Plato vs. Sophists: Key Differences in Epistemology, Ethics, and Politics
Plato vs. the Sophists
Classical Period Thinkers
Plato and the Sophists lived during the Classical period (5th-4th centuries BC), primarily in democratic Athens. The skillful use of language was crucial for social success in this environment.
The Sophists: Teachers of Rhetoric and Eristic
The Sophists presented themselves as teachers of virtue, focusing on practical skills for social advancement. They primarily taught rhetoric (effective speaking and persuasion) and eristic (dialectical skills for argumentation). Key Sophists include:
- Protagoras: Famous for his statement, “Man is the measure of all things; of the things that are, that they are, of the things that are not, that they are not.”
- Gorgias: His doctrine rests on three pillars: 1) Nothing exists; 2) If anything did exist, it could not be known; 3) If it could be known, it could not be communicated. This stance leads to skepticism.
Onto-Epistemic Differences
Similarities:
Plato and some Sophists shared an interest in the essence of things, rather than the Presocratic focus on the fundamental principle (arche). This led them to explore the existence of individual and multiple entities. They also agreed on the practical value of knowledge for achieving virtue, although their conceptions of virtue differed.
Differences:
Plato, following Socrates, viewed knowledge as the pursuit of universal truth, not merely a tool for social success. He also opposed the Sophists’ skepticism, believing that truth and its attainment are both possible and necessary. The Sophists argued that there is no single truth; reality is subjective and depends on individual perception. They believed knowledge is relative and imposed through rhetoric.
Dialogue: A Tool for Truth or Persuasion?
Plato saw dialogue as the path to truth, while the Sophists used it as a means of argumentation and persuasion, aiming to enforce their viewpoint.
Ethical and Political Differences
Similarities:
Both Plato and the Sophists were concerned with politics, laws, morals, and customs, but their approaches differed significantly.
Differences:
A key difference lies in their understanding of laws. The Sophists often contrasted the laws of the polis (nomos) with the laws of nature (physis), leading to a relativistic view of morality, institutions, and laws. They believed that these constructs are not based on immutable principles but are the result of human agreements. Therefore, laws and institutions vary across societies, with their effectiveness determined by their practical success.
Education, Justice, and the Republic
In The Republic, Plato emphasizes the crucial link between moral education and justice in public life. He advocates for a radical educational model, criticizing the perceived crisis of traditional Athenian values. He views the Sophists’ relativism and focus on individual success as contributing to the corruption of Athenian democracy. Plato champions objective moral values like justice, goodness, and virtue, emphasizing their importance in education and social integration. He believes that education in moral values is essential for responsible citizenship and harmonious coexistence. Plato criticizes the Sophists’ individualistic and often egotistical approach to education, advocating for a systematic education that fosters continuous reflection on public matters.