Summary of Plato's Sophist... kinda (heavy focus on distinguishing sophists from philosophers, the former primarily interested in winning, the latter primarily interested in truth). *** my books: www.amazon.com... **
Great video! Just finished reading the dialogue and I have one problem with it. I think Plato's description of the ideal philosopher was partially hypocritical and very biased. As an example, as you said in the video, Plato critiques sophists actions like dodging questions and being "slaves of their own arguments", but the same Plato (through Socrates) in the dialogue "Theaetetus" refuses to answer a valid question and states that he didn't want to disrespect the idea of an old philosopher (I think it was Parmenides, but I can't recall right now). Thank you for the video and I apologise if my text isn't very well written. Cheers from Brazil.
Thanks so much, Marcelo! You're right that Plato doesn't live up to the ideal of the perfect philosopher. However, neither do I, but it's useful to have the ideal in mind - gives us something to shoot for. Your English is excellent - thanks so much for stopping by! And cheers from the States.
I would contend sophist today can have expertise in many areas they would make claim to , we need to recognize that in Plato's time there was no internet or access to the quantities of information of today , allowing one to actually educate themselves in a infinite latitude of subjects and fields. It is also my contention that there are several different types of sophist today , politician's as you describe as being one , those who Plato describes , and the sophist who looks and believes in the truth and purity of philosophy with an open mind to ever learn more , at the same time being that professional amateur in all he claims to be . I must say that I would be in that class of sophist , being a true sophist is an actual vocation and one works quite hard , it's an neverending vocation to strive towards being that better sophist , in summation I say that sophistry today is a vocation and should be respected as such .
Sophist is not a politican. By saying, sophists do not give thr whole truth, you assume they know the whole truth. How can someone give what they do not have. Thus, your statement is what makes politicians lie. It is an unnecessary burden you add to policians. With sophists, by arguing they lie, again misgoes the possibility that they are correct. You have contradicted the work you quoted. I advise revisiting and simply summarizing, not adding.
Muhammed, you may better understand the dialogue than I do. But while not all sophists are politicians, many politicians engage in sophistry. Even when sophists promote truth, their aim isn't truth, but persuasion, winning, proving some predetermined view correct. Philosophers, on the other hand, at their best, transparently and collaboratively pursue truth. This is the humble distinction I'm making in the video. Cheers, Matt
Maybe its that sophists are not searching for the whole truth. It could be that they are turning a blind eye to certain ideas that they know could tanish their image or that of the people they represent. As well as if they knew the whole truth they would find themselves more morally obligated to start becoming more like philosophers. Which would leave them to further seek the pure truth.
