Criticism of Sophism-Urdu

Criticism of Sophism-Urdu

سوفسطائیت کا تنقیدی جائزہ

If all who have engaged in the profession of education. They were willing to state the facts instead of making greater promises. Then they can possibly fulfill, they would not be in such bad repute with the lay-public. As it is, however, the teachers who do not scruple to vaunt their powers with utter disregard of the truth. They have created the impression that those who choose a life of careless. Criticism of Sophism-Urdu

Platonic Tradition

Let us consider what the Platonic tradition has to say about the sophists’ practice of accepting money for instruction. Although, Plato never explicitly has Socrates condemn the sophists for taking money. The Platonic corpus is full of satirical diatribes against their pecuniary aspirations.

Thematic Sequence

Here Xenophon establishes a thematic sequence consisting of wisdom, money, and prostitution. Money runs the danger of corrupting and even conflating the things of the mind with the sphere of the body. Of course, This is exactly the opposite trajectory of what we are wont to see in Plato. In the Symposium and the Alcibiades love (ἔρως) is restricted to using the physical as an initial stepping stone. Only to climb the philosophical ladder to reject the body in favor of the mind. Thus gradually transforming itself from a physical, sexual desire directed at a specific individual.

Socratics Versus Sophists

In his influential article “Socratics Versus Sophists on Payment for Teaching,”. David Blank undertakes to “summarize ‘popular’ complaints about the sophists’. He concludes that the sophists charged outrageous fees. According to Blank, there is sufficient evidence in non-Platonic authors and genres. Mainly old comedy, to support the claim that complaints directed at the sophists go well beyond Platonic criticism. And that Plato’s hostile characterization of them simply reflects these pre-existing, negative popular attitudes.

Sophistic greed

What upsets Isocrates is that they deviate from their publicly stated position. In contrast, Plato’s one-dimensional picture of sophistic greed. Isocrates acknowledges two points about teaching for pay. One that the sophists themselves publicly promote (disregard for money), and one that attracts Isocrates’ censure (greed). Far from openly announcing their fees, the Isocratean sophists are careful. At least rhetorically, not to violate the propriety of the social norms by presenting themselves as engaged in money-grabbing practices. They do not publicly endorse the practice of offering instruction for money. Nor do they describe their relationship with students as an economic rapport between producer and consumer.