The Sophists were an ancient greek school of philosophy and teaching (loosely speaking) active in the 5th and 4th centuries BCE. What we know about them is fairly limited, driven by a highly critical accounting in Socrates' (edit: Plato's) writing and not a lot else that isn't centuries removed accounts, but its probably fair to say that they were rhetoricians who prioritised winning arguments by rhetorical flourishes, verbal traps and relativistic dissection, often for profit. They were paid teachers and professed to be able to teach virtue.

Some of the accounts of their positions verge on cynicism, extreme subjectivity and even nihilism.

When trying to pin down JP on basically anything, he retreats into motte-and-bailey arguments, arguing on the inherent openness of the meaning of words ("do you believe in X?" "what even is a belief?" etc), refusing to make clear statements of his positions that would then be open to attack. This too, seems to share some of the extreme subjectivity verging on nihilism attributed to the sophists.

JP also purports to teach virtue, for profit. There's a lot of interesting overlaps.

Do you think characterising JP as a sophist holds any weight?