(Sorry I missed to reply on this)Is a sophist a philosopher? — Fooloso4
Very good. Among other things, this proves that philosophy can indeed be a profession! :grin: (There are some doubts about that in this thread; I can't remember from whom.)I am a philosopher by profession — Fooloso4
Why do you 1) refer to the past and 2) consider that "unfortunate"?I used to say that philosophy was a transformative practice, but unfortunately that has become hackneyed — Fooloso4
Anyway, my interest on the subject is consumed at this point! — Alkis Piskas
I'm surprised that you are using present time ... I couldn't think that sophists have survived to this day! — Alkis Piskas
Regarding philosophy always, I always --since school-- connected "sophists" to pre-Socratic philosophers, represented mainly by Protagoras. — Alkis Piskas
Very good. Among other things, this proves that philosophy can indeed be a profession! :grin: (There are some doubts about that in this thread; I can't remember from whom.) — Alkis Piskas
Why do you 1) refer to the past and 2) consider that "unfortunate"? — Alkis Piskas
Nietzsche says that the "real philosophers are commanders and law-givers." (Beyond Good and Evil, "We Scholars")
— Fooloso4
Yes, he did. And in his time, he had good reason for saying so. However, in the spirit of Nietszche, I would the real philosopher is he who realizes the that only alternative to a value for value trade of the products of one's mind, is the rule of commanders and law-givers. And I'd say in my own time I have good reason for saying so. But, that's just saying as much in the same spirit. The acual philosopher is the one has developed enough virtue within the domain to discuss, generate, and teach within the domain with proficient command. And I think I'm closer to the mark than Nietszche. — Garrett Travers
The real philosopher is a he? You haven't heard my mum and wife talking! True philosophical riddles! — Schootz1
What's a value to value trade? — Schootz1
I see. OK.My point was that we should not consider the profession as a necessary condition for being a philosophe — Fooloso4
You are right. I also find that Plato's answer is not so clear.Are the really professional sophists then? Is pay what distinguishes the philosopher and the sophist, or is the no clear distinction? Plato raises the question, but the answer he provides is not so clear cut. — Fooloso4
Maybe so. I have no idea! :grin:Plato identifies Protagoras as a sophist, but we should not take this to mean that he simply rejected his teaching. Protagoras' influence on Plato was considerable. — Fooloso4
Some do. — Fooloso4
What is entertainment? It is education in its highest manifestation. Public, formal education, alas, all too often is NOT entertaining. Ever had a good teacher? They were entertaining! — ucarr
Who's transporting today's young people? — ucarr
A philosopher fails not when s/he embraces wacky concepts supported by faulty logic, but rather whenever s/he is dull, boring & sleep-inducing. — ucarr
Who are the great philosophers? They're the one's who get read by the general public, generation after generation. — ucarr
Being entertaining in one's work, philosophical or otherwise, is an individual trait... — Garrett Travers
Sleep deprived students with an attention span that can be measured in seconds may find something dull, boring & sleep-inducing that requires alertness, attention, and hard work. — Fooloso4
The general public has never been equipped to read or understand great philosophy. The demand to be entertained is one of, but certainly not the only reason they are ill-equipped. — Fooloso4
From the cognoscenti to the skid row bum, and all points in-between, people are the same.
So why not talk to everybody, if you have something to say? Doing that successfully, however, entails being interesting, as in being entertaining — ucarr
There’s an important distinction needing to be made here, as the difficult & the boring are very different things. — ucarr
I suspect you proceed from the premise that entertainment has no truck with communication of important (and therefore serious) ideas & information. — ucarr
Is the demand for entertainment a matter of indifference to the cognoscenti? — ucarr
I say meeting the demands of the general public, in any field, establishes the most correct yardstick for measuring success. — ucarr
If the general public is ill-equipped for the difficult, how come A Brief History of Time was a best seller? — ucarr
From the cognoscenti to the skid row bum, and all points in-between, people are the same. — ucarr
Should we stop assigning Plato or Aristotle in philosophy classes because most students do not find them entertaining and will not read them? — Fooloso4
A philosopher is anyone who examines the nature of life and metaphysics — CallMeDirac
A philosopher is anyone who contemplates the meaning of life and metaphysical questions for enjoyment. Anyone whose hobby is contemplation. — CallMeDirac
Just writing doesn't make one a writer, writing as a hobby and writing simply because one enjoys writing makes one a writer. — CallMeDirac
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.