Absolutism Vs Socrates Research Paper

Sophistry vs. Socrates Prior to the entrance of Socrates, there was a time in Athens where a group of philosophical thinkers called the Sophists corrupted society. These men were masters of rhetoric and had the ability to turn any argument in the direction they desired. A major component of their thoughts was based upon a term called relativism. In this essay, I will cross-examine the Socratic viewpoints with those of the Sophists. Topics that will be highlighted include each method of teaching, what each claims to “know”, and relativism against absolutism (physis and nomos). Although there are similarities amongst the Sophists and Socrates, there are distinct differences that separate Socrates from the Sophists and point to a better grasp of truth and relevancy. A similarity between Socrates and Sophistry is both are interested in human affairs. The method that is used to prove this is their use of rhetoric as they interact with the citizens of Athens. We will first differentiate the methods of “teaching” …show more content…
Although Socrates did not claim to “know” anything outside of human excellence, it is evident that he did not agree. This is because Socrates discards views that are illogical. The viewpoint of the Sophists is described as, “Of all things the measure is man: of existing things, that they exist; of non-existing things, that they do not exist.” (DK 80 B 1, IEGP, 245) Sophists believe there is no standard we are to live by, it is only decided by ourselves. As we can see through history of Athens, this was the case. By looking back we can see how corrupt they were. A simple refutation to relativism would look like this. Person A says, “There is no absolutes, only the measure of a man.” Person B could simply refute by saying, “Is saying there are no absolutes and absolute statement?” It is easy to catch their illogical argument as the world operates with physis and nomos. Things are as they are by