Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
This is really the extent of Gorgias attempting to remove himself from Socrates' argument, but instead, pulls him deeper into the intellectual trap, for Gorgias has only one misgiving about the entire situation . . . he fears that the crowd of onlookers might be disinterested in two men trying to outdo each other in being wrong (458b-c). Thus, Gorgias proves two things: he cannot intellectually handle a multi-layered discussion and he needs an audience in order to perform -- the basics of dialog and intellectual discourse are lost upon him. If then, Gorgias needs an audience, Socrates must be correct in that rhetoric is a craft -- designed not for serious intellectual combat, but for pure entertainment value.
2.Explain and critically evaluate Socrates reasoning for the apparently preposterous claim that tyrants like orators have no great power (Gorgias 466a-468e). You should make sure that you take into account Socrates distinction between doing what one wants and doing what one sees fit. How does Socrates argue for this distinction? How crucial to Socrates argument is it? Is there any such distinction or is Socrates simply mistaken? or, even worse, is Socrates merely playing word games.
One of the primary claims within the entire dialog focuses on Socrates' view of the wielding of real power. He advances the idea that "orators and tyrants have the very least power in any of our cities" (466d). By putting rulers (tyrants) and practitioners of rhetoric into the same category, Socrates indicates that both groups, think they are doing what is in the best interest of themselves to further their means, but in fact...
Doing what is morally rights, however, may be unpopular, may be grounds for the mob turning, but it is still right. Rhetoric, then, is window dressing, comparable to pastry baking and cosmetics as opposed to medicine and gymnastics -- one is a quick fix and a surface dressing; not long lasting, not moral, not real; the other takes time, effort and work (464c-465d). This difference between the wants of humans and the needs of humans juxtaposed between the surface thought of rhetoric opposed to intellectual philosophy, forms the basis for Socrates' entire argument.
At times, one could read into the work that Socrates was playing word games. For instance, when Socrates agrees to asking and answering his own questions because there seems to be an intellectual stalemate (505d). Yet, when one steps back to view the methodology of Socrates within the structure of this set of dialogs, Socrates does posit that there are true and verifiable differences between base instincts and morals. In showing that he is both a good sport and sees the value of comedic self-deprecation, the reiterates that he was serious about the best use of rhetoric -- best used against one's self. A man who has done evil is wretched, but a man who does evil and is never caught is worse off (509b).
REFERENCES
Plato. Translated and revised by E.R. Dodds. (2003). Gorgias. Oxford University Press.
REFERENCES
Plato. Translated and revised by E.R. Dodds. (2003). Gorgias. Oxford University Press.
Plato's (and Socrates') Criticism of Rhetoric in "Gorgias" In Plato's philosophical work entitled "Gorgias," the philosopher's criticism of the method of rhetoric as a form of persuasion is the primary focus of Plato's written work. In the said philosophical and ethical discourse, Plato uses the character of Socrates as the 'voice' or transmitter of the message that Plato wants to extend to his readers/audience. "Gorgias" is a philosophical discourse in that
Plato's theory of Being and Becoming, and its relations to the forms, is rooted in the dichotomy between being and not-being. Prior to Socrates the Sophists, from Parminedes to Gorgias, had argued that because it was impossible by definition for Nothing to exist, it was impossible to describe or vocalize a negative state, and therefore also impossible to utter falsehood. "And now arises the greatest difficulty of all. If
Gorgias, Encomium of Helen In the English language in the twenty-first century, the term "sophistry" still exists to refer to a plausible-sounding but misleading argument, an evaluatively negative term to describe bad reasoning. Although the term derives from the original Sophists in Athens in the 5th century BCE, the modern usage of the term is inaccurate in describing the likes of the Sophist Gorgias. By examining Gorgias' "Encomium of Helen" and
Plato Gorgias Based on your interpretation of "The Gorgias," what is the relationship between philosophy and politics, in a democracy? How does the debate between Callicles and Socrates inform your answer to this question? In the dialogue entitled "Gorgias," the title character, a teacher of rhetoric, does rhetorical battle with the philosopher Socrates. Several individuals enter the dialogue, most notably Callicles, whom over the course of this dialogue emerges as a rather
Socrates asked them to come forward with their thoughts if they were "still doubtful about the argument." The two proceed to make a sophisticated argument, contrary to Socrates' points, that were counterexamples to the points about the body and the soul that Socrates had been making with such eloquence. It was cross-examination, but it was also a series of new hypotheses that Cebes and Simmias presented to the philosopher
Thucydides and Plato had conflicting methods in their attitudes toward the good life. Thucydides demonstrates empirical thinking in his readings of human nature and comportment throughout the Peloponnesian War and Plato demonstrates normative thinking in the writing within his books and discourses in particular Gorigia. Plato's interpretations of a good life revolve on principles that an individual has reached contentment. What contentment means to Plato is a person who has