#disregarding the blatant corruption and misuse of law on the side

[slavictear]

it's either gonna be the end of him and his corrupt rule or it's gonna be the end of serbia/ serbs as we know it

[morethanjustmediocremusings]

Isocrates: A Distinction from Older Sophistry

Taylor Abouzeid

Dr. Duffy

COMS 330-01

9 October 2018

To fully comprehend the differences between Isocrates and the Older Sophists, it is important to first understand the characteristics and teachings of the later; as ultimately, in matters of contrast, one without the other lacks the potential importance of the two together. The Older Sophists were of non-Athenian origins, often referred to as metics, and as is common with immigration, brought with them new ideas and cultural beliefs, forming a unique environment perfect for cultivating new philosophical perspectives.The Older Sophists were relativists who acknowledged a lack of absolute truth, and therefore believed that “truth” was simply what one could be persuaded of, and further; that there can never be knowledge, only belief (Murphy, James J & Hoppmann 2014). All sophists also taught rhetoric in exchange for a payment. Although Isocrates was also a teacher of rhetorical nature, he believed that rhetoric must be devoted to courts of law and statesmen of Greece. The target audience of Older Sophists was significantly restricted from the necessity of payment, as those who could afford the teachings were also more likely to rise into a place of political power where rhetoric was absolutely necessary. Though theses sophists did not struggle to draw a crowd to their lectures, it was those concerned with preserving the conservative professionalism of teaching that turned up their noses to this new-wave of Athenian rhetoric (Guthrie 1971). Traditional Older Sophists, such as Protagoras and Antiphon, taught their students to debate both sides of a case as a practical exercise in making the lesser argument the better. With a focus on deceptive persuasion, the Older Sophists gave the power of rhetoric to those who could pay, and it was these pupils’ misuse of rhetoric, according to Isocrates, that ultimately drove Isocrates to condemn Athenian sophistry in its entirety. As the knowledge of one tends toward the acknowledgement of the other, Isocrates juxtaposed theses ideals in his teachings in both style and rhetorical subject matter.

Isocrates was born to a wealthy family in Athens and was only forced to earn a living after the Peloponnesian War, when his family tragically lost their immense wealth (Cawkwell 2018). Unlike the Older Sophists, Isocrates was an Athenian-native and thusly watched, in his perception, the corrosion of rhetoric from a useful tool for statesmen and those affiliated with upholding justice into a relativistic utensil by which the lesser argument became the better. On the front lines of Athens’ demise, Isocrates bore witness to the injustice and corruption that rhetoric cast onto the city-state.

As a logographer, Isocrates was not political by election, but gained political authority by devoting his time to Panhellenism; the arduous task of unifying the Greek city-states against the barbarians of the East (Murphy, James J & Hoppmann 2014). Although personally lacking confidence in public speaking, his prepared speeches and pamphlets provided insight on the day’s political issues for the public at large. Continuing in his pursuit of public education, Isocrates later went on to found his own school of rhetoric and proved himself not only a skilled teacher and great influence on his select pupils, but also a talented businessman.

His curriculum came with a high price, and with class sizes no larger than nine students at any given time, Isocrates created a money-making university targeted at the rich. According to Pliny the Elder, Isocrates amassed a plentiful fortune and it was once rumored that a single oration could go for the hefty price of twenty talents an equivalent of roughly six-hundred drachma (Phillips & Kapparis 2003). Consistent with his beliefs of preserving the art of rhetoric, Isocrates was careful in selecting his pupils, many-of-whom would go on to become successful legislators and philosophers.  He believed in a necessity of natural intellect which must be fostered in a temple of education in order to ultimately be successful (Potter 2015). Although he did thoroughly criticize the misuse of Sophistic teaching ideals, Isocrates did not completely disregard their methodology. He stated in Against the Sophists that a natural aptitude was essential for an orator, for a man without it could only ever achieve mediocracy; although some untaught men became fair presenters, the best must have a composite of both intrinsic ability and higher education (Isocrates, Norlin & Hook 1961).

It was at his school of rhetoric that Isocrates promoted the benefits of a broad-spectrum education. By exploring the faults of focused study, Isocrates was able to inform his privileged audience on a variety of subject matter. Unlike the despised teachings of Sophists and Eristics, Isocrates devoted his time to an in-depth study of diction; more specifically, the use of language and words alike within the public domain (Murphy, James J & Hoppmann 2014). Rather than a course on rhetoric, Isocrates saw his teachings as practical philosophy. The rise of the anti-Sophist movement created problems for Isocrates. Plato’s attacks on sophistry became crucial in the corrosion of Isocrates scholastic achievement. With its foundation in the domain of Older Sophistical beliefs Isocrates’ school came under fire for unethical and deceitful practices which can be examined in his Antidosis.  

It was common of the time to attribute age with wisdom, so without accurate public record, the tale of Isocrates’ death goes on to claim the Athenian at one-hundred years of age. In an act of martyrdom, Isocrates starved himself midst a futile attempt to encourage the diversification of Greek militarist powers. His wish was ultimately fulfilled two years later when Alexander the Great took power over the Greek city-states (Potter 2015). In a moment of horrific irony Isocrates did not live to see his vision of unity come to life.

           In Isocrates’ older years he actually defended the Sophists, claiming alignment to his own philosophical ideals. He recognized the existence of deceptive teachers of rhetoric, but rationalized their presence by claiming they were a minority among their colleagues (Guthrie 1971). To Isocrates, rhetoric was “that endowment of our human nature which raises us above mere animality and enables us to live the civilized life” (Isocrates & Dinsdale 1752). Isocrates defined his approach to rhetoric in his Against the Sophists in which he states that rhetoric is a practice of art, not of science (Isocrates, Norlin & Hook 1961). Said best by Aristotle “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then is not an act but a habit,” (Aristotle 1999); similar to his predecessor, Isocrates held that psychical and mental facilities should be developed by the same methods, and to achieve excellence in rhetoric practical exercises in speaking were necessary to achieve artistry.  According to Isocrates’ philosophical views morals could not be taught, but a study of political discourse could encourage loyal and good-mannered citizens. He also believed that speeches should place emphasis on matters of justice and virtue, and that the orator’s responsibility to promote general welfare should be held in a higher regard than law-givers; as the task of educating the general public proved more arduous than that of policy making (Murphy, James J & Hoppmann 2014).

           Arguably his most well know work of rhetorical nature, Isocrates’ Antidosis has notoriously been interpreted in three very distinct ways. The first of which is a third-person account of Isocrates’ life. Through this autobiographical lens we are able to examine the work as a glorified depiction of its author as a model citizen in an Athenian-based fictional society. Isocrates would have been eighty-two at the time he wrote Antidosis, providing him with an objective scope on his life. He presented himself as a quiet citizen in a society where oral discourse was used in cases of litigation much to the dismay of the upper-echelon who believed that this oratory was corrupting the republic (Isocrates & Dinsdale 1752). In Antidosis Isocrates is charged with tainting the youth through the education of public speaking, this is a blatant defense of his life’s work and plays into the idea that Antidosis is actually an autobiographical piece of epidictic rhetoric.

           A secondary interpretation reads as a court case procedure in which Isocrates much prove his innocence. Although neither a charge nor punishment is ever explicitly presented, Isocrates goes on to defend himself against what appears to be a court-room interrogation. Isocrates battles his case by claiming the education of youth in the art of rhetorical interrogation of injustice is helping armor future leaders with the skills necessary to successfully run a powerful state, similar to that of Athens. In regards to the monetary claims within the indictment, Isocrates reasons with the jury, stating the influence of his teachings far outweighs the profits that come with the profession and even calls upon the success of former students of provide evidence of his innocence (Isocrates & Dinsdale 1752).

           The final translation is that of viewing Antidosis as a lecture for Isocrates’ pupils to learn the importance of upholding crucial, societal roles. Isocrates believes that a teacher’s judgement should come from his pupils, and withstanding that the students provide a thorough and fair examination, the educator should be awarded. Among the final points of Antidosis, Isocrates notes that he tries to teach morality and holds his students in high regard by discouraging those acts which are malicious to a society; such as gambling and drinking to excess. It is at this point where the defendant surrenders to the punishment on the grounds that a student of his could be procured who was found to be negatively influencing society, an accusation which he is confident will not happen (Isocrates & Dinsdale 1752).

In Plato’s The Republic the idea of everything in life merely being a copy of something else, draws on the concept of philosophical influence (Plato 1943). Hidden imitations of Gorgias can be examined in Isocrates’ orations, which closely mimic those of Gorgianic prose (Cawkwell 2018). Even Isocrates’ emphasis on Panhellenism within his political doctrine originated in the teachings of Gorgias and his focus on the importance of a unified society. Isocrates also received instruction form the well-known sophist Prodicus, starkly contrasting his close association with the notorious, anti-Sophist, Socrates.  Isocrates advocated for the vital Greek ideals of freedom, self-control and virtue. These pillars of society appealed to the later practices of Cicero and Quintilian who thereafter became recognized figures in Roman rhetorical practice ("Marcus Tullius Cicero" 2018).

Held as the “founder of modern liberal arts education” (Marsh 2010), Isocrates’ achievements in education, rhetoric, and moral philosophy far exceeded those of his strictly sophistic peers. Juxtaposing the predominance of Older Sophism at the time, Isocrates embodied a native push-back from rhetorical deception. Although he did collect payment for his work, it was the subject matter that he presented which truly showcased the differences between the two. Isocrates advocated for a well-rounded education unlike the Older Sophists’ beliefs in a highly-technical focus of a singular subject. Differing once again from the Older Sophists, Isocrates, like Gorgias, believed in the power of “Kairos” and “to prepon,” stating that rhetoric had both a time and place. To Isocrates, this was restricted to courtroom proceedings and other forensic uses, and for statesmen in an attempt at the Panhellenism necessary to defeat the impending Persian Empire. Alike once again to his antitheses, Isocrates was undeniably effective in his teachings and held great influence over Athenian society while still maintaining a unique and enriched perspective of rhetoric.

 Works Cited

Aristotle. Aristotle. Vol. 3, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1999. Print.

Cawkwell, George Law. “Isocrates.” Encyclopedia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 8 Feb. 2018, www.britannica.com/biography/Isocrates.

Guthrie, W. K. C. The Sophists. Cambridge University Press, 1971. Print.

Isocrates. Isocrates: Against the Sophists. Translated by George Norlin and Larue Van Hook, vol. 2., Harvard University Press, 1961. Print.

Isocrates. The Orations and Epistles of Isocrates. Translated by Joshua Dinsdale, 3rd ed., T. Waller, 1752. Print.

“Marcus Tullius Cicero.” Edited by History.com Staff, History, A&E Television Networks, 21 Aug. 2018, www.history.com/topics/ancient-history/marcus-tullius-cicero.

Marsh, Charles. "Millennia of Discord: The Controversial Educational Program of Isocrates." Theory and Research in Education 8.3 (2010): 289-303. Pro-Quest. 6 Oct. 2018. Print.

Murphy, James J., et al. A Synoptic History of Cassical Rhetoric. 4th ed., Routledge, 2014. Print.

Phillips, David P., and K. Kapparis. “Orator Biographies: Isocrates.” Classical Athenian Democracy, Stoa Publication, 27 Mar. 2003, www.stoa.org/projects/demos/article_orator_biographies?page=5&greekEncoding=.

Plato. Plato's The Republic. New York :Books, Inc., 1943. Print.

Potter, Ben. “Isocrates: The Essayist.” Classical Wisdom Weekly, Classical Wisdom Limited, 17 Apr. 2015, classicalwisdom.com/isocrates-essayist/.