Sophist vs Socrates During class, we were presented with an article called “The Ivy League, Mental Illness, and the Meaning of Life,” written by William Deresiewicz, a former Yale English professor. In this article, Deresiewicz explains how an elite education can lead to a cycle of grandiosity and depression in adolescents. He believes the nation’s most prestigious schools are full of “excellent sheep” because they just follow instructions without thinking why they are doing it. They have not been given the opportunity to find their own path in life. Deresiewicz thinks these schools are flawed and that we are creating a society where some kids are animals in a scientific experiment. People may argue that this article can be similar to Sophist or Socrates teachings. To begin with, Socrates was a Greek philosopher, who cared nothing for appearance and was only interested in the mind. His face was unbelievably ugly and disproportionate but it did not matter to Socrates. He was disliked because he challenged the people and the state where he lived. Socrates was known for questioning assumptions and challenging the way things are. He believed “the unexamined life is not worth living,” so people should always find out the reason why they do certain things in their life. This seems nothing like the students Deresiewicz described in his article. None of the students examine their life like Socrates would want them to, they just follow instructions. Since the students are nothing like Socrates, they must be similar to Sophist. First, Sophism is a method of teaching in Ancient Greece, where teachers use techniques of philosophy and rhetoric to use in arguments. They teach you how to win arguments, solely not to search for the truth. Sophists, which is Greek for expert, were mainly interested in ideas that were politically useful. “They thought about how people, acting as