Joygill Moriah His 1101 Prof Trumbach Midterm

In Ancient Athens, as massive shifts in the political landscape began to take hold; a new form of philosophy and politics emerged which allowed for a shift from politicians gaining power through force to gaining power through persuasion of the masses. Sophism became an art of speech making and cross-examination. It is a methodology based on using logic and science to develop reasonable answers to the unexplained. At the time, Sophism presented a great threat to the Athenians; some considered it a form of Atheism. Much is to be said about the rise of the Sophist movement and its impact on Athenian society. This essay will be divided into three main body parts to answer three questions. In part I, we will discuss the teachings of Sophism. In part II, we will examine how it relates with religious aspects of the Oracles and Omens and how Sophisms decision making process deals with that. I shall also use famous Athenian Sophists such as Pericles to support my theme in both parts. The final part will be an analysis based on the information gathered to answer the question of whether or not Socrates is a sophist or not and the extent at which we can answer this question. The sources I will use to prove my thesis are The Rise and Fall of Athens: Nine Greek Lives by Plutarch, History of Peloponnesian War by Thucydides, and The Last day of Socrates by Plato, and the lecture notes taken from Professor Randolph Trumbach.

I With the rise of the Democratic polis, the mid-fifth century Athenian no longer could acquire political power through violent or forceful means. Instead, rhetorical skills were developed in order to acknowledge the needs of public and political life, much of which revolved around the use of oratory speech acts as the medium through which political decisions were made and through which philosophical ideas were developed and spread. This is what we call the Sophist movement, a new philosophy that guided the Athenian aristocrats through the shifts in the political game and retain political power. The Sophists were a group of intellectuals whose teachings revolved around that of rhetoric and logic. They were nomads who traveled from across cities making public attractions to draw in wealthy young students who were then charged a large fee for their education. The sophist curriculum comprised of Rhetoric, Science (Biology and Astronomy), and Cross-examination (Trumbach). They would teach these individuals psychology to play with people's emotions (Trum). Through its emphasis on logic and reasoning Sophist philosophy critiqued religion and ethics. Although some sophists were as religious as most Athenians, many held atheistic or agnostic religious views. Rhetoric and cross-examination were of great importance those noblemen who sought to be appointed to political office. Rhetoric is a technique of persuasion through the use of orations. It not only incorporates good use of language, but also utilizes psychology (Trum). The sophists performed before an audience, usually as competition for fame or political influence. They persuaded audience, pulling them in by appealing to their emotions in order to gain to votes in favor of their arguments (Trum). Using cross-examination and rhetoric, a sophist was able to deceive the audience into believing a weak argument was strong it was important for

Democracy as that it gave less popular viewpoints the chance to be heard in the Athenian assembly (Trum). One of the greatest Athenian sophists to use rhetoric to gain political influence was Pericles. Pericles teachers were Damon, Zeno of Eleatic, and Anaxagoras of Clazomenae (Plutarch, 168). Damon seems to have been a sophist of the highest order, who used his musical teachings as a red herring for his skill while it was he was Pericles trainer for political contests (Plutarch, 168). Anaxagoras of Clazomenae is said to be the first to dethrone Chance and Necessity and set up pure Intelligence as their place in as the principle law and order which informs the universe (Plutarch 169). Under Anaxagoras Pericles exceled beyond the other speakers, he was able to equip himself with a style of speaking which harmonized with his mode of life and the grandeur of his ideals. (Plutarch 172). In the beginning of Pericles career, he measured himself against Cimon's reputation, and set out to win the favor of the people (Plutarch 174). Cimon was a rich man, so he was able to buy his popularity. Pericles did not have as much wealth so he turned his attention to the distribution of public wealth. Taking the advice of Damonides of the Deme of Oa, Pericles received allowance establishing public festivals, jury fees, and grants. He provided entertainment for the people as well as activities and public buildings. For the most part, Pericles accomplished all this spending the public's money and which led to Cimons ostracizing (Plutarch 174). A later opponent of Pericles was Thucydides, the son of Melesias. He accused Pericles of squandering the public's money and letting the national revenue run to waste (Plutarch 181). As the story goes, Pericles questioned the people of the Assembly and asked if this was true. The people reply saying "far too much" (Plutarch 181). Bluffing, Pericles says that he would pay for all the expenses as long as his name was put on all the public buildings. The Athenians, being a

very proud people, allowed him to draw freely out of the public funds. Pericles knew they were an ambitious people and wanted their glory. After Pericles succeeded, he sent Thucydides and the opposing party to exile and gives himself full power (Plutarch 182) . Pericles' teacher, Zeno, perfected the technique of cross-exemption and could "corner"

his opponents. It was said he had a double-edged tongue" and could dispute either side of an argument (Plutarch 168). This ability to argue with such skill is illustrated in The Melian Dialogue, in which Melians argue with the Athenians that their neutrality in the Peloponnesian war be respected. Throughout the text the Melians offer reasons that their position is stronger and the Athenians take this same argument and rearrange it, not only strengthening their argument but also weakening the opposition. This is best seen when the Melians state that the gods will not allow their city to fall and the Athenians retort with the idea that it is man's duty to conquer all he can and so the gods would not take pity on the destruction of Melos (Thucydides 404). Ultimately, the Melians go against the Athenians but are defeated due to betrayals from its own people.

II Under Anaxagoras and Zeno, it is said that Pericles also learned to rise above the superstitious terror which springs from an ignorant wonder at the common phenomena of the heavens (Plutarch 170). The Athenians believed strongly in oracles and omens. They were interpreted as messages from the gods and were used to make political decisions (Trum). Omens were unusual events in the natural world, like an eclipse, that were believed to be related to bad luck. Oracles were direct interpreters of these omens and prophets tried to predict what would happen (Trum). One famous oracle was about Pericles and Thucydides. A soothsayer spotted a

ram that had one horn, which was strong and firm, in Pericles' country estate. Usually a ram has two horns, so the soothsayer interpreted this one-horned ram as a message that meant, of the two leading parties in city (Pericles and Thucydides) it will only go to one man who shall dominate, which was Pericles. However, Anaxagoras disproved this superstition through scientific means. Anaxagoras dissected the ram's skull to show that its brain was not filled with natural space, but had "contracted into a point like an egg at that place in the cavity from which the horn grew" (Plutarch 170). Using Anaxagoras teachings, Pericles rose above the irrationality that ended up affecting those who do not know the cause of such things, who fears the gods to a point of madness and are easily confused because of their lack of experience (Plutarch 170). Another omen occurred when Pericles was getting ready to set off to sea. In one story, Pericles disproves a bad omen using practical logic. When his ships were ready to begin their expedition, an eclipse of the sun occurred (Plutarch 201). Light was considered a symbol of life, so Pericles helmsman thought this darkness was a sign of an awful omen and they were seized with panic. Pericles takes off his cloak and put it in front of their eyes, and then he asks the men whether they found this as alarming as a terrible omen (Plutarch201). He explained that there was no difference "except that the eclipse has been caused by something bigger than [his] cloak," (Plutarch 202). This was no sign from the gods and there was no need to back off from the expedition. Proving that oracles and omens are not reliable, the sophists replaced these ideas of decision-making with two new ideas: cross-examination and public speeches (Trum). Crossexamination calls for logical thinking and reasoning that require people to rely on wit as oppose to the oracles. Public speeches and debates also helped give people another decision making method. In both The Mytilenian Debate and The Melian Dialogue, public debates are used to

give answers to important decisions, such as the fates of cities and punishing wrongdoers (Thucydides 212 and Thucydides 400). With all the disproving and dispute of religion, Plutarch himself states that "Those who say that to discover the cause of a phenomenon disposes of its meaning fail to notice that the same reasoning which explains away divine portents would also dispense with the artificial symbols created by mankind" (Plutarch 170). The sophists feel that religion and science cannot coexist. In ancient Athens, atheism was seen as a great crime because it was believed that a city that tolerates atheism would be doomed by the gods (Trum). It was also said that those who study natural philosophy are a few steps away from not believing in the gods; thus leading to the conclusion that Sophism can turn a man into an atheist and must be punishable by death. Such harsh penalties of mocking the gods, as were seen in the cases of Alcibiades, where he was accused of intervening in sacred festivals (Plutarch 264); Damon, who was accused of being a supporter of tyranny (Plutarch 168); and Socrates, who was accused of being a Sophist and was put to death (Plato 70). Although only Socrates was able to be trialed and killed, they were all aware of the punishment and Alcibiades, for example, simply refused to come back to Athens because he knew he would be killed if he did (Plutarch 265). III Now in order to answer whether Socrates was a sophist, we must look critically at his apology. Plato begins the speech saying Socrates was charged for impiety on the grounds that he was failing to acknowledge the city's god, introducing new divinities, and corrupting its youth (Plato 33). Socrates made sure to mention, in advance, that it is possible that he is simply on trial for having insulted a few too many people (Plato 40). He then proceeds to bring up points for why he is not an atheist, nor a sophist, not a corrupter of youth (Plato 42).

The speech begins with Socrates stating that he will not use "flowery speech" because people may assume he is trying to fool them (Plato 39). This is evidence that he may be a good rhetoric because he acknowledges the psychology of the people by comforting them and saying that he wont use the skill he is accused of possessing. He then goes on to tell the jurors that their minds were poisoned by his enemies when they were young and impressionable. He says his reputation for sophistry comes from his enemies, all of whom are envious of him, and hateful (Plato 40). Socrates argues that his problems all began with the oracle. He tells how Chaerephon went to the Oracle at Delphi, to ask if anyone was wiser than Socrates. When Chaerephon reported to Socrates that the god told him there is none wiser, Socrates took this as a riddle (Plato 44). He says that he knew that he had no wisdom "great or small" but that he also knew that it is against the nature of the gods to lie (Plato 44). This shows that Socrates acknowledges the existence of gods, unlike his atheist sophist peers. He then cross-examines Meletus, and gets him to say that Socrates is an atheist who believes in spiritual agencies and demigods. Socrates announces that he has caught Meletus in a contradiction, and asks the court whether Meletus has designed an intelligence test for him to see if he can identify logical contradictions (Plato 51-56). The way in which Socrates uses cross-examination to corner an individual, gives us the ability to say Socrates may be a sophist. Socrates also states that he is not afraid of death because one who was afraid of death was not wise: "...to be afraid of death is only another form of thinking that one is wise when one is not; it is to think that one knows what one does not know" (Plato 55). People see death as evil, but they have never come back from the dead to tell such stories. Socrates believed that one was wise if one was not afraid of death. Death could just be a great blessing. He believed that dishonoring the god would be wrong, but if he were an atheist, then he would not have a care in

the world how he treats the gods (Plato 56). Socrates then goes on to deny ever being interested in politics, because he says he would have lost his life long ago without doing any good to the people or himself. (Plato 58). Next, Socrates points out that he is a benefactor to the city because he drives the people to do more (Plato 59). He is fully aware that people would not punish one who is helping them. On the charge of being a professional teacher, Socrates replied that when he taught his students, he taught for free. He mentions how all real sophists would go to different cities to persuade young men through speeches (Plato 42). However, Socrates comes from Athens and has a poor status. He argues he couldnt be a sophist if sophists are wealthy non-Athenians and charges high fees for teaching. He states that he cannot be held responsible if any citizen turns bad and asks why there are no witnesses coming forward to claim Socrates corrupted them. Or if they do not realize that they have been corrupted, why have their relatives not stepped forward on their behalf? Many relatives of the young men associated with him, Socrates points out, are presently in the courtroom to support him (Plato 61). We cannot say whether Socrates was a sophist or not. We see his great use of crossexamination and rhetoric. However, he also shows that he is neither an atheist nor a professional teacher like the typical sophist. Yet, Socrates demonstrates a powerful psychological awareness and understanding of speech; one could say Socrates was able to deceive the people into believing that he is not a sophist. As they say, the Devils greatest trick was convincing the world he didnt exist; I would say that Socrates made a great attempt. Sophism, rhetoric and logic are powerful tools to gain political strength and control. We see its use today in the modern era of politics and throughout history Sophism allowed us to weave new stories of power and at the same time develop new understandings about the world

around us in contradiction to the God ran world believed to be the only one by the ancient Greeks.