THE SOPHISTS, Truth, Nomos and Physis

Summary

In this video, Demizmue and their assistant, the Foot, explore the sophists of Ancient Greece. These wandering teachers were known for their teachings on excellence in rhetoric, philosophy, and other subjects. The sophists, often criticized by later philosophers like Plato and Aristotle, emphasized the art of argumentation over the pursuit of truth. Through discussions on relativism, the nature of law, and the relationship between society and nature, the sophists played a key role in shaping philosophical thought, questioning societal norms, and laying the groundwork for later philosophical inquiries into justice and truth.

Takeaways

• 😀 The Sophists were wandering teachers in Ancient Greece, not part of an organized school or group, and they taught various subjects like rhetoric, philosophy, and mathematics.
• 😀 The term 'Sophist' initially referred to independent individuals who taught excellence (*arete*) for a fee, leading to criticism, especially from later philosophers like Plato and Aristotle.
• 😀 The Sophists' reputation for teaching rhetoric for money contributed to their negative perception, as they were seen as prioritizing the winning of arguments over the pursuit of truth.
• 😀 'Sophistry' is now associated with making convincing but ultimately fallacious and misleading arguments, due to the Sophists' focus on persuasive rhetoric.
• 😀 Protagoras, one of the most famous Sophists, argued that truth is relative, depending on one's ability to argue effectively and on the standpoint of the individual or society.
• 😀 Protagoras’ famous statement 'Man is the measure of all things' suggests that truth is subjective—what is true for one individual or society may not be true for another.
• 😀 The Sophists introduced the distinction between *nomos* (social law) and *physis* (natural order), suggesting that social norms and laws are not absolute, but relative to society.
• 😀 According to Protagoras, natural principles like justice and shame are universal to all humans, but they manifest differently in various societies, influencing the laws they create.
• 😀 Some Sophists, like Gorgias’ pupil Callicles, believed that the natural law is based on power, claiming that the strong should rule over the weak, which challenges social laws that protect the weak.
• 😀 Another of Gorgias' pupils, Lycophron, argued that society creates unjust hierarchies, as natural equality among humans is corrupted by laws that establish divisions like nobility and slavery.
• 😀 Despite criticism from Plato and Aristotle, the Sophists’ teachings were foundational in prompting philosophical inquiry into the relationship between society, culture, laws, and nature.

Q & A

What were the sophists known for in Ancient Greece?

The sophists were known as wandering teachers in Ancient Greece who focused on teaching arete, or excellence, in areas like rhetoric, philosophy, poetry, mathematics, and disputation. They were independent teachers, not part of any organized school or group.

How did the sophists' teaching methods differ from those of Plato and Aristotle?

The sophists taught for money, which led to criticism from Plato and Aristotle. They were accused of prioritizing winning arguments over seeking truth, whereas Plato and Aristotle valued finding truth through philosophical inquiry and logical reasoning.

Why is the term 'sophistry' still associated with deception today?

The term 'sophistry' carries a negative connotation because the sophists were seen as using clever but ultimately fallacious arguments to win debates. This view was perpetuated by Plato and Aristotle, who criticized them for prioritizing rhetorical success over truth.

What was Protagoras' view on truth and how is it interpreted?

Protagoras famously said, 'Man is the measure of all things,' which can be interpreted in two ways: one, that each individual has their own subjective truth; and two, that truth is relative to the beliefs of each society or community.

How did Protagoras' view of truth challenge traditional concepts?

Protagoras' view challenged the idea of absolute, objective truth by suggesting that truth depends on the individual's perspective or the collective viewpoint of a society. This relativism was revolutionary, as it questioned universal truths and absolute morality.

What distinction did the sophists make between 'nomos' and 'physis'?

The sophists were the first to distinguish between 'nomos' (the laws of society) and 'physis' (the natural order). They argued that while certain principles, like justice, are natural to all humans, their expression in society varies according to different cultures and laws.

How did the sophists view the relationship between law and nature?

The sophists had different views on the relationship between law and nature. Protagoras believed that society's laws were based on natural principles of justice, but these laws were socially constructed and relative. Other sophists, like Gorgias' pupils, had opposing views, arguing that society's laws either suppressed the natural order or created unjust hierarchies.

What were the conflicting views of Gorgias' pupils regarding law and nature?

Gorgias' pupils held contrasting views: Callicles argued that the natural law of power (might makes right) opposed the laws of society, which he believed forced the strong to tolerate the weak. Conversely, Lycophron argued that society, not nature, created unjust hierarchies like nobility and slavery, and nature itself promoted equality.

How did the sophists' ideas contribute to the development of philosophy?

Despite their controversial reputation, the sophists played a crucial role in philosophy by introducing the idea that social norms and laws are not absolute but are open to critique. This opened the door for later philosophers to explore the relationship between nature and society, as well as the legitimacy of social structures.

What did Protagoras mean by claiming that there are always at least two sides to any argument?

Protagoras believed that every issue could be argued from multiple perspectives. His claim emphasized the relativism of truth, suggesting that each argument has multiple valid interpretations depending on the viewpoint and rhetorical skills of the person presenting it.