Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Refine search results

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The paper aims at reconstructing the fundamentals of the sophistic anthropology. Contrary to the recognized view of the humanistic shift which took place in the sophistic thought, there is evidence that the sophists were continuously concerned with the problems of philosophy of nature. The difference between the sophists and their Presocratic predecessors was that their criticism of the philosophical tradition and the transformative answers given to the old questions were the basis and the starting point of the “ethical” and “rhetorical” part of their intellectual activity. This naturalistic perspective is reflected in their research in the field of medicine and biology, in the discussion about “the human nature”, and in their interest in the individual physiological and mental conditions, which determine the state of the human body and the behaviour of a man. The sophists pioneered in linguistic, rhetorical, and philological studies. To enhance the power of persuasion, they investigated how various mental conditions influenced cognitive processes and physiological reactions. Thus they started a thorough examination of the human psyche, initiating the field of psychology. Although the originality of the sophists in each of the aforementioned aspects is undeniable, a complete picture of the sophists can only be achieved by examining the sources of their thought: the Presocratic philosophical tradition, Hippocratic medicine, and earlier literary tradition.
2
100%
Folia Philosophica
|
2019
|
vol. 42
|
issue 2
5-19
EN
The paper is devoted to the sophistic method of "two-fold arguments" (antilogic). The traditional understanding of antilogic understood as an expression of agonistic and eristic tendencies of the sophists has been in recent decades, under the influence of G.B. Kerferd, replaced by the understanding of antilogic as an independent argumentative technique, having its own sources, essence, and goals. Following the interpretation of G.B. Kerferd, according to which the foundation of the antilogic is the opposition of two logoi resulting from contradictions or opposites, necessarily associated with contradictory character of the sensual world, in the paper it is argued that the philosophical basis of antilogic should be sought in the presentation of the views attributed to Protagoras and "adherents of flux" in Plato's dialogue Theaetetus.
PL
Artykuł poświęcony jest sofistycznej metodzie antylogicznej. Tradycyjne rozumienie antylogiki ujmowanej jako przejaw agonicznych i erystycznych skłonności sofistów i pod wpływem optyki Platona przeciwstawianej dialektyce zostało w ostatnich dekadach, pod wpływem pracy G.B. Kerferda, zastąpione rozumieniem antylogiki jako samoistnej techniki argumentacyjnej, mającej swe własne źródła, istotę i cele. Idąc za interpretacją G.B. Kerferda, wedle której fundamentem antylogiki jest opozycja dwu logoi wynikająca ze sprzeczności lub przeciwieństwa, w konieczny sposób związanego ze światem zmysłowym, w artykule dowodzi się, że filozoficznych podstaw antylogiki należy poszukiwać w przedstawieniu poglądów przypisywanych Protagorasowi w Platońskim dialogu Teajtet.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.