Socrates vs Protagoras - 1705 Words

Philosophy Socrates a sophist? Or just sophisticated? Plato goes a long way in attempting to distinguish Socrates from the likes of Protagoras, a self admitted sophist. In Protagoras, Socrates is depicted as a street smart, wisdom dispensing young man, brash with confidence and a bit of arrogance that goes a long way when confronted with the old school rhetoric of Protagoras. Plato begins to separate the two at the hip right from the get go. The dialogue between Socrates and his inquisitive friend Hippocrates went a long way to show that Socrates had more questions than answers about Protagoras, the sophist, especially when it came to talk about what it is exactly that he offers. Socrates companion is eager to hear the words of†¦show more content†¦He preferred those who wish to learn from him, to come to him. The other sophist of the times traveled through the towns teaching anyone at arms length, a method that was in much higher danger of criticism than the one adopted by Protagoras. A sophist would speak, a sophist would teach, a sophist would use language and words to manipulate a situation to fit his point. A sophist would engulf you in his words and make the impossible seem possible. A sophist would share his views on the world, life, and the future with you; he would make you see the light of day even if it was night. A sophist was a wise man who had the gift of gab, the ability to influence, the ability to sway, the ability to teach the young how to be better speakers. All of the qualities that Socrates claimed he did not possess. Socrates was depicted as a clever man, yet one who never taught, never persuaded, never tried to make his thoughts shared by others. He was not a sophist, not a teacher, not a wise man. A wise man knows that he knows nothing. Socrates always spoke of the fact that he was not a sophist because he was only out for the truth. He never wanted you to believe his words just because they came out of his mouth, he only asked the questions that were necessary to draw out the map to the truth buried down below the layers of rhetoric.Show MoreRelatedAristophanes Vs Socrates1472 Words   |  6 Pages ARISTOPHANES VERSES PLATO’S VIEW OF SOCRATES Student’s Name Course Name Date Introduction The historical story of Socrates depicts why he was able to attract critics and followers from different geographical locations. A more profound assessment of his biography reveals how his arrogance put him on the wrong side of the law on many occasions throughout his life. It is essential to note that the significance of Socrates contribution to the society cannot be sidelined based on theRead MoreEuripides And The Classic Greek Culture1243 Words   |  5 Pagesbeing after his death with plays he left behind unperformed. Some of his most famous pieces of work include Rhesus and Cyclops. During his time at the festivals he got to know many of the great philosophers of the 5th century B.C. such as Socrates and Protagoras. Euripides eventually up and left Athens in 408 B.C. because he was invited by the king of Macedonia, Archelaus. This ended up being the last place he would ever live because he dies shortly after around the year 407 B.C. Orestes is a dramaticRead MorePlato And Aristotle s Political Situation2648 Words   |  11 Pagesupper-middle class, Plato was taught by educated tutors, and so was enabled to explore a wide range of topics which focused mainly on ethics. (Allen and Wilbur 1986: 99-101) Later in life, he became a student and, eventually, good friend of Socrates, but his studies with Socrates were interrupted by the Peloponnesian War where Athens fought against Sparta. Plato himself fought as a soldier in the war and this probably influenced his viewpoint that Athenian political leaders were badly educated and made poorRead More Robert Pirsigs Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance Essay5286 Words   |  22 PagesThe relationship in the new commonplace becomes one of evaluative engagement or Quality; the affirmation of quality or value precedes our awareness of subjects and objects, and is indeed the cause of subjects and objects (Pirsig 234). Echoing Protagoras, Pirsig maintains that man is not the source of all things, as the subjective idealists would say. Nor is he the passive observer of all things, as the objective idealists and materialists would say. The Quality which creates the world emerges