Oppositional World Views: Plato & The Sophists Essay -- essays researc

The Sophist views and beliefs originated in Ancient Greece around 400 B.C.E. The Sophists were known as wandering rhetoricians who gave speeches to those who could present to listen. The Sophists deeply believed in the power of rhetoric and how it could improve ones life. Plato on the other hand was opposed to all Sophist beliefs. He viewed the Sophists as rhetorical manipulators who were only interested in how state could be persuaded that they learned the truth, regardless if it was in fact the truth. Plato basically opposed any view the Sophists held true and tried to disprove them by start his many dialogues. The Sophists and Plato held twain very contrasting views and this publisher volition attempt to sift by dint of them all in hopes of illustrating each one. This cover go out first management on each group. It will begin by citeing both the Sophists and Plato and and thusly citing the signifi derrieret principles associated with each world view. This paper will then snap on how each component of their world views relate specifically to rhetoric. Finally, this paper will steering on illustrating each world view by way of current newspaper editorial.As noted, the Sophists were rooted in quaint Greece but traveled to many places, giving speeches on rhetoric to those who could feed to listen. Within their teachings, the Sophists centered on rhetorical techniques and how they could be used to successfully argue any side of an argument. They harped on the idea that through their teachings, egotism improvement could be achieved because those who controlled language had the power. The Sophists were relativists, which means they believed that an individual or order of magnitudes beliefs, while true for that particular individual or golf-club, energy be untrue for others. (Bizzell P. & Herzberg, B., 2001, pg. 6) The Sophists referred to this as kairos and said that because of it, there could be no infrangible truth because the truth was de pendent on that particular souls point of view. They believed that the only noesis that humans could achieve is knowledge that is potential because infrangible knowledge is unattainable. The Sophists feel that this seeming knowledge arouse be boiled down through what they refer to as dissoi logoi. This technique, in which each opposing side of an argument is examined in order to put the probable truth, was developed by Protago... ..., this would be dusting away the debris (the myths) and reveal the absolute truth of what really happened. Through rhetoric, probable truths such as McDonalds had to kick in three million, are cleared step to the fore and absolute truths, McDonalds had to profit $640,000, are uncovered. (Doroshow, J. pg.1-3) This is exactly how Plato would have had it.To summarize, the Sophists were traveling rhetoricians who were paid to teach deal techniques to becoming great arguers and persuaders. They were relativists who believed there was no absolute tru th, only probable. This probable truth was discovered through kairos, dependent on a souls situation, or dissoi logoi, the truth is uncovered by examining opposing arguments. The philosopher Plato was in opposition to virtually every belief the Sophists had. He believed in absolute truth and that rhetoric and discourse should be used to uncover this truth. He also believed that false rhetoric was that of the Sophists. Whether the Sophist view is correct or Platos view is, there is some sort of truth out there and maybe one day it can be opinionated as to which method best uncovered it. But until then, the debate will rage on, as it did within this paper. Oppositional World Views Plato & The Sophists Essay -- essays researc The Sophist views and beliefs originated in Ancient Greece around 400 B.C.E. The Sophists were known as wandering rhetoricians who gave speeches to those who could reach to listen. The Sophists deeply believed in the power of rhetoric and how it could improve ones life. Plato on the other hand was opposed to all Sophist beliefs. He viewed the Sophists as rhetorical manipulators who were only interested in how people could be persuaded that they learned the truth, regardless if it was in fact the truth. Plato basically opposed every view the Sophists held true and tried to disprove them throughout his many dialogues. The Sophists and Plato held dickens very contrasting views and this paper will attempt to sift through them all in hopes of illustrating each one. This paper will first focus on each group. It will begin by identifying both the Sophists and Plato and then citing the significant principles associated with each world view. This paper will then focus on how each component of their world views relate specifically to rhetoric. Finally, this paper will focus on illustrating each world view by way of current newspaper editorial.As noted, the Sophists were rooted in antiquated Greece but traveled to many places, givi ng speeches on rhetoric to those who could present to listen. Within their teachings, the Sophists focused on rhetorical techniques and how they could be used to successfully argue any side of an argument. They harped on the idea that through their teachings, self-importance improvement could be achieved because those who controlled language had the power. The Sophists were relativists, which means they believed that an individual or societys beliefs, while true for that particular individual or society, top executive be untrue for others. (Bizzell P. & Herzberg, B., 2001, pg. 6) The Sophists referred to this as kairos and said that because of it, there could be no absolute truth because the truth was dependent on that particular someones point of view. They believed that the only knowledge that humans could achieve is knowledge that is probable because absolute knowledge is unattainable. The Sophists feel that this probable knowledge can be boiled down through what they refer to as dissoi logoi. This technique, in which each opposing side of an argument is examined in order to identify the probable truth, was developed by Protago... ..., this would be dusting away the debris (the myths) and show the absolute truth of what really happened. Through rhetoric, probable truths such as McDonalds had to pay three million, are cleared out and absolute truths, McDonalds had to pay $640,000, are uncovered. (Doroshow, J. pg.1-3) This is exactly how Plato would have had it.To summarize, the Sophists were traveling rhetoricians who were paid to teach people techniques to becoming great arguers and persuaders. They were relativists who believed there was no absolute truth, only probable. This probable truth was discovered through kairos, dependent on a souls situation, or dissoi logoi, the truth is uncovered by examining opposing arguments. The philosopher Plato was in opposition to virtually every belief the Sophists had. He believed in absolute truth and that rheto ric and discourse should be used to uncover this truth. He also believed that false rhetoric was that of the Sophists. Whether the Sophist view is correct or Platos view is, there is some sort of truth out there and maybe one day it can be intractable as to which method best uncovered it. But until then, the debate will rage on, as it did within this paper.