Nevar saprast tavu komentāru, norādi avotu.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

man vienalga. starp citu, zini, kāda ir viena no sofistu pazīmēm? ja ticētu viņiem, sanāktu, ka viņi nekad nekļūdās abstraktos jautājumos

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Nu, skaidrs, ja tu nedefinē un neeksplicē metafiziskas teorijas, ir diezgan grūti pieļaut kļūdas. Tu runā par kādu konkrētu sofistu (Protagoru, Gorgiju?), kas tā ir apgalvojis, vai arī izmanto to kā virtuālo salmu maisu?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

es runāju par to, ka sofismi darbojas sliktāk pret faktiem, bet ir diezgan uzticami pret abstraktiem argumentiem dabiskajā valodā

(Reply to this) (Parent)

tas nav uzaicinājums uz droņīšanas sacensībām

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Tevi izglābj tas, ka sofisti, precīzāk, Gorgijs par to tiešām runā:

Gorgias is the author of a lost work: On Nature or the Non-Existent. Rather than being one of his rhetorical works, it presented a theory of being that at the same time refuted and parodied the Eleatic thesis. [Eleatic thesis: everything is One and unchanging] The work developed a sceptical argument, which has been extracted from the sources and translated as below:

• Nothing exists;
• Even if something exists, nothing can be known about it; and
• Even if something can be known about it, knowledge about it can't be communicated to others.

The argument has largely been seen as an ironic refutation of Parmenides' thesis on Being. Gorgias set out to prove that it is as easy to demonstrate that being is one, unchanging and timeless as it is to prove that being has no existence at all.

(Reply to this) (Parent)