As the demand for slaves grew, the Portuguese began to enter the interior of Africa to forcibly take captives; as other Europeans became involved in the slave trade, generally they remained on the coast and purchased captives from Africans who had transported them from the interior.
Both sophists and philosophers were well trained and highly educated, but the main difference was that a sophist taught others and they got paid for that. It is said that their own wealth was their only goal.
Philosophers, such as Socrates, refused to get paid.
Throughout history, the sophists have had a reputation as professionally amoral, . They would help people to attain any goal, regardless of what it was. They would take any case, promote any cause, and empower any person, if the money was right.
Philosophers, for the most part, have walked on the side of the angels. They may sometimes have had reputations as prolix and obscure, complex and abstract, out of touch, but they have, for the most part, seemed to be purer souls in their focus and work.
In other words, the sophists were much more concerned about how than about why. The philosophers have always been more cautious.
Tiberius' ideas of land reform should win him few friends in the senate. Gracchus now replied by applying his own veto as Tribune to every sort of action by government,bringing the rule of roman to a standstill
i think the answer is the third one
