Ashamed to Be Called Sophists
Read the full text in our reader
Phaedrus — οἱ μέγιστον δυνάμενοί τε καὶ σεμνότατοι ἐν ταῖς πόλεσιν αἰσχύνονται λόγους τε γράφειν καὶ καταλείπειν συγγράμματα ἑαυτῶν δόξαν φοβούμενοι… μὴ σοφισταὶ καλῶνται.
Phaedrus makes a shrewd sociological observation, and it opens the dialogue's real subject. The men who wield the most power and enjoy the most dignity in political life, he says, are actually 'ashamed' — aischynontai — to write speeches and to 'leave behind writings of their own,' syngrammata heautōn. What holds them back is doxa, their reputation, and one fear in particular: 'lest they be called sophists.' The word sophistēs lands with a thud of contempt. In Phaedrus's Athens it named the celebrated, resented class of paid teachers of rhetoric — men suspected of selling cleverness and teaching people to win arguments rather than to find truth. To leave a signed written work, Phaedrus reports, was to risk that label sticking to you forever. The powerful would rather act and speak than write and be catalogued, for centuries, among the sellers of words.
Socrates teases Phaedrus for thinking Lysias so easily rattled. Phaedrus defends the point with an observation about public life: even the most powerful and respected men in the cities are ashamed to write speeches and leave written works under their own names — for fear that posterity will call them 'sophists.' The remark opens the dialogue's long reckoning with writing itself.
It is worth pausing on how strange Phaedrus's observation sounds to us, because the strangeness is the point. In our world, leaving behind books is precisely how a powerful or serious person secures a dignified reputation; the memoir, the treatise, the collected papers are monuments. Phaedrus reports the opposite: that the greatest men of his city are ashamed to write and fear that a signed syngramma will get them filed among the sophists. To understand this you have to grasp how unsettled the standing of writing still was in fourth-century Athens. Wisdom, in the older Greek understanding, lived in living speech — in the give-and-take of conversation, the memorized poem, the argument that could answer back. A written text was something newer and more suspect: fixed, silent, unable to defend or explain itself, exposed to every future reader's misreading. To commit your thought to writing was to perform it for an audience you would never meet, and that performance looked uncomfortably like what the sophists did for money. Plato is setting all of this up with great deliberateness, and with an irony he clearly savors. He is about to have Socrates deliver, at the dialogue's climax, a devastating critique of the written word — the myth of Theuth, the claim that writing weakens memory and can only remind, never teach, the image of texts as paintings that stand mute when questioned. And he is delivering that critique inside a written dialogue of surpassing artistry, one that has survived precisely because it was written down. The tension is not an oversight; it is Plato's deepest move. He shares the powerful men's suspicion of the dead, defenseless text, and he shows us, in the very act of reading, what writing at its best can still do — not replace living thought, but point toward it, provoke it, keep the conversation going across twenty-four centuries. The shame of the sophist-label is the door; behind it lies Plato's lifelong question of whether philosophy can survive being written at all.
Read the full commentary — and tap any word for its dictionary entry — in the interlinear reader.
Open Phaedrus 257d in the full reader
Always open passages in the reader
You are reading a page of the Phaedrus — the whole book is free in our interlinear reader.
The Great Library Project presses the classics in their original languages, glossed word by word — free to read, always. Browse the whole library.
Also on our shelves:
Phaedrus 257d — The Great Library Project interlinear edition · greatlibraryproject.com/book/phaedrus/257d/