Isocrates' "Against the Sophists"

The very first sentence could easily be said about education today. I like education (or I would not be in a program that will lead to years of school and hopefully a profession as a professor), but I have seen the negative effects of educators from preschool teachers to college presidents making greater claims than they can fulfill and thus earning a bad name. Still, I think serious study is certainly better than careless indolence.

Though I suppose it remains obvious to most (when they take time to think about it) that humans do not possess the ability to know the future, Isocrates remains relevant as so many high school seniors still enter college because professors (and parents, teachers, mentors, coaches, etc.) make it seem like the obvious next step, the university, will show them what they’ll do for the rest of their life to be happy and successful. The system still costs money too, and fees are still due before enrollment is complete.

Isocrates found fault in the educational promises and therefore practices of both the sophists and the professors of political discourse. Specifically arguing against the political professors, Isocrates claims that they ignore practicality and convince students that they will be wonderful persuaders without considering natural talent or the discourse itself. Instead, they rely on their bold promises and the admiration and esteem the promises offer.

Isocrates claims to wish that philosophy had as much power as some promised it did, but since it doesn’t, he wants the false claims to stop so the bad repute will stop. As evidenced by both of these selections of reading, Isocrates seems to care deeply about what the public thinks.

Believing that teachers cannot teach fixed rules for speaking because “fitness for occasion, propriety of style, and originality of treatment” all affect persuasion (13). In these three variables, the fixed letters themselves do not matter as much as these changing aspects of speech. The structure of many writing classes that only attempt to teach grammar while ignoring the majority of the cannons of rhetoric might find this statement relatable and enlightening.

After a sharp insult that the teachers themselves need to learn their lesson, Isocrates considers it his duty to share his own opinion (which he assumes all intelligent people will agree with, that’s not at all vain Isocrates). His stance is that nature and practical instruction make a skilled person, whether that person is speaking or doing anything else.

Formal training helps teach skill and resourcefulness by teaching a student to read carefully and examine the possibilities. Teaching alone cannot create perfect speakers out of those who completely lack natural abilities, but it can help the poor talentless student take a step towards self-improvement by offering more intelligence on multiple subjects.

While believing this is true, Isocrates also admits that speaking is difficult and requires many details which require, in turn, study and a “vigorous and imaginative mind” (17). Teaching is a very important aspect in becoming aware of these nuances of persuasion. Isocrates seems to make one of the bold, future-telling statements he is arguing against by claiming that when all the right ingredients are present, “then the devotees of philosophy will achieve complete success” (18). Lest he be considered an optimist, Isocrates dashes quick hope by stating that if any element is absent, the students fall below the mark by that degree.

I find the argument that educators are often guilty of promising a future most compelling. Though I do not think it wrong to charge a fee for education, charging a fee for a false claim that happiness and prosperity will be guaranteed after one graduates from college is less than moral. When education has a cost, there seems to be a greater value placed on it. This is at least true in the difference between public high school and college in America. Though many students still skip or sleep through classes they (or their parents) pay for in college, I think there’s a general greater appreciation for the lessons in college. Group work is not as unbearable because a few more of the students are more motivated to be there. Though there are cultures where free education works, I agree that the fault is in the claim that education is the obvious path to success is the deeper issue. There are many who aren’t successful after graduation (today’s job market for new college graduates is bleak for many areas of study) and there are just as many who are successful without a degree from a university.

Isocrates’ stance on innate ability and training is also very fascinating and relevant, and I agree that a blend of the two (plus probably some other ingredients as well such as motive and values) lead to a successful student regardless of the subject. This is also another reason why education alone cannot offer a perfect future. Whether the difficulty lies in a student’s innate inability to grasp a subject (for example, I’m horrible at spatial reasoning, I wouldn’t make a perfect architect), an educator’s or a systematical fault, or the simple inability of humans to know the future, the promise of success after education cannot be made.

#Isocrates #GreekRhetoric #Sophists