The Sophists

Gorgias of Leontini has already made an appearance on the Presocratic stage. Gorgias was a Sophist; and his fellow Sophists will have a larger part to play in this and the following chapters. Who, then, were these Sophists? They do not constitute a school, like the Milesians and the Eleatics, bound together by a common philosophy; rather, they are a group of outstanding individuals—Protagoras, Gorgias, Hippias, Prodicus, Antiphon, Thrasymachus—who are associated not by any common doctrines but by a common outlook on life and learning. The term ‘sophist (sophistês)’ was not originally a term of abuse: when Herodotus calls Solon and Pythagoras sophists (I.29; IV. 95) he is praising them as sages and men of wisdom (sophia) (cf. Aristides, 79 A 1). But ‘sophistês’ became connected not with ‘sophia’ but with ‘to sophon (cleverness)’; and to sophon ou sophia. Thus Plato offers us six uncomplimentary ‘definitions’ of the sophist as a tradesman in cleverness (Sophist 231 D=79 A 2); and Aristotle defines the sophist as ‘a man who makes money from apparent but unreal wisdom’ (Top 165a 22=79 A 3). Xenophon, that stuffy old prig, put the classical view clearly:

The sophists speak to deceive and they write for their own gain, and they give no benefit to anyone; for not one of them became or is wise, but each is actually content to be called a sophist—which is a term of reproach in the eyes of those who think properly. So I urge you to guard against the professions of the sophists, but not to dishonour the thoughts of the philosophers (370:79 A 2a). ¹