The New Sophists

Rhetoric and composition studies has a new movement but like many movements in modern academia, it has historical roots with a new sexy twist. It is the seduction of words in whatever realm: writing, politics, economics, media, or education.

This new movement has its contrast and its detractors:  they are the followers of Aristotle, Aquinas, and today MacIntyre. These contemporaries wonder what has become of argument and proper persuasion (not Facebook narrissicism, rule by emotion and graphic images and video). They look for sollogisms ("All men are mortal; Socrates is a man; therefore Socrates is mortal") behind the arguments, substance, and underlying principles and what they usually find is that behind contemporary discourse, debate, and media, there is no substance. The substance is the underlying principles of community, intellectual freedom, hope, and the human spirit.

So who were the sophists in Ancient Greece? In the words of Alasdair MacIntyre, they sought successful careers in politics, the assembly, and the courts where "to succeed in that milieu it is necessary to convince and to please" (14). As might be expected what the sophists taught varied by place and crowd.

In the 21st century the sophists are seemingly omnipotent. They are the short-sighted congress people of all parties who cannot see the forest for the trees. One is obsessed with the federal deficit; another is equally obsessed with cutting any spending. They are the economists who are only trying to promote their own self-serving economic theories based on the gold standard, or Keynes or Reagan. They are the recreational marijuana crowd; they are the global warning obsession people; they are the one issue abortion rights or pro lifers, and the gun people. They are the educators who only care about multiculturalism or moral relativism. Last is the media lovers who think their existence is contained in their ipod mini.

None of these groups has an underlying set of coherent principles or simply stated, a philosophy of life. If they do, it is self-serving and short sighted. There is no connection to the country or continent as a whole. As would be expected debates are mere assertion and counter assertion. Moderators cannot get these new sophists to answer questions or explain their underlying principles. The sophists just keep talking and jarring their opponent.

The consequences are equally omnipotent: deadlock in Congress; posturing but no decision making; prevalence of media which seems to have no purpose or meaning. An increase in poverty but also opulence at the highest level. Fiscal crises that are perpetual; funding shortfalls and unbelievable violence in real life but also in the oversaturated media that bombards the average citizen literally twenty-four hours a day with pointless violence and self-destruction.

The consequence is what John Paul II used to call "the culture of death": widespread destruction and violence, a lack of consciousness of it, and a loss of hope for young and old alike (Love and Responsibility 3). The new sexy twist is the media obsession with sex appeal and the use of sex objects, usually female, to persuade and sell. The underlying principle is simply to sell and to buy, which leads to the same meaningless activity tomorrow. And that handheld device is the perfect place to do it.

The solution is with many things--education. First, students need to think about the media they are using and how they are using it. And second, students need to be taught to argue and be persuasive but in ways that are "legal" in academia. This also means, however, that academia has to believe in standards of thought again. Debate and dialogue must again happen in this country, where underlying principles can be discussed. This cannot be done in Congress, on Facebook, or Twitter.