Were the sophists more than just teachers of rhetoric? Introduction “Sound is the least controllable of all sense modalities, and it is this that is the medium of that most intricate of all evolutionary achievements”. (Jaynes 96) The history book of ancient Greeks is almost empty of a chapter without the name of the Sophists. But who were the Sophists? Second half the 5th century was absolutely glorified by the sophists; the Greek word Sophistes: Sophia; ‘wisdom’ or learning. Theognis in 6th century B.C.E, clarified this wisdom indicating that sophie is actually the cleverness which is superior to a great excellence. Sophists were itinerant teachers who offered wealthy Greek men an education in arête; (virtue and excellence). Prior to this time people praised Homeric epics; arête was then referred to as strength and courage of a real man. In the mid 5th century however, another thing was flourished; the success in public affair which was only possible through rhetorical persuasion. Arête for the democratic Athens at the time 1 was understood in terms of one’s ability to influence others in political gathering also as self-defense through rhetorical persuasion; the term often associated with sophists teaching. The sophists discovery of rhetoric helped develop sociological and anthropological information to which the Greeks were unknown to about humankind. They then made oral persuasion practical, in offering content with form and actio. No doubt that rhetoric was the core of sophists teaching. Nevertheless, one should not neglect their proficiency in a broader range of subjects; sophistic taught revolved around three important themes: the distinction between nature and convention, relativism about knowledge and truth, the power of speech. Sophists through the eyes of many Athenians at the time were considered as a treat to states que ; aristocratic model of education: Paideia. This is because arête could then become an available education to all free citizens; what Protagoras so speak of in his origins of justice. That explains Athenians demos’ hostility towards the sophist; Socrates who appeared in Anistophen’ famous play Cloud as a sophist, was later on put on trial for several charges including corrupting the young, impiety and for charching fees, all of which were associated with the sophists too. But why do we have such a narrow opinion of the sophists; only the teachers of rhetoric? Perhaps the blame should be on Plato. Plato as a historian could be argued to be the one who misinterpreted many of the unsaved texts of the sophists. Evertt Lee Hunt argues that, Plato even reduced sophistical thought to reduction ad absurdum rather than providing us with an 1 In this democracy, participation of all citizens who were allegeable was essential and obligatory by law, in decision makings; direct democracy as we know it today. Thus, oral skills played an important role in making one to succeed in the general assembles; Meno; Gorgias s pupil asserted that arête- and hence function- of man is to rule over people, that is, manage his public affairs so as to benefit his friends and education and harm his enemies (Protagoras, 318e). interpretation. ( 78-79) To Plato and Aristotle; “Sophistry is the deliberate use of fallacious reasoning intellectual charlatanism and moral unscrupulousness” 2 the clear distinction which as Plato desired to place between himself, his fellow philosophers and the sophists laid in their understanding of knowledge. While Plato saw himself possessing a hierarchical knowledge, he regarded the sophists as those relativists whose democratic philosophy was of the many; thus the difference is twofold, on one hand accepting that rhetoric is a success seeking task, and on the other hand, acknowledging that philosophy is based on truth seeking task (Schiappa 201; Grassi). There are a great number of predominant Sophists to name, including; Protagoras, Gorgias, Antiphon, Hippias, Prodicus, Thrasymachus. Gorgias particularly is of an importance for the role he played in promoting rhetoric. In fact, in this essay I want to argue strongly against this very cliché opinion3 and in details show how much more they actually offered to shape the western thought and culture. Perhaps one can argue that the philosophers actually benefited greatly from the Sophist to develop their way of thinking. Certainly, it will not be the case through the skeptical eyes of Plato who marked the beginning of all philosophical thoughts with Socrates and his doubt whether ‘virtue could be taught’. In the first section I briefly present what critics of sophists have to argue and in the second section I spend more examination to justify my point; that sophist had a lot more to offer in oppose to just being the teachers of rhetoric. Ultimately, I would conclude offering what many contemporary scholars had to offer in praising the sophists. 2 For Plato, Aristotle and Socrates who considered themselves as philosophers the teaching of the sophists as regarded as the other of philosoph . 3 That sophists were only the teachers of the rhetoric. Rhetoric as we know it, a case against the sophist by critics Poulakos defines rhetoric as “the art which seeks to capture in opportune moments that which is appropriate and attempts to suggest that which is possible" (36). Up to this date, rhetoric in association with sophistic teaching has its opponents in compare to philosophy. For many, rhetoric has no content but rather is a manipulation of the minds and just a pure teaching of using persuasive language to convince your interlocutor that you are right by making the weaker argument seem stronger. The Sophists have been accused so rottenly because of teaching so. But where did it all begin? Plato fans the flame in his dialogues. In Gorgias particularly he makes Gorgias agree that rhetoric is nothing but a “mere belief”: “Socr: Then which kind of persuasion concerning justice and injustice does rhetoric effect in law courts and other public gatherings, the kind which produces belief without knowledge, or the kind which yields knowledge? Gorg. It would seem quite obvious, Socrates, that it is the kind which produces mere belief. (454)” It is however, not only Plato who has been in dispute with sophistic thought. A great deal of criticisms did not appear up until after Gorgias’s death. Many of these opponents accept the duality of form and content of rhetoric in sophistic teaching; nevertheless, they all disparage the former. Connor’s germinal article “Greek Rhetoric and the Transition from Orality” for instance, presents us with the fact that in the first century AD Dionysius "excludes Gorgias from his list of great orators because he 'exceeds the bounds of moderation, and frequently lapses into puerility". On the other hand, Cicero blames Gorgias for his ‘immoderately abusing’ the methods involving rhyme and figure. Forty-five years after Gorgia’s death, we read in Aristotle’s Book III of the Rhetoric (1406 A), that he derides Gorgias’s style. Contemporary critics have not been silenced on this matter either. Despite the fact that Gorgias was called "one of the most famous [sophists] in the history of rhetoric," by Kennedy, he accused Gorgias for abusing the Greek poetry to an "unprecedented degree", he believes the only reason that helped Gorgias succeed was based on “fad” (Classical Rhetoric 29). Jebb, another scholar in dispute with the sophist argues that "Gorgias seems to have given little or no heed to the treatment of subject matter-to invention or management; or even to that special topic of probability which was already engaging so much of the attention of rhetoric." Additionally, he asserts: “that Gorgias’s style was incredibly tasteless” (Attic Orators cxxvii). Likewise, Dodds regards Gorgias’s speeches as being "affected and boring; the well drilled words execute ad nauseam the same repetitive manoeuvres with mechanical precision of a platoon on a barrack square" (9). The concept rhetoric in parallel with Kairos; meaning the right or opportune moment, played a key role in the Greek oral society at the time and eventhough rhetoric enhanced it, Plato saw it as a treat. It was as if this art of persuasive speeches helped magicians or was seen as a magic. It was argued that rhetoric could work as casting of spells. Plato hence, claimed that rhetoric was effective and as a result he argued that it could be misused by wrong people. Consequently, he argued that rhetoric could undermine the realm of science. At the time Gorgias presented the Greeks the usefulness of rhyme, relativistic ideas, and “the language of magic and superstition: thelegein, goehteia, and mageia". (Segal 115). Gorgias, however, contributed a lot in transferring the magical rituals into an art; the art of speech which made it possible for Athenian to comprehend things which they could not before; it was as if things were magically changed from what they used to be. As can be seen from the critics of the sophists, sophists had nothing more to offer but rhetoric and not only that, they even attacked rhetoric too as a negative medium to achieve negative ends. It seems that many neglect the important role that rhetoric played. Rhetoric was not only attaining the skill for persuasive speeches but the concept behind sophistic teaching required the use of rhetoric. In my next section I shall explain what sophists actually had to offer using rhetoric. Rhetoric not the way we know it; in Praise of the Sophists This section focuses on sophistic work beyond rhetoric. Firstly, it is crucial to point out that rhetoric had content and not only form, the fact many critics fail to notice. Secondly, sophistic epistemology and in particular Gorgias’s Helen opened a new perspective to approach the nature of the truth and the fact that nothing is certain and everything has two sides to it. Thirdly, it was the vital role that rhetoric played in social life of the oral Greek at the time. Fourthly, they introduced the concept of Kairos with Antithesi; which meant saying the right thing at the right time, this with the skill of improvising have proved very useful in many areas including acting 4. Science-wise, rhetoric has consolidated a key concept in psychology; neuroscience; in that it illustrates that the power of sound is crucial in hypnotizing and its use is very common, up until today. Sophists seem to have had a profound knowledge of human mind and it is only right to say that they shaped the fundamental bases in the western culture and thought. In fact, I want to argue that sophists shaped the thoughts behind many philosophical concepts and philosophers owe a great deal to them because without the sophist they could never have developed their ideas. Those who acknowledge sophists for the content in their work and what they socially constructed, argue that Gorgias’s style was anthropological in a sense that it provided as Havelock puts it "process of verbal communication between men and groups of men which made the democracy workable; and that fierce play of ideas and emotions of which words were media" (156). This brought about later enhancement of the sophists teaching in arête; political excellence. Content of rhetoric is important to spend sometimes on, in that it produced stylistic techniques which were and are up to this date in English and literature. With regards to this Enos in his work The Epistemology argues that “Plato's representation of Gorgias was "biased" and a "disservice to one of the most innovative theorists in the history of rhetoric". Likewise, Hunt claims that Gorgias’s oratory was full of ideas. As stated earlier, Greek democracy at the time required the teaching of rhetoric. But, how did that democracy look like? Flaceliere describes this democracy as a forced one. Athens’s democracy may seem a complete oxymoron to what we call democracy today. 5 Forced democracy implies that of those who were considered citizens, participation was compulsory and as Cole describes “the busy sessions of courts and assemblies, and the crowded halls dedicated to sophists or eristic debate were an inseparable and characteristic part of Athenian life in the fifth century" (Cole 79) . Within such system of governance where direct democracy in its real sense was at practice, sophists such as Protagoras contributed massively to the fundamental 4 Improvisation is a very important skill in acting. The fifth century Athens was estimated to have a population of 500 thousand in Attica, of which only two fifths were considered citizens (Flaceliere 52) in which three elements were very important to strengthen the democracy: firstly, the majority of the citizens had slaves at their disposal and that indicates that they had time to participate. Secondly, they were obliged to participate otherwise they would face a fine or lose their source of income and finally, public would not approve of the citizens who did not fulfill their civic duties ( Flaceliere 32) 5 theories of decision- making and he may as well be the one who marked the beginning of conducting debate and discussion the way we are familiar with today and is essential in politics. It was in a sense not only participation that mattered but the civilization aspect of theses activities which make the sophists role of an importance. Moving on from the Athens democracy to its judicial system6 we face another crucial role that sophistic thought played. As mentioned earlier sophists were relativists; in an oral culture as of that time the truth was literally shaped by the present not the unknowable, unchanging or even absent past. Thus, the political framework worked around the relationship of form and content, the oral nature of discourse. Saussure argues that the “oral culture” of the Athens was “dependent upon convention because the same storehouse exists in the brains of language community” (Schafer 5). Sophists were the product of this culture, for them the truth was not one definite thing. Gogias argues in “on nature” that things can both exist and don’t exist. This implies that sophistic teaching was through the relativistic indulgent of ‘better’ and ‘worse’ guiding their student to think and also make others to consider the fact that human being are changeable so as the truth. Indeed this style; relativistic epistemology is a practical application of lawsuit today. Moreover, in sophistic teaching pure truth is impossible; all that matters is the comprehension of the concept of Kairos with Antithesi7. Sophists were aware of the changeable human mind so what Gorgias tried to advocate was that there is no such thing as the Truth; he used the named concept to illustrate the people’s ever-changing belief in sentence of “Helen”. His use of antithetical argumentation proves to the reader that there may have been a possibility for the listeners to “Helen” case to change their minds. What he tries to achieve here in terms of logic is that people should understand that x is not y is not the same as x is not equal to y.8 On the concept of Kairos, Engnell states that: it works as a “guide for action”; it brings to light previously hidden logos. (Egnell 178) That is very relevant when considering “Helen”; the sophists’ use of antithesis in which arguments counterbalance others in combination with kairos could result in listeners to come to completely different belief to what they hold initially on any topic.9 Here it come the concept of Knowledge; that implies to attain the truth for Plato, however for Gorgias this was not the case. To definitely stating that “Yes” Helen was guilty or “No” she is innocent is pointless, instead he urges people to take into consideration the outside environment and circumstances which at first place, made her create the guilt she was accused 6 The judicial system of Athens at the time was based on extremes. You were either concidred guilty or innocent. The failure to kno the real truth e plains h Gorgias s st le and ie point as ery much praised by Eugene Dupreel. 7 The idea of speaking the right thing at the right time. Helen is not guilty is not equal to saying that Helen is innocent. 9 “egal e plains that it is the practical aspect of Gorgias s riting in that he sa "what is significant, however, is the rational principle involved, that the manipulation of the formal aspect of the logos can produce a desired emotional effect on the audience; and hence linguistic 'techne' of rhetoric becomes also a technique for directing human motivation" (128). 8 for.10 Consequently, we can draw the conclusion that sophists taught us to observe and do a thorough examination when it comes to judgment. 11 Rhetoric in this case worked as enhancing the concept of kairos; it was concerned with human ever changing opinions. Accordingly, there are many factors that sophists encouraged us to consider when judging, time, place and circumstance in the case of Helen for instance played an important role in determining whether she was innocent or guilty. What I have so far discussed about sophist work seem like a drop in the ocean of what they actually contributed to the Greek society and the implications of their work in our society today. Rhetoric being the core of sophistic teaching indeed had a lot more to offer than just being the art of persuasive language. Certainly, one can argue that sophists were practical philosopher; while philosophy is the love for wisdom and a philosopher someone whose thirst for knowledge is never satisfied, sophists I believe were wise men who knew that great ideas needed to be practice and without practicality an idea is of no use. 10 The fall of the Troy. Without reading Gorgias one is inclined to declare Helen guilty. However, Gorgias presents us with the paradoxical epistemology, circumstances and the fact that jurord might have voted in favor of Helen s innocence 11 Conclusion: 450 BC is said to be the period of a transition from oral to literature culture. With that in mind, we can see that Plato who admired his own philosophy: the doctrine of truth misinterpreted the work of the sophists and hence led us to witness a case of blurry historical retrospection.12Living in a very well established literate society today perhaps it is hard to comprehend the Athenian needs for oral skills offered by the sophists in the oral societies of those days. Nevertheless, through examining the Periclean democracy we come across the importance of the sophists at first place and secondly we really get to aknowledge the essential role of orlaity in that democracy; in which it played a fundamental role in understanding the transitional period Greek was facing towards literacy. Sophists were full of complex ideas and that could be seen seen through the work, particularly kairos and antithesis. Sophistsic rhetoric serves an importance in the socio-cultural framework of the Police. “seeing is believing” is what we still have our faith in. while the advance level of technology provide us with evidence today to make our decision or make a judgment, still its trustworthiness begs the question. In Athens, sophists live, oral skills worked as the technology for the democracy in which success was equal to getting the crowed to vote for you and agree with you. Sophists were defined and associated with many things throughout the history. What I tried to focus on in this essay was to draw attention to the application of the content of their core interest: rhetoric, arguing that the sophists were more than just the teachers of the rhetoric. To conclude I found myself in line with many other scholars including Hegel for whom Sophists were “subjectivists whose sceptical reaction to the objective dogmatism of the pre-Socratics was synthesised in the work of Plato and Aristotle”, George Crote a Utilitaran Eglish Classicist who described sophists as “progressive thinkers who placed in question the prevailing morality of their time” and ultimately two French theorists: Jacques Derrida and Jean Francois-Lyotard whose work suggests many similarities between sophists and postmodernism. 12 Havelock claims that Plato's "entire epistemology was unwittingly a programmed rejection of the old, oral, mobile, warm, personally interactive life world of oral culture" (qtd. in Ong 80). Work cited Aristophen,Clouds,KJ.Dover(ed), Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1970. Aristotle. The Rhetoric and the Poetics of Aristotle. Trans. W. Rhys Roberts and Ingram Bywater. New York: Modem Library, 1984. Cole, Thomas. The Origins of Rhetoric in Ancient Greece. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1991. Connors, Robert J. "Greek Rhetoric and the Transition from Orality." Philosophy and Rhetoric 19 (1986): 38-57. Derrida, Jacques. 1981.Dissemination,trans.B.Johnson.Chicago:University of Chicago Press. Dodds, E. R. Introduction. Gorgias. By Plato. Oxford: Clarendon, 1959. Engnell, R. A. "Implications for Communication of the Rhetorical Epistemology of Gorgias of Leontini." Western Speech 37 (1973): 175-84. Enos, Richard L., and John M. Ackerman. 'Walter J. Ong and the Archaelogy of Orality and Literacy: A Theoretical Model for Historical Rhetoric." Media, Consciousness, and Culture: Explorations of Walter Ong's Thought. Ed. Bruce E. Enos, Richard L. "The Epistemology of Gorgias' Rhetoric: A Re-examination." Southern Speech Communication Journal 42 (1976): 35-5 1. "The Hellenic Rhapsode." Western Journal of Speech Communication 42 (1978): 134-43. "Aristotle, Empedocles, and the Notion of Rhetoric." In Search of Justice: The Indiana Tradition in Speech Communication. Ed. Richard J. Jensen and John C. Hammerback. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1987. 5-21. Flaceliere, Robert. Daily Life in Greece at the Time of Pericles. Trans. Peter Green. London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson, 1959. Freeman, Kathleen. God, Man and State: Greek Concepts. London: Macdonald, 1952. The Presocratic Philosophers. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1966. Grote, G. 1904.A History of Greece vol7. London: John Murry. Havelock, Eric A. The Literate Revolution in Greece and its Cultural Consequences. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1982. Hegel,G.W.F.1995.Lectures on the History of Philosophy,trans.E.S. Haldane, Lincoln :University of Nebraska Press ( Original work published in 1840) Hunt, Everett Lee. "On the Sophists." The Province of Rhetoric. Ed. Joseph Schwartz and John A. Jarrett, J. L., ed. The Educational Theories of the Sophists. New York: Teachers CP, 1969. Jarratt, Susan C. Rereading the Sophists: Classical Rhetoric Refigured. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois UP, 1991. Jaynes, Julian. The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. Boston: Houghton, 1976. Jebb, R. C. The Attic Orators fiom Antiphon to Isaeos. Vol. 1. New York: Russell and Russell, 1962. Kennedy, George A. "Later Greek Philosophy and Rhetoric." Philosophy and Rhetoric 13 (1980): 181-97. Kerford, G. B. "Gorgias On Nature or That Which Is Not." Phronesis 1 (1955): 3-25. Ong, Walter J. Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. New York: Methuen, 1982. Plato. Gorgias. Trans. W. C. Helmbold. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1985. de Romilly, Jacqueline. Magic and Rhetoric in Ancient Greece. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1975. Schiappa, Edward. Protagoras and Logos: A Study in Greek Philosophy and Rhetoric. Columbia: U of South Carolina P. 1991. Segal, C. P. "Gorgias and the Psychology of the Logos." Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 66 (1962): 99-155.