Page:Ferrier Works vol 2 1888 LECTURES IN GREEK PHILOSOPHY.pdf/242

Rh to our notice: first, as teachers generally; and, secondly, as philosophers. In his account and defence of the Sophists, which you will find in vol. viii. of his 'History of Greece,' Mr Grote has stated that the Sophists were not properly a sect, but were merely a class or profession. By a sect is meant a society which is held together by a unanimity of sentiment and opinion; by a class or profession is meant a body of men who exercise a particular vocation, but who do not all practise it in the same way, or necessarily agree in their doctrines. For example, it cannot be said of the professors in our universities that they are a sect. We can only say of them that they are a class. They all teach; but they do not all teach the same doctrines or in the same way. In like manner, says Mr Grote, the Sophists were not a sect they had no common groundwork of opinion, they were merely teachers; and each man taught what he pleased to the best of his ability and in his own way. It seems to me, however, more correct to say that, viewed merely as general teachers, the Sophists were a class or profession; but that, viewed as philosophers, they properly constituted a sect. For although they may have differed a good deal in their philosophical opinions, they all agreed, as we shall see, in assuming a common principle as the basis of their speculations. And accordingly I have laid down these two points of view under which I think they may be regarded: first, their character as general teachers, in which