man makes god in his owry/image, led the poet to the conclusion that god transcends all human grasp it might lead other men to the conclusion that god is only a figment of the human mind. see Xenophanes on "anthropomorphism" COMPARATIVE STUDY OF CULTURES Travel is said to broaden; it does so by dis- playing the diversity of men's judgments. If diverse, they cannot all be valid, and if some are invalid, have we any reason to suppose that any are not? If the Ethiopians judge god to be black because they are so, and the Thracians say that god is fair because they are fair, would it not be impertinent to suppose that the Greek god is anything but a reflection of the Greek mind? The same consideration applies naturally to PHILOSOPHICAL HERITAGE 59 the kind of choice," which we can expect of the new and enlightened generation. Religious sceptics had to find new sanctions to enforce that self-discipline and moderation which the best Greek conception of the good life had in- : + < RA KY
Transcribed Image Text:Search 8:43 <course 0 W.T. Jones - Who were the Sophists? [8... A < Document W.T. Jones - The Sophists.pdf 3 the new, anti-establishment or non-traditional class of thinkers THE CLASSICAL MIND 58 The Sophists naturally met with a mixed Reasons for Scepticism reception. The avant garde received them with open arms, and bright young men sat at their feet in rapt attention. But in the middle of the fifth century B.C. the bulk of the population was still devout and superstitious. This was true even at Athens, where "society" was doubtless sceptical and progressive but where the mass of the citizenry was as conservative intellectually as it was radical politically. In the people's mind, indeed, opposition to the Sophists' teachings be- came associated with the defense of political democracy. This is not surprising since many of the enlightened pupils of the Sophists were, as a matter of fact, opponents of the people's rule. Hence it was easy, even in Pericles' day, and still more. so in the period of mob rule which followed his death, for innovators to be tried for atheism and treason at the same time, without a distinction being made between the two charges. for example, with Socrates Estimate of the Sophists As between such extreme evaluations it is hard today to make a fair assessment of the Sophists. Though they certainly performed a useful social function in sweeping away the cobwebs of superstition, they had nothing posi- tive to put in the place left vacant by the dis- appearance of mythology. They are important not for any positive theories they developed, for they developed none, but for the way in which they drew out, formulated, and then passed on to the next generation the negativism implicit in the intellectual structure of the times. It will not do simply to condemn the Sophists as a destructive force; they merely extracted an es- sence which was already there and which sooner or later had to be drained off before real prog- ress could be made. From this point of view, indeed, their role was positive. They are im- portant not only because they hastened the end of an era by spreading scepticism and relativism, but because their views, taken in themselves and apart from their impact on the subsequent de- velopment of theory, are "signs of the times." THE the supposedly god-given moral codes inherited from our ancestors. The more we travel in other lands the more we see that in the diversity of men's customs and laws there is but one com- mon element the conviction of each group that DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL SCIENCE It will be useful, therefore, to inquire why the Sophists, and the society of which they were a part, should have come to be so cynical and sceptical about beliefs the masses still held dear. Partly it was simply a result of social changes which made the old valu values no longer significant in achieving success. Partly it was the result of back to Solon's or to Hesiod's time, we find a the thinking of the natural scientists. If we go deep-seated conviction that law had its source in divine authority. Zeus, the son of Cronos, had decreed a line of conduct for men to fol- low and, sooner or later, those who failed to live up to these rules would be punished. More- over, these rules were by implication absolute. Since there was but one Zeus, there was but one justice. Justice, as Zeus's decree, must be everywhere the same. These admirable but naïve notions could hardly survive a period of scientific study. If Iris turned out to be a natural phenomenon like a rainbow, the same argument would inevitably be applied to the other gods and to Zeus him- self. And if Zeus is no more, what happens to the law of justice he is supposed to have pro- mulgated? As Aristophanes remarked, when Zeus is uncrowned, chaos succeeds to his place, and whirlwind rules. If Xenophanes' insight, that every man makes god in his owry/image, led the poet to the conclusion that god transcends all human grasp it might lead other men to the conclusion that god is only a figment of the human mind. see Xenophanes on "anthropomorphism" COMPARATIVE STUDY OF CULTURES Travel is said to broaden; it does so by dis- playing the diversity of men's judgments. If diverse, they cannot all be valid, and if some are invalid, have we any reason to suppose that any are not? If the Ethiopians judge god to be black because they are so, and the Thracians say that god is fair because they are fair, would it not be impertinent to suppose that the Greek god is anything but a reflection of the Greek mind? The same consideration applies naturally to PHILOSOPHICAL HERITAGE 59 the kind of choice," which we can expect of the new and enlightened generation. Religious sceptics had to find new sanctions to enforce that self-discipline and moderation which the best Greek conception of the good life had in- : + < RA KY
Expert Solution
steps

Step by step

Solved in 3 steps

SEE SOLUTIONCheck out a sample Q&A here
Blurred answer