Placed on a meliorative‐pejorative scale the terms sophist and sophistry allow varying interpretations, according to the types of sophistry, the nature of the sophists’ teachings, and changing meanings of the terms themselves. This paper examines some current misconceptions about the sophists and urges that critics consider both merits and faults of sophists in assessing their role in ancient education.
Pendants, professors, and the law of the excluded middle: On sophists and sophistry
Reprints and Corporate Permissions
Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?
To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:
Academic Permissions
Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?
Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:
If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.
Related research
People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.
Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.
Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.