https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/08/liz_cheneys_agony.html
The professor reminded me that there is a difference between an argument in the sense of what the ancient Greeks called an “eristic,” a “fight with words,” and a rational argument in the very different sense that is oriented solely towards discovering the truth. The ancient Greeks saw eristic as an “agon” (the root is the same as that of the English word “agony”). But an agon is simply a contest to see who is stronger in some respect, that is, to pick a winner, e.g., the heavyweight champ. But that has nothing per se to do with finding the truth.
In his dialogue titled “Euthydemus” Plato holds an eristic agon, the standard practice of the ancient Greek Sophists, up to ridicule. The Sophists were, roughly, a band of pseudo-philosophers, “mouths for hire” that used deceptive techniques to win arguments and make money, not to find the truth. Plato was, in this dialogue and others, attempting for the first time in human history to create the sort of refined conceptual apparatus needed to distinguish between a mere eristic contest (agon) and a rational argument governed by the sort of rules designed to lead to the truth.
| 