Sophists have been perpetuated in the history of philosophy primarily due to their most fierce critic Plato and his Gorgias, where Socrates brings profound accusations against the practice of sophists and declares notoriously rhetoric to be a part of flattery (κολακεία, 463c). This paper focuses on the responses to sophists’ practices by Plato and Aristotle, analysing on the one hand criticism made on their practice, on the other, however, trying to evaluate in which respect the responses of the two philosophers differ. Thus, taking the polemic of sophists as a starting point, the paper moves forward into discussing the fundamental differences in the treatment of rhetoric as perceived by Plato and Aristotle. For this reason (and in order to present a fuller account of Plato’s theory of rhetoric) not only Plato’s Gorgias, but also his Phaedrus is incorporated to the following analysis.
Plato on sophists and rhetoric
In Gorgias Plato claims that rhetoric is not a τέχνη (462b) and his accusations against sophists or rhetoricians seem to be reducible to three closely related arguments: first, that rhetoric doesn’t have its own subject (that would make it a τέχνη); second (and most importantly) that it lacks the theoretical basis that is necessary for a τέχνη, and thirdly that rhetoric is used for morally base intentions and pursuits, which corrupt the souls of the citizenship (503a). And, as will be apparent below, a discussion of these problems is offered both in Plato’s theory of true rhetoric in Phaedrus as well as in Aristotle’s treatment of rhetoric in his Rhetoric.
Thus, the above presented accusations are latently put forward also in Phaedrus, where Plato presents his positive concept of rhetoric, yet which obviously sta...
... middle of paper ...
...or Plato actually) rhetoric ‘happens’ (McCabe 1994: 152), the sophistic practice has an impact on its audience and thus it must be possible to find out the underlying system of this practice (1.1.1) that would enable one to call it an art. Further, it seems that Aristotle’s response is in some sense more fundamentally a response to Plato, at least in terms of taking the problems Plato articulates in his Gorgias as well as in his Phaedrus into serious consideration, and building up his own theory that would not suffer of the problems demonstrated in Plato’s works. Thus, Aristotle is very profoundly in a dialogue with Plato, accepting some of his criticism against the sophists (rhetoric should be basically a rational practice, with morally-neutral pursuits), while rejecting others (the appeal to emotions plays an important part in Aristotle’s theory, for example).
Throughout Aristophanes’ “Clouds” there is a constant battle between old and new. It makes itself apparent in the Just and Unjust speech as well as between father and son. Ultimately, Pheidippides, whom would be considered ‘new’, triumphs over the old Strepsiades, his father. This is analogous to the Just and Unjust speech. In this debate, Just speech represents the old traditions and mores of Greece while the contrasting Unjust speech is considered to be newfangled and cynical towards the old. While the defeat of Just speech by Unjust speech does not render Pheidippides the ability to overcome Strepsiades, it is a parallel that may be compared with many other instances in Mythology and real life.
ABSTRACT: I analyse the dramatic setting of the Gorgias by contrasting it with that of the Protagoras. The two dialogues are closely related. In the Gorgias Socrates states that the rhetorician and the sophist are basically indistinguishable in everyday life. In both the Protagoras and the Gorgias, his confrontation with his interlocutors is metaphorically related to a descent to Hades. However, while the events in the Protagoras are narrated by Socrates himself, the Gorgias has readers face the unfolding events without mediation. The temporal and spatial framing of the Gorgias is indeterminate, while both aspects are described in detail in the Protagoras. I maintain that the magical passage from an indeterminate "outside" to an indeterminate "inside" in the Gorgias is significantly related to the characters' attitude towards the boundaries of each other's souls, which are constantly ignored or attacked. As a matter of fact, the dialogue presents a very impressive amount of anger and exchange of abuse, which never ceases until the end. I suggest that the temporal framing demonstrates that the beginning and the end of the dialogue are closely connected. Socrates unexpectedly arrives and refutes Gorgias by asking him unexpected questions. The last myth of judgment indicates that Gorgias' attitude is comparable to that of the mortals who lived during Kronos' age, while Socrates brings about a liberation from appearance which is analogous to the innovations brought about by Zeus.
In Plato’s Phaedrus, Socrates encounters Phaedrus who has just come from a conversation with Lysias. Phaedrus invites Socrates to walk with him and hear what he has learned from his conversation with Lysias. The two read and discuss Lysias’ speech, and then enter into a discussion on how one can become an expert in rhetorical speaking and on whether writing is beneficial and acceptable or the contrary. Socrates’ thoughts on the subjects of rhetoric and writing will be the main points of this paper.
Neo-Aristotelian criticism states, that in order to understand rhetoric we must first understand the motivations that caused the speaker to speak. The rise of partisan politics, narrowed the focus of Jefferson’s Inaugural Address. Therefore, to understand his motives, we must first understand the
In what is noted as one of Plato first accounts, we become acquainted with a very intriguing man known as Socrates; a man, whose ambition to seek knowledge, inevitably leaves a significant impact on humanity. Most of all, it is methodologies of attaining this knowledge that makes him so mesmerizing. This methodology is referred to as Socratic irony, in literature. In any case, I will introduce the argument that Plato's Euthyphro is extremely indicative of this type of methodology, for the reason being that: Socrates's portrays a sense of intellectual humility.
Aristotle on Rhetoric Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) was a Greek philosopher, educator, and scientist. He was able to combine the thoughts of Socrates and Plato to create his own ideas and definition of rhetoric. He wrote influential works such as Rhetoric and Organon, which presented these new ideas and theories on rhetoric. Much of what is Western thought today evolved from Aristotle's theories and experiments on rhetoric. Aristotle's Life Aristotle was born in 384 B.C., in Northern Greece.
In the text Phaedrus, Socrates and Phaedrus consider the nature of the soul in order to assess Lysias' speech, rhetoric in general, and the requirements of good rhetoric for a speaker and an audience. A chariot allegory is given to provide a separation between the rational and impulsive sides of man and suggest the ultimate pursuit of philosophy. Socrates explains the relation of madness to rhetoric by bringing attention to the good gifts that come out of madness, such as the noble lover. There are three lovers discussed throughout Phaedrus that Weaver parallels with the differing ways language can affect us. Through the evaluation of the soul, madness, and lovers, Plato's Phaedrus and Weaver's analysis of Phaedrus, function to provide several
...e, the ability to manipulate words for the means of persuasion do not always have positive results. In the hands of the ignorant and irrational, persuasion becomes an evil that plagues all those who come in contact with and conform to it, but when used by the knowledgeable and thoughtful, manipulation can provide for the betterment of a society, such as the peace that ensues Odysseus's vengeance when Athena persuades them to stop the futility. Homer teaches young Athenians to be aware of the dangers of manipulation, rhetoric, and persuasion, but he also shows that a man who can do such effectively is deemed a leader, and that those who cannot are mere followers.
Aristotle. On Rhetoric. The Rhetorical Tradition: Readings from Classical Times to the Present. 2nd ed. Ed. Trans. Patricia Bizzell & Bruce Herzberg. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2001. Book I, Chapter V. Print.
To begin, Plato’s view of rhetoric stems from his theory of the nature of reality known as Platonic realism. He argues that there are true forms of ideas that exist in a higher realm of being and thought. Essentially, there is a perfect template for every idea in the universe, including such concepts as good, justice and knowledge. These templates are the true abstract qualities of these ideas that individuals of the material realm cannot directly perceive with the senses, and so everything that exists within the worldly realm is actually a flawed copy or reflection of those perfect ideals, or absolutes. Basically, it is the qualities of an idea that make it what it is. For example, suppose one were to take the qualities of being a chair and deconstruct all the ideas there are about what chairs should be, thereby determining what constitutes “chairness”. This would eventually eliminate all the flaws that a chair could have, and then result in a concept of the perfect chair – or a true template. Furthermore, only someone with a highly trained ...
In Plato’s Gorgias, Socrates discusses the nature and uses of rhetoric with Gorgias, while raising moral and philosophical perspective of rhetoric. Socrates believes that rhetoric is a kind of false knowledge whose purpose is to produce conviction, and not to educate people about the true extent of knowledge (Plato 15). On the other hand, Gorgias argues that the study of rhetoric is essential in any other professional fields, in order to provide an effective communication (Plato 19). After their discussion of rhetoric, Socrates seems to understand the true extent of rhetoric better as compared to Gorgias, as he is able to use rhetoric appeals as a device to dominate the conversation. During their discussion, Socrates seems to have use rhetorical appeals, such as ethos appeal and pathos appeal to connect and convince the crowd of audiences, and logos appeal to support his claims. His speeches seems to have shown sarcastic aspects and constantly asking questions in order to keep Gorgias busy, at the same time preparing an ambush. Since rhetoric is the art of effective communication through the form of speaking and writing, with the appropriate knowledge and virtue, it can be used for good purposes. On the other hand, rhetoric also can be used as an act of conviction because rhetorical appeals can be defined as an act of persuasion as well. Learning the true extent of rhetoric can help an individual strengthen their verbal communication skills. Socrates uses rhetorical appeals of ethos, pathos and logos appeal to win his argument against Gorgias, as he is able to get the audiences’ attention through rhetoric and cornered Gorgias into revealing the true extent of rhetoric.
Well-versed speech was an essential factor in the construct of power. In Passage 3, the “quarrel” that arises between the two men is to be decided by “whoever spoke straightest in judgement” (Homer, Iliad XVIII, 547). Here, it is shown the justice system is built upon one’s speaking ability. Even though they could be the one in the wrong, the individual who
Plato's rhetoric uses dialogue and dialectic as a means of making meaning known. Anthony Petruzzi says that Plato’s “Truth is neither a correspondence with an "objective" reality, nor does it exist solely as a coherent relation to a set of social beliefs; rather, truth is concomitantly a revealing and a concealing, or a withdrawing arrival” (Petruzzi 6). However, for Plato truth becomes a matter of correspondence or correctness in “the agreement of the mental concept (or representation) with the thing” (Petruzzi 7). In other words, the tr...
Plato defines rhetoric as “the art of ruling the minds of men” (Bloom). The sophists were instructors in the disciplines of rhetoric and overall excellence. Their teachings thrived in the fifth century B.C. Through the work of Protagoras, Gorgias, Antiophon, and other sophists, the people of Athens gained higher education and stopped accepting everything they were taught as absolute fact. This questioning of traditional philosophical schools eventually led to the emergence of other ways of thought such as skepticism.
Let us start with some similarities between the two that will lead us to understand why Aristotle deviated from Plato’s beliefs on the arts. Both of these thinkers believed in the idea or the unchanging rational essence, which shapes everything we know. To them, nothing can be understood without understanding the idea or form of it. Aristotle however was more tolerant towards art and tried to rationalize the tragedies, for example, rather than reject them as Plato did. Even though, he did not explicitly say that he was countering Plato’s theories about art, in his writings that was what he