# Socrates vs the Sophists: Truth vs Relativism in Ancient Athens

An episode of [Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle: The Thinkers Who Changed History — Fexingo History](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/1895380089), 29 Jul 2026, 8:00.

Audio: https://audio.fexingo.com/history/socrates-plato-and-aristotle/episode-0182.mp3

The Sophists were the rock stars of 5th century BCE Athens—paid teachers of rhetoric and virtue who made fortunes by claiming they could make any argument persuasive. But Socrates saw a dangerous emptiness in their relativism. This episode explores the intellectual battle between Socrates and his Sophist rivals: Protagoras, who declared 'Man is the measure of all things'; Gorgias, the master of persuasion who boasted he could make the weaker argument stronger; and Thrasymachus, who argued that justice is simply the interest of the stronger. We dig into Plato's dialogues—Protagoras, Gorgias, Theaetetus, and Republic—to show how Socrates used his method of cross-examination (elenchus) to expose the contradictions in their positions. The clash was not just academic: it framed the very definition of philosophy as a search for objective truth versus mere opinion. We also consider how the Sophists' emphasis on success and power resonated in Athenian democracy—and how Socrates' insistence on moral absolutes ultimately led to his trial and death. #Socrates #Sophists #Protagoras #Gorgias #Thrasymachus #Plato #AncientAthens #GreekPhilosophy #Rhetoric #Relativism #Elenchus #Ethics #Truth #5thCenturyBCE #HistoryOfIdeas #Philosophy #History #FexingoHistory Keep every episode free: buymeacoffee.com/fexingo

## Transcript

Lucas: Over the past few episodes we've gone deep into Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. But I want to pull back and look at the intellectual landscape Socrates walked into. Because Athens in the 5th century BC was full of traveling teachers called Sophists—and they were hugely popular.
Luna: What made them different from philosophers?
Lucas: Great question. The Sophists were professional educators who charged fees—sometimes enormous fees—to teach upper-class young men how to succeed in public life. They taught rhetoric, debate, and what they called 'virtue' or aretē. But for Socrates, that was the problem. He thought they were selling a shallow version of wisdom, focused on winning arguments rather than finding truth.
Luna: So he saw them as rivals?
Lucas: More than rivals—he saw them as a threat to genuine philosophy. The most famous Sophist was Protagoras of Abdera, who opened his book with the line: 'Man is the measure of all things.' That's a radical claim. It means truth is relative—what seems true to you is true for you, and what seems true to me is true for me. No objective standard. Socrates spent a lot of his life arguing against that.
Luna: I can see why that would bother him. If there's no truth, then ethics falls apart.
Lucas: Exactly. Plato's dialogue Protagoras shows Socrates directly challenging the old Sophist. Protagoras claims he can teach virtue as a practical skill—how to manage a household and city. But Socrates traps him into contradicting himself: if virtue can be taught, why don't good fathers produce good sons? Protagoras wriggles, but Socrates keeps pressing. It's a masterclass in showing how confident assertions collapse under questioning.
Luna: That's the elenchus—his cross-examination method.
Lucas: Exactly right. And then there was Gorgias of Leontini, a Sicilian who brought rhetoric to Athens in 427 BC, around the time of the Peloponnesian War. Gorgias was famous for claiming he could make any argument persuasive—even the wrong one. He said rhetoric is 'the art of persuasion in law courts and other assemblies.' For Socrates, that's terrifying. If persuasion is detached from truth, then the most charismatic speaker can lead the city to disaster.
Luna: Did they ever debate face to face?
Lucas: We don't have a historical record of that, but Plato wrote a dialogue called Gorgias where Socrates debates a student of Gorgias. In it, Socrates makes the shocking claim that it's better to suffer injustice than to commit it. That's the exact opposite of what the Sophists taught. Callicles—a character in the dialogue—represents the Sophistic view that might makes right, that the strong should dominate the weak. Socrates argues that true power is self-mastery, not domination.
Luna: So Socrates is laying the foundation for ethical philosophy.
Lucas: Absolutely. And not just ethics—epistemology, too. In the Theaetetus, Plato has Socrates take on Protagoras' 'man is the measure' claim head-on. If all perceptions are true, then why do we call some opinions wise and others foolish? Protagoras has to admit that some opinions are more useful—but that's a pragmatic criterion, not a truth criterion. Socrates shows that pure relativism leads to absurdity. If every opinion is true, then the opinion that Protagoras is wrong is also true—self-refutation.
Luna: That's clever—turning the argument on itself.
Lucas: It's a move you see a lot in Socrates. Now, the Sophists weren't all bad—they introduced the idea that virtue could be taught and they democratized education to some extent. But they had a reputation for making the weaker argument stronger, and that drew criticism from conservatives as well. Aristophanes' play The Clouds mocks both Socrates and the Sophists, lumping them together—that confusion actually contributed to Socrates' trial.
Luna: So the public saw them as the same kind of troublemaker?
Lucas: Exactly. The average Athenian didn't distinguish between a philosopher asking 'What is justice?' and a Sophist teaching how to win a lawsuit unfairly. Both seemed to undermine tradition. And it's worth noting that the Sophists charged huge fees—Protagoras is said to have charged over 100 minas for a full course, which was several years' wages for a craftsman. That made them elite, and Socrates—who never charged—was poor. That contrast mattered.
Luna: It's a big contrast—and it made Socrates look more authentic.
Lucas: It did. And it makes me think about our own work here. We do this show because we love history and philosophy, and we try to keep it ad-free and listener-supported. Quick honest thing—a handful of our listeners chip in monthly through buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo, and that literally funds making episodes like this one. No ads, no sponsors—just people who find value in the conversations.
Luna: I think that's why the episodes feel genuine—there's no product pushing.
Lucas: Exactly. So to everyone who already supports us, thank you. And for anyone considering it, every bit helps keep the show going. Now, back to the Sophists—there's a third figure worth mentioning: Thrasymachus. He appears in Plato's Republic, and he's the one who famously says 'Justice is the advantage of the stronger.' He's angry, aggressive, and he speaks for the view that morality is just a tool the powerful use to control the weak.
Luna: He sounds like a real antagonist.
Lucas: He is—probably the most dramatic opponent Socrates ever faced in a dialogue. Thrasymachus bursts in and attacks Socrates' naivety. But Socrates calmly dismantles his argument: if rulers make mistakes, then justice might be the advantage of the stronger—or not? Thrasymachus ends up blushing, as Plato says. It's a brilliant depiction of how arrogance crumbles under logical scrutiny.
Luna: So Plato is showing the Sophist as a dangerous but ultimately defeatable figure.
Lucas: Exactly. And that pattern—the philosopher asking questions, the Sophist making grand claims—shaped Western philosophy's self-image. Aristotle carried it on: his Rhetoric is partly a response to Gorgias, trying to rehabilitate rhetoric as a tool for truth rather than manipulation. He says rhetoric can be used to argue both sides, but the rhetorician should aim for what is truly persuasive, not just what works.
Luna: So the debate didn't end with Socrates.
Lucas: Not at all. The Sophist tradition continued. In fact, the Roman Empire was full of Sophists—the so-called Second Sophistic of the 2nd century AD. But the core distinction Socrates established—between the pursuit of truth and the mere art of persuasion—remained central. Whenever someone accuses philosophy of being all talk, or when we hear 'that's just rhetoric,' we're echoing this ancient battle.
Luna: It's amazing how alive these ideas still are.
Lucas: They really are. And the next time you hear someone claim truth is relative, remember Protagoras. Remember that Socrates showed that if everyone is right, then no one is. The Sophists were the original relativists, and Socrates—along with Plato and Aristotle—built the case for objective knowledge and ethical absolutes. That's a legacy that still challenges us today.
Luna: I think that's a great place to leave it.
Lucas: Me too. Until next time, keep asking questions.

Shows are listed from Apple Podcasts' charts and directory, and Podcast Index where it is used. Every show and episode belongs to its publisher and plays from the publisher's own feed; this site hosts none of them.