|
stan, guess you have no idea who the sophists were. ought to investigate that one. might have a moment of self discovery. (not that this ought to be a maslow moment for you though. I'm pretty sure you've achieved that already!!)
ok, I'll give up the ghost. sophists were pre-socratics in ancient greece (socrates was accused of being one, though he rejected them), who argued for the sake of arguing, could take any side and argue indefinitely, without facts or evidence, "winning" as much as by taking apart their opponents arguments rather than constructing one of their own. they would use rhetorical tricks to gain the upper hand. rather than reaching a logical conclusion based on facts, evidence, and reason, they instead would show how an opponent made a mistake or something and thus, "win". yes, they were hated, cf the clouds. also, truth was relative (i.e. man is the measure of all things) and something that could change or existed in one mind different from another. in fact, there was no truth, simply what one thought to be, was.
even the ancients knew the to be what we so eloquently refer to as, bullshit artists.
|