Teachers are Penultimate Sophists

At first the question “Are teachers penultimate sophists?” didn’t make sense to me. I couldn’t derive even a semblance of meaning from it and immediately thought “Did he mean ultimate? Are teachers ultimate sophists?” I could at least answer that. But, after some contemplation, I like the original question better.

My attention is drawn to the adjective, not the noun, in this question, but first I have to make a case that teachers are sophists. They are, or at least the good ones are. They teach the strategies of good rhetoric. They teach their students to use good timing, to make themselves as credible as possible, to think about arrangement and delivery. They teach students to add flavor to otherwise bland ideas. Sophistry carries with it a connotation of manipulation, which itself carries a negative connotation. But manipulation is actually a neutral term; the motive and result of manipulation should be evaluated and perhaps contested, but not necessarily the manipulation itself. Think of a parent who uses euphemistic language to soften tragic news for a child. That’s a manipulation without intent to deceive for personal gain, and shouldn’t be classified synonymously with a malicious deceit. At any rate, teachers may teach the strategies for manipulation, but few teach sophistry as it’s commonly (mis)understood, as the craft of deception.

Now on to the adjective: penultimate. I understand the word penultimate to mean second to last. Teachers as penultimate sophists means their students would be the last of the sophists, but then those students would eventually become the teachers, or the penultimate sophists. In other words, the question could be rephrased in this way: “Is education perpetuating sophistry?” We have no choice but to answer yes. We have 2500 years of sound evidence that teachers are, indeed, penultimate sophists.