"In Greece in the fifth century BC, some public speakers who were certainly cultured but who were also unscrupulous, made the most of their oratorical talents by turning them into a particularly lucrative profession. Armed with misleading arguments and fallacious reasoning, they were called Sophists. They were so good at arguing any case they were able to simultaneously demonstrate something and its opposite."
"To be a sophist is to argue in a way that appears to be valid, but where the argument has been deliberately manipulated to distract or mislead the listener. Sophism is not a way of thinking; it's a way of arguing designed to dazzle and trick an opponent; or if they should suspect foul play, to cause them logical embarrassment."
Sophists in fifth-century BC Greece used oratorical skill, misleading arguments, and fallacious reasoning to turn persuasion into a lucrative profession. They could argue any case and simultaneously demonstrate a proposition and its opposite by manipulating argument structures. Sophism functions as a rhetorical technique that appears valid while intentionally distracting or misleading listeners; its flaws are often subtly concealed, making refutation difficult. Sophists prioritize power, approval, and victory over ethics, justice, and truth, accepting lies or cheating when necessary. Eighteen key figures in the history of critical thinking are presented chronologically, beginning with Protagoras and his relativist stance and noting how short-form platforms hinder argument development.
Read at Philosophynow
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]