Gorgias

"Gorgias" begins with Socrates speaking to Callicles and Chaerephon about Gorgias. Socrates has heard of Gorgias' ability to answer any question presented to him and Socrates wished to find him in order to challenge this claim. Gorgias presents himself in a proud and boastful manner saying he is an orator and “a good one, if you want to call me what, in Homer’s phrase, ‘I booast myself to be’” (p. 6). In a back and forth dialogue of questions and answers, the two men discuss the art of oratory. They come to the conclusion that the object of oratory (rhetoric) is the persuasion of others. Out of this definition comes the important question of whether people are persuaded by the truth or by flattery. Gorgias holds that a rhetorician is more convincing than an expert in a subject area because people are convinced by flattery. Polus, a student of Gorgias, enters the conversation with Socrates to defend his teacher. He and Socrates discuss the meaning of power and whether it is always good for the person who holds it. In addition, they discuss the differences between committing wrongs and being punished versus committing wrongs and escaping punishments.

In reading the first half of the book I felt a theme of competition. Tensions were high throughout most of the dialogue with the quick back and forth responses. Socrates originally seeks out Gorgias because he wants to test his skills, which demonstrates a feeling of antagonism from the start. Later when Polus defends Gorgias, Socrates belittles him by commenting on his young age, sarcastically remarking how the young folks should correct the old folks like himself when the mess up their words. I found myself picturing a modern day athlete who thinks he is the best at a particular skill and feels the need to challenge anyone who claims to be able to outperform them. For example, in the most recent Seahawks game, Richard Sherman (Seahawks) and Michael Crabtree (49ers) ended in the game in a brawl because Crabtree had previously claimed he was the best receiver and Sherman was determined to outperform him. He did so by deflecting a touchdown pass intended for Crabtree. The two players ended on the game on a heated note with Sherman claiming he was in fact, the best corner in the league. In a similar way to how these two players have challenged each other verbally and on the field, Socrates is challenging other rhetoricians through the Socratic method.

The actual structure of the work is interesting because it is arranged like a play script with character’s names and their quotes following after. I think Plato was making a rhetorical move by structuring his piece like this rather than writing his thoughts about oratory, power, and virtue in a scholarly essay style. Instead of telling the reader what he thinks, he presents his ideas through the voice of Socrates, his teacher. I believe this is more powerful because it removes Plato from the situation and allows the reader to have more freedom in determining whose ideas they agree with in the different dialogues. For modern day students of rhetoric, the goal of the subject is often to consider multiple sides of an argument and open up discussion. By using the Socratic method, Plato is setting an example of how dialogues can be conducted to discuss difficult concepts, a strategy that is very helpful in many modern classrooms. In addition, I think using Socrates as a figurehead for his ideas was a way for Plato to deal with the recent execution of his beloved teacher because it helps bring him back to life, even if only in written words.

Questions for discussion:

1. Gorgias answers several of the questions shortly while Socrates elaborates on his responses and often seems to be forcing Gorgias into certain answers. Do you think Gorgias is being presented in a more negative light because he was speaking less than Socrates in their back and forth dialogue?

2. Socrates and Polus discuss wrongs that have gone both punished and unpunished. Do you think it is worse for someone to commit a wrong and escape punishment or commit a wrong and be punished?

The Sophists

After reading the first four chapters of The Sophists: Rhetoric, Democracy, and Plato's Idea of Sophistry I have a much better understanding of who the most significant Sophists were, what their main teachings and purposes consisted of, and the contributions they made to society as a whole. The notions of humanism and subjectivity that Sophists introduced to Greek society were their most valuable contribution. Although Athenians were not completely receptive of the Sophists notions, it is a great thing that these ideas survived. Consider life in America today without them... Much of our democracy is based around the idea that people are capable of change and that people are allowed to think differently about certain issues because we are each shaped by our own experiences and perceptions.

The current abortion debate is a very relevant example of how these concepts define the foundations of our democracy. The pro-life and pro-choice debate (along with all other contemporary debates) exists because one side is attempting to convince the other side of their truth. Convincing others to agree with you is only possible if the notion of humanism exists --- that people are capable of change. If people are not capable of change, debate would be unnecessary because no one would ever be swayed towards a new direction. In addition, the fact that both sides (pro-life and pro-choice) still exist with great support for each shows the power of subjectivity in our society. This allows others to accept that people may not agree with them but it is because they perceive the issue at hand in a different light based on their individual experiences and opinions. Without the notion of subjectivity, all people would have been forced to agree with one side or the other by now.

After reading about the five most prominent Sophists who were teachers in Ancient Greece, I found it interesting that the oldest teacher, Protagoras, seemed to introduce ideas most similar to our democratic concepts today. His ideas that "virtue could be taught, that men could improve their condition through education, and that competent, educated men deserved society's respect and rewards" seem most similar to the today's democracy (p. 10).  Looking at past presidents, most have been very well educated and follow Protagoras' notion that educated men will be the most respected and rewarded. I also found myself considering the jail system in our country as a representation of the idea that virtue can be taught and men can improve their own conditions. If we did not believe this, criminals would most likely be killed immediately upon conviction. The jail system today provides a way to avoid this extreme measure but it only exists because we believe people are capable of change, growth, and learning. After all, the hopes for a criminal placed in jail is that they will come to understand their wrongs and make personal changes so that they may one day leave prison with a second chance. Protagoras' idea that all people are equal before the law is also an accurate representation of our democracy today, which defends the equal rights of all Americans.

As a future law student, the Sophists contributions to debate and the legal realm were interesting to me. Sophists were the first teachers of rhetoric, and in turn, they became the first influencers of debate in court. They unsettled Greek society by suggesting that there are two sides to every argument, authority can be challenged, and speech strategies exist that can influence the opinions of others. Although rhetorical debate in courts today is not as stylistic or poetic as some of the Sophists' teachings were, its roots grew from their teachings of oratory that gave people the skills to deliver speeches powerful enough to influence the courts and the Assembly.


For class discussion:

1. Do you agree that Protagoras' teachings are most in line with our democratic notions today? If not, which of the five Sophists would you suggest is more consistent with America's democratic system and why?

2. Although many of the Sophists' contributions are considered valuable today, the Athenians believed they were the cause of instability in Greek life at the time of their introduction. Do you think the Athenians were justified in their reactions to the Sophists' teachings? Why or why not?