Before the young man could reply to this compliment the sophist proceeded: “Answer me, Ctesippos, a little longer. Do you ever beat that dog?” “That I do,” replied Ctesippos laughing; “and I wish I could administer the same discipline to you in your turn.” “Then you beat your own father!” “The beating,” answered the young man, “would be more justly inflicted on yours, for having knowingly let loose two such sages upon mankind!”[836] Footnote 836: Plat. Opp. t. iii. p. 245.—The amusing manner of teaching introduced by these sophists was sometimes imitated by the philosophers. Thus Theophrastus, who, before proceeding to his school, used to anoint himself with oil and perform his exercises, had recourse to extraordinary drollery for the purpose of charming his pupils, adapting all his gestures and movements to his discourses; so that when describing the manners and character of a glutton, he used, like a comic actor, to thrust out his tongue and lick his lips.—Athen. i. 38. But these, after all, were but laughing sophists, who, though they had succeeded in confounding and obliterating from their own minds every trace of difference between right and wrong, fell short of that superb degree of wickedness at which Polos, Callicles, and Thrasymachos arrived, at least in speculation. The former were mere babblers, who corrupted a pupil or two whom bad luck threw in their way. Thrasymachos flew at higher game. His sophistry was political,[837] and his aim the destruction of freedom, by extinguishing that sense of justice on which it must ever be based. The genius of the man was considerable. He had deep thoughts, and investigated boldly; but his sympathies having somehow been early perverted, he grew sombre, fierce, and unsociable, and without the slightest disguise advocated, like our Hobbes,[838] tyrannical maxims and morals. Money, like the rest, he of course worshipped. Nay, in the conversation at the house of Cephalos he even ventures to sneer rudely at Socrates’ poverty; upon which Glaucon[839] observes:—"Don’t fear to go unpaid for the instruction you may give him, for we will enter into a subscription on his behalf."[840] Thrasymachos, however, was still more vain than avaricious. He thirsted to exhibit his notions in order to enjoy the satisfaction arising from shocking those who heard him. He maintained that justice is nothing more than what in any state the rulers think proper to establish; and that, consequently, the ordinances of a tyrant are as binding and as just as the laws of a free state, since by nature all actions are indifferent. Footnote 837: Cf. Dem. Lacrit. § 10. Sch. Aristoph. Nub. 113. Footnote 838: