From fred.fauquier@infonie.fr Sun Feb 17 03:57:45 2002 Received: from mailscan1.cac.washington.edu (mailscan1.cac.washington.edu [140.142.32.16]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.12.1+UW01.12/8.12.1+UW02.01) with SMTP id g1HBve5S054570 for ; Sun, 17 Feb 2002 03:57:40 -0800 Received: FROM mxu4.u.washington.edu BY mailscan1.cac.washington.edu ; Sun Feb 17 03:57:39 2002 -0800 Received: from mail.libertysurf.net (mail.libertysurf.net [213.36.80.91]) by mxu4.u.washington.edu (8.12.1+UW01.12/8.12.1+UW02.01) with ESMTP id g1HBvcAV019321 for ; Sun, 17 Feb 2002 03:57:39 -0800 Received: from kukwh (212.83.183.180) by mail.libertysurf.net (5.1.053) id 3C6C7B1A00062449 for classics@u.washington.edu; Sun, 17 Feb 2002 12:58:30 +0100 Message-ID: <001301c1b7ab$22757c20$b4b753d4@kukwh> From: "fred.fauquier" To: "liste classics" References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020216152856.00a0f1e0@servidor.unam.mx> Subject: Re: Were or not the Sophists "eristic"? Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 13:03:01 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0010_01C1B7B3.6E10AC60" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C1B7B3.6E10AC60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Maybe the question cannot be asked in these terms...Indeed 'eristic' is = not a school, but a mode of using logos. If you want to appreciate if = sophists are 'eristic', the best way is to search for what is = 'eristik=E8' for a greek. =20 In the 'Euthydemus', Socrates says that he desires (epithumein) this = science (sophia) called eristik=E8 (272b-c), science learned and now = taught by Dionysodoros and Euthudemos. Is this irony? This science = allows to fight with words against falsehood, but also against truth = (271c-272b). 'Eristik=E8' is a mode of using language; in what way is it different = from dialectic? 1) The 'eristike' as it is defined, in the fifth definition of the = sophist ('Sophist' 225c-226a) seems to be neutral and can refer just as = well dialectic as sophistic. I explain myself, this dialectic is the = dialectic which is described in the methodological part of the = 'Parmenides', it is a virtuosic exercise (the platonic dialectic is not = only this exercise, it must be completed by the desire of the truth). = The difference between this dialectic and sophistic is the context: = private/public and the money (*). (*) An another interpretation is possible if we look at Rep.499a where = the eristic, in his public and private form, is opposed to dialectic. 2) But there are other texts where Plato associates 'eristic' with a = mode of power through language; so there is an opposition between = eristic and dialectic (cf. Meno 75c-d). This practise of power could be = associated with the sophists. It's the power and not the logos which is = important; so the eristic is only a game on the word; it is empty (cf. = Rep. 454a-b). 3) This emptyness is a real danger for philosophy (cf. Rep.539a-d); = dialectic mustn't be taught to young people, because the desire of the = truth, the good orientation of the look is not sufficiently prepared in = them. 4) Even if the word 'eristik=E8' does not appear in Phaedo 89d. sq., = this excerpt is very important to show that, lastly, eristic is a form = of weakness concerning 'logoi'. The eristic have its origin in a = psychological disposition, hate concerning logoi; 'eristikoi' are = desperate, incapable of distinguishing in the logoi the strong and the = weak. So, we can see different meanings of 'eristike' in Plato's corpus: 1) virtuosic exercise of language 2) practise of power through language 3) empty arguments 4) weakness concerning arguments (genealogical and critical approach) According to Plato, it's quite obvious that sophists use eristic (maybe = he has right with Protagoras (antilogia, kreitton logos...)). [For Aristotle, you can look at Sophistic Refutations 11, Rhet. B24 = (1042a)] Kind regards=20 Frederic Fauquier ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Lizbeth Concha Dimas=20 To: classics@u.washington.edu=20 Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 10:42 PM Subject: Were or not the Sophists "eristic"? Hi everyone. I'm working on sophistic educational theories and I very confussed. = :p: Were the sophists "eristic" or not? Marrou says they were; Kerferd = (The sophistic mouvement) is not explicit about this particular. And if = sophists were not "eristic", who were the "eristic" practicioners about = whom Plato wrote?=20 Any help, will be really appreciated.=20 Liz Lizbeth C. Dimas M=E9xico, UNAM lctettix@servidor.unam.mx ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C1B7B3.6E10AC60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Maybe the question cannot be asked in = these=20 terms...Indeed 'eristic' is not a school, but a mode of using logos. If = you want=20 to appreciate if sophists are 'eristic', the best way is to search for = what is=20 'eristik=E8' for a greek.
 
In the 'Euthydemus', Socrates says that = he desires=20 (epithumein) this science (sophia) called eristik=E8 (272b-c), science = learned and=20 now taught by Dionysodoros and Euthudemos. Is this irony? This science = allows to=20 fight with words against falsehood, but also against truth=20 (271c-272b).
 
'Eristik=E8' is a mode of using = language; in what way=20 is it different from dialectic?
 
1) The 'eristike' as it is defined, in = the fifth=20 definition of the sophist ('Sophist' 225c-226a) seems to be neutral and = can=20 refer just as well dialectic as sophistic. I explain myself, this = dialectic is=20 the dialectic which is described in the methodological part of the = 'Parmenides',=20 it is a virtuosic exercise (the platonic dialectic is not only this = exercise, it=20 must be completed by the desire of the truth). The difference between = this=20 dialectic and sophistic is the context: private/public and the money=20 (*).
(*) An = another=20 interpretation is possible if we look at Rep.499a where the eristic, in = his=20 public and private form, is opposed to dialectic.
 
2) But there are other texts where = Plato associates=20 'eristic' with a mode of power through language; so there is an = opposition=20 between eristic and dialectic (cf. Meno 75c-d). This practise of power = could be=20 associated with the sophists. It's the power and not the logos which is=20 important; so the eristic is only a game on the word; it is empty (cf. = Rep.=20 454a-b).
 
3) This emptyness is a real danger for = philosophy=20 (cf. Rep.539a-d); dialectic mustn't be taught to young people, because = the=20 desire of the truth, the good orientation of the look is not = sufficiently=20 prepared in them.
 
4) Even if the word 'eristik=E8' does = not appear in=20 Phaedo 89d. sq., this excerpt is very important to show that, lastly, = eristic is=20 a form of weakness concerning 'logoi'. The eristic have its origin in a=20 psychological disposition, hate concerning logoi; 'eristikoi' are = desperate,=20 incapable of distinguishing in the logoi the strong and the = weak.
 
So, we can see different meanings of = 'eristike' in=20 Plato's corpus:
 
1) virtuosic exercise of = language
2) practise of power through = language
3) empty arguments
4) weakness concerning arguments = (genealogical and=20 critical approach)
 
According to Plato, it's quite obvious = that=20 sophists use eristic (maybe he has right with Protagoras (antilogia, = kreitton=20 logos...)).
 
[For Aristotle, you can look at = Sophistic=20 Refutations 11, Rhet. B24 (1042a)]
 
Kind regards
 
Frederic Fauquier
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Lizbeth Concha Dimas
To: classics@u.washington.edu
Sent: Saturday, February 16, = 2002 10:42=20 PM
Subject: Were or not the = Sophists=20 "eristic"?

Hi everyone.

I'm working on = sophistic=20 educational theories and I very confussed. :p: Were the sophists = "eristic" or=20 not? Marrou says they were; Kerferd (The sophistic mouvement) is not = explicit=20 about this particular.  And if  sophists were not "eristic", = who=20 were the "eristic" practicioners about whom Plato wrote?

Any = help,=20 will be really appreciated.

Liz

Lizbeth C. = Dimas
M=E9xico,=20 = UNAM
lctettix@servidor.unam.mx
------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C1B7B3.6E10AC60-- .