Sophistry

Sophism in the modern definition is a specious argument used for deceiving someone. In ancient Greece, sophists were a category of teachers who specialized in using the tools of philosophy and rhetoric for the purpose of teaching aretê — excellence, or virtue — predominantly to young statesmen and nobility. The practice of charging money for education (and providing wisdom only to those who can pay) led to the condemnations made by Plato (through Socrates in his dialogues). Plato regarded their profession itself as being ‘specious’ or ‘deceptive’, hence the modern meaning of the term.

Advertisements

29 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Kim
    Dec 14, 2011 @ 10:26:03

    Readers may recall that great speech on race in Philadelphia in 2008 in which he said he could no more turn his back on the Rev. Jeremiah Wright than he could his grandmother. As a lifelong baseball fan, I knew that speech. General managers give such backing to a beleaguered field manager. It is code for pack your bags. Six weeks later, Obama kicked Wright to the curb.

    http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/47892

    Reply

    • Sherry
      Dec 14, 2011 @ 11:12:53

      LOL!

      Didn’t Roosevelt go on to lose in 1912? I sure hope that by channeling the original President Roosevelt, President Obama meets the same fate in 2012.

      Reply

    • Sherry
      Dec 14, 2011 @ 21:55:30

      “The fatal defect is the American people are far too intelligent, they have too much common sense to be deluded by the shallow sophistries of the Roosevelt Socialism,” the editorial said. “But the Colonel had to do something, his party was going to pieces.”

      Alas, the editorial writer overestimated the intellectual capabilities of his countrymen. We fell for the shallow sophistries of super socialism.

      😦 I wish what the writer had said was true and true to this day.

      Reply

  2. Dawgbert
    Dec 14, 2011 @ 10:57:18

    I guess you could’nt take the heat on previous page.
    LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply

  3. Kim
    Dec 14, 2011 @ 11:08:38

    Reply

  4. Sherry
    Dec 14, 2011 @ 11:15:51

    Hitting the follow-up comments box to be sure-then I’m off to paint my closet!

    Reply

  5. Kim
    Dec 14, 2011 @ 11:16:25

    Our Attorney General, the same one who wouldn’t prosecute OBVIOUS voter intimidation, now leads the “it’s racism!” charge this election season with a speech signaling his department will be wasting resources by looking into State Voter ID laws.

    http://floppingaces.net/2011/12/14/holder-ignores-voter-intimidation-but-will-go-after-voter-id-requirements/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+FloppingAces+%28Flopping+Aces%29

    Reply

    • Kim
      Dec 14, 2011 @ 11:17:02

      I find it quite humorous when people give the argument that forcing someone to have ID to vote will somehow suppress minorities. Is it not racist to believe that they aren’t capable of get an ID? Even the very poor must have ID when spending their welfare money. So who is being racist here?

      Reply

  6. Kim
    Dec 14, 2011 @ 11:26:01

    Woe is President Obama. His re-election already clouded by a bad economy and a chaotic world, he has picked a lousy time to run against the DNA of America.

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/12/breaking-voters-are-smart-fear-government-most/

    Reply

  7. Kim
    Dec 14, 2011 @ 11:39:09

    The Obama information collection effort is cast under the mischievous guise of asking Obama supporters to “have a little fun at the expense of a Republican in your life” by signing them up to get an email from the Obama campaign ribbing them for having “inspired” the Obama supporter to donate.

    The result, however, is that the Obama campaign gets a new trove of Republican email addresses that it could never have collected through voluntary submissions.

    http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2011/12/14/obama-campaign-collecting-republican-emails/

    Reply

  8. Kim
    Dec 14, 2011 @ 11:41:21

    Unfavorable views of Barack Obama inched to their highest level of his presidency in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll, but he’s still more popular than his front-running potential Republican challenger, Newt Gingrich.

    And then there are views of the economy, which make both look almost good by comparison.

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/unfavorable-views-of-obama-reach-a-high-although-gingrich-trails-in-popularity/

    Reply

  9. Kim
    Dec 14, 2011 @ 11:59:24

    The American Civil Liberties Union sued the state of Wisconsin on Tuesday over its law that will require voters to present official identification, claiming it is unconstitutional and will deprive citizens of their right to vote.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/13/us-usa-campaign-wisconsin-idUSTRE7BC2CH20111213?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews&rpc=22&sp=true

    Reply

  10. Kim
    Dec 14, 2011 @ 12:05:24

    Today: Obama’s Car Czar, “We Never Said Taxpayers Would Get Auto Bailout Money Back” – Before: Obama Triumphantly Declares All Taxpayer Funds Will Be Recovered…

    http://weaselzippers.us/2011/12/14/today-obamas-car-czar-we-never-said-taxpayers-would-get-auto-bailout-money-back-before-obama-triumphantly-declares-all-taxpayer-funds-will-be-recovered/

    Obama said Thursday that the government will recover all of the taxpayer money used in the auto industry bailout last year and held it up as an example of “a good story” in his administration’s economic efforts.

    Reply

  11. Kim
    Dec 14, 2011 @ 12:24:13

    Reply

  12. Kim
    Dec 14, 2011 @ 12:28:49

    Reply

  13. Kim
    Dec 14, 2011 @ 13:38:53

    In an interview with KOAA-TV, a local news channel from Colorado Springs, Colorado, President Obama says if Congress is not willing to pass legislation he wants, he will do it himself in order to win another term.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/12/14/obama_where_congress_is_not_willing_to_act_were_going_to_go_ahead_and_do_it_ourselves.html

    Reply

  14. Kim
    Dec 14, 2011 @ 14:03:54

    Reply

  15. Kim
    Dec 14, 2011 @ 14:21:25

    Reply

  16. Kim
    Dec 14, 2011 @ 14:23:54

    Justia is a Google Mini-powered website which has singled itself out as one of the most comprehensive and easy-to-search legal sites on the internet. Other legal resources such as Lexis can cost as much as $5,000 a month for a subscription, and it’s impossible to hyperlink to cases which include copyrighted headnotes and analysis. This is why powerful law firms such as Perkins Coie (where former Obama White House Counsel Bob Bauer practices law) have cited Justia’s pages.

    The Wayback Machine, run by InternetArchive.Org, is the means by which the changes made at Justia were documented over time. Among the first responses from Justia regarding this controversy was to block its Supreme Court Server from being viewed by the Wayback Machine.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/justiagate_natural_born_supreme_court_citations_disappear.html

    Reply

    • Kim
      Dec 14, 2011 @ 14:24:35

      At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. (Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 167 [1874])

      Reply

  17. Kim
    Dec 15, 2011 @ 17:16:16

    Arizona Republican Rep. Paul Gosar’s office announced on Thursday morning that it has 73 cosponsors on its House of Representatives resolution of “no confidence” in Attorney General Eric Holder’s ability to serve.

    Between the 59 congressmen demanding that Holder resign and those who have signed onto Gosar’s resolution, there are now a total of 85 members of Congress

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/15/73-cosponsors-sign-house-resolution-of-no-confidence-in-ag-eric-holder/

    Reply

  18. Sherry
    Dec 15, 2011 @ 17:49:34

    Something I didn’t know-today is Bill of Rights Day. It is 220 years old.

    Reply

  19. Kim
    Dec 15, 2011 @ 17:55:48

    I saw that earlier

    Now we have to keep this regime from trying to take it away

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: