Answer:
The British did not suffer the hardships the Indians faced.
Explanation:
The period when Britain ruled India was <em>full of hardships over native Indians.</em> Indians were not just the slaves of the administration of the monarch but every British who was rich. Moreover, the purpose of Britain to come to India was never the development of the state. They were just there to exploit the natural resources India had. And native Hindu's accepted their rule because they got tired of seeing <em>Afghanis and Persians</em> invading their territory and establishing kingdoms, in other words, they were looking to have some power as well. And in that process, they tried everything to get the blessings of Britain monarch over them and in contrast for Muslims, it was hard for them to accept slavery because they used to own slaves and hence they were also trying to get the blessings of the monarch. So there was a kind of competition over who would get close to Britain. And in all that confusion British were utilizing them. So, the imperialism wasn't easy or fruitful for Indians albeit it was for Britain.
B. Taxation without representation
The main difference between the Sophists and the other philosophers is that the Sophists were essentially rhetoric teachers, while the other philosophers were more interested in seeking the truth.
The Sophists were rhetoric teachers, and their focus was on the art of persuasion by using language. They were wise intellectual people, and they tried to use and teach their abilities of persuasion by using language to the wider masses.
The philosophers, on the other hand, were focused on knowing the truth, they wanted to be wiser by knowing the truth instead of dogmatically stand by the false beliefs. So they were trying to teach the wider masses the ways as to how to come to the truth and wisdom.
