The Sophists were a group of orators, educators, writers, and advocates who manifested Rhetoric as a systematic study. In an oral culture, the sophists professed to teach the art of virtue (arête), or excellence. It was more than political excellence, but moral excellence which allocated the use of spoken words. They were considered a professional class rather than a school, scattered throughout Greece presenting professional rivalries. Sophists were important intellectual figures who have received a negative reputation. According to The History and Theory of Rhetoric the Sophists were considered controversial:
They taught for pay, threatening the power of aristocratic families to hog educators. The Sophists were wanderers and people were suspicious of the “rootless individual”. The cultural relativism clashed the Platonic ideas of universal forms and gods. They built a view of justice based on nomos, or social agreement. This contradicted the Greek view that truth and law should be derived from absolute authorities, like Gods or a King. (Herrick 35)
However, the way we think about rhetoric today is the same way the Sophists did. The Sophist’s reputation should be reconsidered by scholars because they have contributed insight in logic and rhetoric, they provided democracy, and they ascribed no central authority meaning they formed no particular movement.
The Sophists were a threat to Greek society because they influenced change. They were teachers of the art of persuasion- rhetoric. They taught more than just speechmaking, but arête, meaning virtue, excellence, and a magnitude of success. Greeks, on the other hand, dismissed the thought that arête could be taught or learned. They considered arête as a gift, something only a select few were born with. Such excellence could not be purchased from a professional teacher, especially not from a foreigner or an “outsider”. Most Sophists were foreigners, itinerants who traveled looking for work as teachers, entertainers, and speechwriters. The Athenians considered Sophistry an exotic import because all but a few Sophists were not from Athens. The Sophists observed people from all different places in their travels and concluded that people believe rather different things in different places. Cultural relativism from the Sophists furnished Greek suspicion.
They declared they could make the youth better (superior politicians and influential persons) by teaching them the art of persuasion. Their ability to persuade with clever arguments, and their desire to teach others to do the same, guided people to view the Sophists as a threat in Athens. This caused great suspicion towards the Sophists among the Athenians. Many young men in ancient Greece viewed the sophists as the key to personal success because they were able to provide some aspects of leadership and careful management. Kairos was a key concept for the sophists. It was the full context, the speaker, audience and the moment. They taught their students to understand the situation and manage it. They are now praised for their perception of the power of words and the important social role of persuasion. Even though is goes unnoticed, Rhetoric is all around us and is in everything we do. Lawyers in a court room, teachers to their students, a leader to their followers. We persuade people every day through speech, words, through techniques the sophists have taught us.
Gorgias was one of the greatest early teachers and practitioners of the art of rhetoric. He is known for the “Gorgianic style”, a way of speaking that would have a huge impact in a non-literate, oral culture. He bragged about his power of persuasion and being able to persuade anyone of anything. Gorgias was so taken with the power of language, considered it to be almost magical. Gorgias’s Encomium of Helen was an important example of Sophistic oratory, a force of language to lead. Protagoras was another great teacher who was the first to charge for his services as a teacher of political virtue. He was more concerned about developing the philosophy underlying rhetorical practices. His most famous saying is that “Man is the measure of all things; of things that are not, that they are not; of things that are, that they are”. Thus, sophistry is associated with appearances as opposed to reality. Protagoras is also known for his concept of dissoi logoi (different words), the idea that there are two contradictory sides of every issue, the method of critical questioning. This notion provided a worldview with rhetoric as its center.
The Sophists were producing change and the Greeks did not accept change. Customs and beliefs were more diverse the further away from Athens. The Sophists were interested in logic as well as the art of speech and provided us with insight in logic and rhetoric. Aristotle, a Greek philosopher, was one of the major contributors to the development of Western thinking about rhetoric. He criticized the sophists for self -contradiction and shallowness of thought. Aristoteles definition of rhetoric emphasizes persuasion using the three rhetorical appeals, ethos, pathos and logos. Ethos is the rhetor is perceived by the audience as credible or not. The speaker must exhibit intelligence and good sense, arête. Pathos is the rhetors way of attempting to persuade the audience by making them feel certain emotions. Logos is the rhetors way of attempting to persuade the audience by the use of arguments that they will perceive as logical.
The Sophists contradicted the Greek view of truth and law. They crafted a view of justice on a social agreement or nomos (social custom or convention; rule by agreement among the citizens). They promoted nomos as the source of law instead of law acquired from the authority of kings or natural law. They believed nomos contributed to their rejection of transcendent truth and objective reality. The sophists view of truth and thought undermined the Greek society’s moral foundations. The sophists ascribed no central authority although they had some general features in common. The sophists of ancient Greece played a role in developing the art of rhetoric, and thus in the developing democracy. They were notorious for disregarding conventional Greek ideas about moral uses of language. They insisted that a persuasive case can be made on either side of an argument, not just on the side favored by prevailing moral assumptions.
side note: still need to add citations throughout paper and need a conclusion..working on it:)