It would not be reasonable to repeat, as true and just, all the
polemical charges against those who are called Sophists, even as
we find them in Plato, without scrutiny and consideration. But
modern writers on Grecian affairs run down the Sophists even more
than Plato did, and take no notice of the admissions in their
favor which he, though their opponent, is perpetually making.
This is a very extensive subject, to which I hope to revert.
[59] I dissent entirely from the judgment of Dr. Thirlwall, who
repeats what is the usual representation of Sokratês and the
Sophists, depicting Alkibiadês as “ensnared by the Sophists,”
while Sokratês is described as a good genius preserving him from
their corruptions (Hist. of Greece, vol. iii, ch. xxiv, pp.
312, 313, 314). I think him also mistaken when he distinguishes
so pointedly Sokratês from the Sophists; when he describes
the Sophists as “pretenders to wisdom;” as “a new school;” as
“teaching that there was no real difference between truth and
falsehood, right and wrong,” etc.
All the plausibility that there is in this representation, arises
from a confusion between the original sense and the modern sense
of the word Sophist; the latter seemingly first bestowed upon the
word by Plato and Aristotle. In the common ancient acceptation
of the word at Athens, it meant not a _school_ of persons
professing common doctrines, but a _class_ of men bearing the
same name, because they derived their celebrity from analogous
objects of study and common intellectual occupation. The Sophists
were men of similar calling and pursuits, partly speculative,
partly professional; but they differed widely from each other,
both in method and doctrine. (See for example Isokratês, cont.
Sophistas, Orat. xiii; Plato, Meno. p. 87 B.) Whoever made
himself eminent in speculative pursuits, and communicated his
opinions by public lecture, discussion, or conversation, was
called a Sophist, whatever might be the conclusions which he
sought to expound or defend. The difference between taking money,
and expounding gratuitously, on which Sokratês himself was so
fond of dwelling (Xenoph. Memor. i, 6, 12), has plainly no
essential bearing on the case. When Æschinês the orator reminds
the dikasts, “Recollect that you Athenians put to death _the
Sophist Sokratês_, because he was shown to have been the teacher
of Kritias,” (Æschin. cont. Timarch. c. 34, p. 74,) he uses the
word in its natural and true Athenian sense. He had no point to
make against Sokratês, who had then been dead more than forty
years; but he describes him by his profession or occupation, just
as he would have said, _Hippokratês the physician_, _Pheidias
the sculptor_, etc. Dionysius of Halikarn. calls both Plato and
Isokratês sophists (Ars Rhetor. De Compos. Verborum, p. 208 R.).
The Nubes of Aristophanês, and the defences put forth by Plato
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account