Институт за политичке студије

Добрињска 11
(IV спрат)
11000 Београд

Контакт подаци
EN
EN
Српска политичка мисао 2/2026

CRITICAL REVIEW OF SOPHISTIC MODELS OF PERSUASION REGARDING THEIR SIGNIFICANCE AND INFLUENCE ON MODERN POLITICAL RHETORIC

Аутори
УДКUDC 32.019.5 Стране55-74 Година2026
Преузми PDF 10.5937/spm96-64201
Преглед истраживања

Сажетак

Sophists were professional teachers of primarily rhetoric who imparted their knowledge to young men in the Greek world. They were active in the fifth century BC, and their influence, above all on rhetoric, was enormous both on later centuries and classical Greek authors, and up to the present day. This is especially reflected in political rhetoric, which is based on persuasion, i.e., convincing listeners by using various rhetorical techniques, the foundations of which were laid by the sophists. It is a common opinion that democratic campaigns should be based on rational argumentation based on the truth, but in practice, this is not the case, and they are more often based on opinion and not necessarily on truth. The basis of doxastic argumentation was laid by the sophists. This paper will analyze certain attitudes of the sophists as well as fragments of their works that indicate that their thought is still present in the political space, using and analyzing the best examples from the most famous sophistic representatives, namely Protagoras and Gorgias. Some of their principles are implemented in modern political campaigns in democratic systems, which reproduce the structural models of persuasion developed by the sophists, where the emphasis was on performance, the impression that was left and effective presentation.

Извори и литература

Референце

  1. Aristotle. 1926. The “Art” of Rhetoric. London: William Heinemann
  2. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
  3. Aristotle. 1933. The Metaphysics (Books I–IX). London: William Heinemann Ltd
  4. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
  5. Aristotle. 1955. On Sophistical Refutations, On Coming-to-be and Passing Away, On the Cosmos. London: William Heinemann Ltd
  6. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
  7. Bitzer, Lloyd F. 1968. “The Rhetorical Situation.” Philosophy & Rhetoric 1 (1): 1–14.
  8. Crick, Nathan. 2010. “The Sophistical Attitude and the Invention of Rhetoric.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 96 (1): 25–45. DOI: 10.1080/00335630903512705
  9. De Romilly, Jacqueline. 2002. The Great Sophists in Periclean Athens. Oxford: Calerdon Press.
  10. Diogenes Laertius. 1925a. Lives of Eminent Philosophers, vol. I. London: William Heinemann
  11. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
    Diogenes Laertius. 1925b. Lives of Eminent Philosophers, vol. II. London: William Heinemann
  12. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
  13. Gagarin, Michael. 2001. “Did the Sophists Aim to Persuade?” Rhetorica 19 (3): 275–291. DOI: 10.1525/rh.2001.19.3.275
  14. Gagarin, Michael, and Paul Woodruff. 2008. “The Sophists.” In The Oxford Handbook of Presocratic Philosophy, eds. Patricia Curd and Daniel W. Graham, 365–382. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195146875.003.0014
  15. Giorgini, Giovanni. 2016. “The Power of Speech: The Influence of the Sophists on Greek Politics.” In Philosophy and Political Power in Antiquity, eds. Cinzia Arruzza and Dmitri Nikulin, 9–40. Leiden: Brill. DOI: 10.1163/9789004324626_003
  16. Johnstone, Christopher Lyle. 2006. “Sophistical Wisdom: Politikê Aretê and “Logosophia”.” Philosophy & Rhetoric 39 (4): 265–289. DOI: 10.2307/20697163
  17. Kennedy, George. 1963. The Art of Persuasion in Greece. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  18. Kerferd, George B. 1981. The Sophistic Movement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  19. McGee, Michael Calvin. 1980. “The ‘Ideograph’: A Link between Rhetoric and Ideology.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 66 (1): 1–16. DOI:10.1080/00335638009383499
  20. Mielczarski, Cyprian. 2018. “Rhetoric: A Theory of Political Lie or The Essence of Politics? Reflections on the Thought of the Sophists, Hannah Arendt, and Jacques Derrida.” Organon 50: 147–163. DOI: 10.4467/00786500.ORG.18.007.9501
  21. Plato. 1961. Theaetetus, Sophist. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press
  22. London: William Heinemann Ltd.
  23. Plato. 1979. Gorgias. Oxford: Clarendon Press
  24. New York: Oxford University Press.
  25. Plato. 1982. Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Phaedrus, vol. I. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press
  26. London: William Heinemann Ltd.
  27. Plutarch. 1968. Plutarch’s Lives, vol. II. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press
  28. London: William Heinemann Ltd.
  29. Poulakos, John. 1983. “Toward a Sophistic Definition of Rhetoric.” Philosophy & Rhetoric 16 (1): 35–48.
  30. Quintilian. 1963. Institutio oratoria, vol I. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press
  31. London: William Heinemann Ltd.
  32. Roe-Crines, Andrew S. 2025. “Introduction: Political rhetoric and democratic discourse.” Global Discourse 15 (2–3): 109–122. DOI: 10.1332/20437897Y2025D000000057
  33. Segal, Charles P. 1962. “Gorgias and the Psychology of the Logos.” Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 66: 99–155. DOI: 10.2307/310738
  34. Schiappa, Edward. 2013. Protagoras and Logos: A Study in Greek Philosophy and Rhetoric. Columbia, South Carolina: University of South Carolina Press.
  35. Sprague, Rosamond Kent, ed. 2001. The Older Sophists. Indianapolis, Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.
  36. Walton, Douglas N. 2009. Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. New York, London: Routledge.
Из истог броја

Повезане публикације