Sofista
- Idioma:
- inglés
- Estado:
- Obra completa
- Autoría:
- Escrita por el autor
- Estado del texto:
- Sin ruido de escaneo detectado (medición automática sobre todo el texto, no revisada a mano)
- Extensión:
- ~46.700 palabras · 222 pasajes
Cita esta obra
- APAPlatón. (n.d.). Sophist [Sofista]. Digital reproduction: SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/es/works/plato/sophist
- MLAPlatón. Sophist [Sofista]. Digital reproduction, SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/es/works/plato/sophist.
- ChicagoPlatón. Sophist [Sofista]. Digital reproduction, SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/es/works/plato/sophist.
Referencia de la edición que reproduce SigPhi: SigPhi es su reproducción digital, no el editor. El año de la edición no consta en los metadatos (por eso «n.d.») y el traductor solo aparece cuando consta.
De qué trata
¿Qué es exactamente un sofista? Persiguiendo la definición, el diálogo topa con un problema mucho mayor: para hablar de falsedad hay que poder decir que algo *no es*, y Parménides lo había prohibido.
Contexto e historia
Aquí Platón rompe con Parménides —el propio texto lo llama parricidio— y abre la vía para hablar del no ser sin contradicción. Es de los textos técnicos más densos del conjunto, y de los que más consecuencias tuvieron para la lógica posterior.
Contexto editorial, no una fuente citable: a diferencia de los pasajes de la obra, estos datos no se pueden comprobar contra el corpus.
deserved or not, was a natural consequence of their vocation. That they were foreigners, that they made fortunes, that they taught novelties, that they excited the minds of youth, are quite sufficient reasons to account for the opprobrium which attached to them. The genius of Plato could not have stamped the word anew, or have imparted the associations which occur in contemporary writers, such as Xenophon and Isocrates. Changes in the meaning of words can only be made with great difficulty, and not unless they are supported by a strong current of popular feeling. There is nothing improbable in supposing that Plato may have extended and envenomed the meaning, or that he may have done the Sophists the same kind of disservice with posterity which Pascal did to the Jesuits. But the bad sense of the word was not and could not have been invented by him, and is found in his earlier dialogues, e.g. the Protagoras, as well as in the later. 3. There is no ground for disbelieving that the principal Sophists, Gorgias, Protagoras, Prodicus, Hippias, were good and honourable men. The notion that they were corrupters of the Athenian youth has no real foundation, and partly arises out of the use of the term 'Sophist' in modern times. The truth is, that we know little about them; and the witness of Plato in their favour is probably not much more historical than his witness against them. Of that national decline of genius, unity, political force, which has been sometimes described as the corruption of youth, the Sophists were one among many signs;--in these respects Athens may have degenerated; but, as Mr. Grote remarks, there is no reason to suspect any greater moral corruption in the age of Demosthenes than in the age of Pericles. The Athenian youth were not corrupted in this sense, and therefore the Sophists could not have corrupted them.…