The terms sophistical sophist and have three different directions which should not be confused. Thus, they can indicate:

• a whole of thinkers, speakers and Greek teachers of fifth century BC (and beginning of the next century);

• at Plato and majority of the philosophers until our days, a voluntary perversion of the conclusive reasoning at generally immoral ends, by making use of method, argument various, in order to make indisputable its matter. The philosopher using only of his reason (Maieutic at Socrate, hyperbolic doubt at Descartes) to arrive at its ends.

• the development of the reflection and teaching Rhetoric, in theory as from fourth century BC, in practice starting from the {{IIe}} century a. J. - C. in the Roman Empire.

The First Sophistical one

One can consider this movement from two points of view:

Sociological point of view

The Greeks made the difference between the sophrôsuné (wisdom-measurement/moderation) and the sophia (wisdom-knowledge). Among those which were interested in the latter, there were initially the sophoi (wise, in particular of the Seven Wise ones), then the philosophoi (enquiring of sophia , philosophers - to see Pythagore). Between the two, the sophistai range (specialists in sophia , the first uses of the word relate especially to a technical knowledge, e.g. the music). Without to form a school in oneself, the members of this group had several novel ideas in common. During 5th front century J-C, a certain number of sophists, resulting for the majority from peripheral cities or small size, traverse Greece to give lessons of sophia . These lessons are paying and even very expensive, but the sophists promise with their pupils (generally, of young aristocrats) a rapid success. Contrary to the sophos or philosophos which tend to transform their disciples into sophoi and philosophoi in their turn, the sophists do not want to form sophistai , but, concretely, people ready to reflect, make decisions, to argue and control. They diverted their attention of sciences and philosophy to carry it on more practical studies, mainly the Rhétorique, the Politique and the law, abilities which the young Greeks needed in order to ensure their success. Part of their educational ideal still survives in the modern concept of “sophistication”. They encouraged also a certain knowledge of arts and trades. They cause a great passion, but also reactions on behalf of those which estimate that they are revolutionists. One has almost nothing of their works, undoubtedly because their teaching was paying: they did not have interest to freely offer it to the public.

The large most famous sophists were Protagoras, expert in right, Gorgias, a Master of rhetoric, Prodicos, one of the first studied the language and grammar, and Hippias d' Élis, a true alive encyclopedia which claimed all to know. There were well of them others, of which some, undoubtedly, were pure charlatans, who could carry the eristic in a ridiculous state. For them, the finality was limited to the victory of the arguments vis-a-vis the adversary. For example, Thrasymaque claimed that by nature, the weak one does not have any right on the fort. Because of Tournament S oratories, Aristote qualified agonistic this practice of the word. But in spite of this doubtful aspect, it is inter alia through the socratic criticism of the arguments of the sophists that was constituted philosophical methodology, without forgetting their contribution to the grammatical and linguistic advances in knowledge.

Prodicos made evolve/move the analysis of the language by its approach of the various significances of the words. Its most significant contribution is in its mistrust of the use Polysémique of the verb which pushes it to establish a use of words having a precise direction in which each expression must refer to only one and even thing.

Point of view of the history of the ideas

Although one knows little about the detail of the ideas professed by the sophists, there were certainly great differences of the one with the other. However, they all seem to have worked in the following directions:

• rational analysis of the situations, the characters, the places, the events;
• the nonspeculative study (like that of the former physicists of Ionie), but pragmatic of all the fields which can be known. In other words, vis-a-vis a given phenomenon, the traditional thought called upon mythology, the physicists with a theory on the constitution of the world, while the sophists made a study Phénoménologique and put the questions of it: With what that can it be useful to me? How could I control it? In a certain manner, the sophists are the ancestors of the thought techno-scientist.
• analysis of the language, not for itself, but as a means of persuasion, i.e. the Rhetoric;
• synonymic use of the words, in a strict direction, in virtue of which each name must refer to only one and single object.

Curiosity without limits of the sophists and their pragmatism make that they often were until calling into question the existence of the gods.

The Sophist according to Plato and the philosophical tradition

Reproaches of Plato (in the mouth of Socrate):

• the sophists make pay their lessons like other Masters of technaï (sculptors, potters, etc), whereas wisdom ( sophia , to higher see) cannot be plastered with the row of technè and that to make it pay, it is to corrupt it.
• the sophists are amoraux, since their teaching can be just as easily used to give weapons to the injustice, whereas they claim to give to their pupils an education.
• the sophists handle the language and prefer the effectiveness with the truth.

Plato, in fact attacks only moderately “the large” sophists of which it is question higher. Its dialogs put in scene tournaments between disciples of these sophists and Socrate (which, of course, comes easily to end from them).

However, certain philosophical theses defended by the sophists are taken with serious by Plato:

• epistemological theses: The sophists are regarded as relativists by Plato. Protagoras affirms thus that " the man is the measurement of all choses". That means that the Vérité is not something of independent of the man, but who it will depend on our prospect. While going hardly further, one will support the thesis that nothing is true, and that all is relative. It there not of doubt that the doctrines of the Ideas are an attempt to leave us the relativism of the sophists.
• political theses: They are not separable epistemological theses. If the man is the measurement of any thing, then the laws of the city are not guided by what is well in oneself, but by what the men are agreed to adopt. It is the legal Positivisme, in opposition to the naturalism. The laws are conventional and not founded on a transcendent morals. It is obvious that the project to base the policy on the competence of its leaders to seize the Idea of the Good, i.e. with being philosophical, is the response of Plato to the political conventionnalism.
• theses morals: Here also, the relativism has consequences. If nothing is true in oneself, then nothing is well in oneself, from where the assimilation of the Vertu to the power. Is virtuous that which is able to appease its desires, i.e. its own good, rather than the community property. Moreover, this good is compared to the pleasure, whereas Plato wants to associate it with the respect justice.

The sophists are thus not at Plato a simple driving bolt, but truly of the serious adversaries, whose doctrines deserve to be fought.

The sophist, philosophical type

The sophist is that which benefits from ambiguities of the language to produce reasoning of logical appearance, but which contains latent defects. One speaks about “sophisticated” speech or “Sophisme”. The principal types of sophisms were catalogued by Aristote in its book the Sophistical Réfutations and also but in less measure to its Rhétorique , where it defines them as “pretenses of Enthymème S” (one usually translates by “enthymèmes apparent”, but it is not a good translation: they are not enthymèmes, in fact reasoning appears the being). Sophisms are classified in two great types: those which are due directly to the words themselves (homonymy, ambiguity, etc) and those which disguise a relation of reason (confusion by oneself by accident, absolute taken for relative and reciprocally, etc)

The Second Sophistical one

It is the polygraph Philostrate which, at the beginning of the {{IIIe}} century a. J. - C., in its Vies of the sophists , invented the expression of “second sophistical”. Rather than a chronological definition (the second comes after the first), it was acted in fact of a logical definition (second because there is already another type). But, as the sophists evoked by Philostrate are all of the 2nd century, the modern historians of rhetoric tend to confine it at this period.

The sophist of the Second Sophistical one is initially a professor of rhetoric: he has as pupils of the teenagers at the age where, today, one attends the college and the preparatory classes. In addition to its lessons, it composes of the technical handbooks, the collections of subjects to be treated, with or without correction (like our Annales of the Vat), of the models of speech.

The sophist has also a role of spokesperson of his city: he composes and makes speeches at the time of the special occasionss (visit of a large character, in particular of the emperor, celebrates solemn, embassy near the emperor or an other city, thanks with a benefactor, praises…). He can also play the part of adviser near his city while composing of the speeches which preach such or such policy, such reform, which denounces such defect.

Lastly, partly on a purely advertizing basis (to conquer pupils), the sophist often moves to give samples of his art in public meetings in other cities that those which he lives. Sometimes one receives it like a high-speed motorboat of the song of today. The top of career to which a sophist can claim is to be noticed by the emperor, auprès whose it will be able to play the same parts as near a city: praises and councils, but it is to better avoid the reproaches. However, the sophists studied and developed the various means of making hear not very flattering remarks without annoying the listener.

Certain historians of rhetoric still speak about “Third Sophistical” to distinguish the sophists from the {{IVe}} and {{Ve}} century a. J. - C. from their predecessors. In the Christian and more bureaucratic empire from now on, their influence is indeed less large than during the Early empire, because they are in competition with the legists, the bureaucrats and the bishops. In addition, these late sophists seem more concerned about morals.

Among the famous sophists, let us quote Hérode Atticus, Dion of Prussia (or Chrysostome), Aelius Aristide, Fronton (Latin). For the Third Sophistical , one can quote Libanios, Himérios, Thémistios (but it is also in addition a philosopher) and Chorikios.

Random links:

Dark Chronicle | Coulombs (Eure-et-Loir) | Soyuz TMA-6 | Dambron | Hit' EM Up