Plato

1
Plato
extremely important text not trying to refute
it or say that Plato got it wrong or
right purpose is to become familiar with his
position on the differences between rhetoric
(persuasion) and truth
Move 1 Socrates If a speech is to be good, must
not the mind of the speaker know the truth about
the matters of which he is to speak? Phaedrus On
that point, Socrates, I have heard that one who
is to be an orator does not need to know what is
really just, but what would seem just to the
multitude who are to pass judgment, and not what
is really good or noble, but what will seem to be
so for they say that persuasion comes from what
seems to be true, not from the truth. Socrates
Phaedrus, the word which the wise speak must not
be rejected, but we must see if they are right
so we must not pass by this which you just said
2
remember Socrates beef rhetoricians only
concerned with getting an audience to believe
something i.e. what seems to be true
Socrates wanted an audience to KNOW the truth,
not simply believe that something was true
example of speaker praising donkey by giving it
the qualities of a horse
example of speaker praising evil under the name
of good
question what is common to each of these
examples?

• knowledge of the differences between a horse and
  a donkey
• and
• certainty regarding the identity of evil and
  good

3
For Plato/Aristotle/you?/me?/just about everyone
Truth pre-exists speech and
speaker must know the truth BEFORE speaking
the role of speech is to transmit truth truth
stays the same forever, speech must be beholden
to truth
SPEECH
KNOWLEDGE
TRUTH
4
MOVE 2
BUT speech can fail to do its job Ex. Lysias
does not organize his speech correctly Socrates
- "the parts of the discourse are thrown out
helter-skelter."
and so, to make sure this doesn't
happen Socrates "every discourse must be
organized, like a living being, with a body of
its own, as it were, so as not to be headless or
footless, but to have a middle and members,
composed in fitting relation to each other and to
the whole" (264c).
this is an important point of contact between
rhetoric and science, right?
why would socrates use a bodily metaphor to make
this point? what does it do for him?
5
important distinction
1. in order to transmit truth, speeches must be
organically organized (i.e. as a body,
"naturally") presuppose absolute truth, one
truth all else false (a la Plato/Socrates)
2. in order to appear truthful, speeches should
be organically organized no need to
presuppose absolute truth, acknowledges
reciprocal relationship between truth and
presentation
different modes of writing/organizing/presentation
create different truth-effects (we'll take this
up again later)
6
MOVE 3
rhetoric has "the greater power" when speaking
about the "class of doubtful things"
Socrates. When one says "iron" or "silver," we
all understand the same thing, do we not?
Phaedrus. Surely. Socrates. What if he says
"justice" or "goodness"? Do we not part company,
and disagree with each other and with ourselves?
Phaedrus. Certainly.Socrates. Then in some
things we agree and in others we do not.
Phaedrus. True. Socrates. Then in which of the
two are we more easy to deceive, and in which has
rhetoric the greater power? Phaedrus. Evidently
in the class of doubtful things. (263a-263b)
7
topics suited for certainty/knowledge iron and
silver
proper domain of science
none shall pass
topics suited for belief/conviction justice
and goodness
proper domain of rhetoric
notice how socrates uses the example of a natural
object when he wants to point out how some things
simply arent doubtful Q why might he have done
this? what does it do for him?
8
review Platos moves
1. truth exists before speech rhetoric should be
a handmaiden to truth
2. speech and writing or presentation in
general - must be done correctly and in a way
which lets truth shine through in fitting
relation (organic) organization
3. demarcation of topics - some things can be
discussed scientifically (objects in nature,
physics, etc.) some cant (values, feelings,
things which cannot be absolutely decided
9
Aristotle (384 322 BCE, student of Plato, etc.,
etc.)
similar to Platos 3rd move, Aristotle is
concerned with distinguishing rhetoric from other
forms of study
The duty of rhetoric is to deal with such
matters as we deliberate upon without arts or
systems to guide us. () The subjects of our
deliberation are such as seem to present us with
alternative possibilities about things that
could not have been, and cannot now or in the
future be, other than they are, nobody who takes
them to be of this nature wastes his time in
deliberation rhetoric must deal with what is in
the main contingent (1357a).
10
ex. fever is sign of illness (irrefutable)
giving milk is sign of motherhood (irrefutable)
these are called complete proofs because the
proposition is necessarily true (not merely
generally true like refutable proofs in
rhetoric)
why would Aristotle select fever and mothers
milk as his examples here? what does it do for
him? notice how biological signs are said to
constitute irrefutable evidence
11
Aristotle also contributes an explicitly elitist
conception of rhetoric
The duty of rhetoric is to deal with such
matters as we deliberate upon without arts or
systems to guide us, in the hearing of persons
who cannot take in at a glance a complicated
argument, or follow a long chain of
reasoning and for we assume an audience of
untrained thinkers (1357a)
because they address audiences that are untrained
in logic, rhetoricians must stoop and can only
base their appeals on what audiences already know
or believe.
a rhetoricians most powerful tool is the
enthymeme
12
syllogism primary method of logical reasoning
ex. All men are mortal Socrates is a man
Socrates is mortal
primary premise
secondary premise
conclusion
The primary premise is always universal, and may
be positive or negative. The secondary premise
may also be universal or particular so that from
these premises it is possible to deduce a valid
conclusion
enthymeme often called the rhetoricians
syllogism
ex. All men are mortal Socrates is mortal
primary premise
conclusion
The speaker gives the primary premise and assumes
that the audience will supply the missing
knowledge in order to reach the conclusion
13
rhetoric employs the syllogism because it assumes
that audiences will be able to provide the
secondary premise which is necessary for the
conclusion to be reached
Ex. from Cheney on Monday
In the past decade Saddam has systematically
broken each of these agreements
unspoken claim breaking agreements is wrong
These are offensive weapons for the purpose of
inflicting death on a massive scale, developed so
that Saddam can hold the threat over the head of
anyone he chooses in his own region or beyond.
unspoken claim bullying neighbor states is not
to be tolerated
In that troubled land, all who seek justice and
dignity and the chance to live their own lives
know they have a friend and ally in the United
States of America.
unspoken claim the U.S. is an ally to all who
seek justice
14

• for Aristotle
• Of the modes of persuasion furnished by the
  spoken word there are three kinds
• The first kind depends on the personal character
  of the speakerwe believe good men more fully
  and readily than others
• (notice believe, not know)

2. the second on putting the audience into a
certain frame of mind persuasion may come
through the hearers, when the speech stirs

the
emotions
3. the third on the proof, or apparent proof,
provided by the words of the speech
itself (rhetoric only capable of apparent
proof, constrained by attitudes of the audience,
not suited for scientific inquiry)
15
rhetoric art of speaking/writing, concerned with
persuasion, argument, producing conviction in an
audience, situated with a particular time and
history, subjective, coercive, manipulates facts,
placed in opposition to truth
science uncovering nature, revealing truth,
concerned with the acquisition of knowledge, free
from biases of culture and human affairs,
objective, pursuit of pure knowledge, discovers
facts, uncovers eternal truths
how could these two pursuits ever become
intertwined?