This CTQ essay has two parts. The first part should take up the bulk of your paper and requires that you explain the topic (make sure that you answer all of the questions on the assignment sheet); the second part asks for a shorter critique or personal response. Put all information IN YOUR OWN WORDS and use quotation marks for quoted material with page numbers. Don’t use any outside sources to obtain information. You do not need a Works Cited page for this essay. The essay should be thorough and demonstrate that you have some understanding of the ideas presented in the textbook; it should be free of grammatical and mechanical errors, and a minimum of 500 words, but longer is even better.
PHIL 101— (Chapter Topic Question) CTQ Chapter 3: The Sophist: Protagoras
Ancient Sophism and Today’s Political Climate
Read pages 76-82 in your textbook on the advent of the “Sophists.” Look at your syllabus for guidelines on how to write your essay. You can hand-write your response but it must be legible. Otherwise, please type it. A copy of this assignment is also on D2L.
Your essay has two parts: in the first part you should explain who the ancient Sophists were, and in the second part address the use of sophistry in today’s political climate for your personal response or critique.
Explain how teachers called the “Sophists” arose in ancient Greece. How did they differ from those who considered themselves the “original, true Athenians”? What was their view of “truth”? What did they value more than anything else? What was their main focus of study? What did Socrates and Plato think about them? Be specific.
Make a convincing case that most politicians today are sophists. How does a non-sophistic politician differ from one who is a sophist? Is it possible to be a successful politician without ever resorting to sophistry? Explain your answer.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|