Arnav Agarwal, RHET 350, Spring 2022 Midterm Essay

.docx

School

Binghamton University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

350

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by arnavagarwal3629

Arnav Agarwal Spring 2022 Midterm Essay SUNY Binghamton Professor Jean-Pierre Mileur 1. Discuss the progression of Socrates' i about rhetoric in the Gorgias and the Phaedrus. It is rare for Socrates to convince someone that their knowledge of a subject is incorrect but rather try and prove the human attempt to persuade others as ethically flawed, if done incorrectly. According to Socrates, rhetoric does not require knowledge of the subject matter, but instead requires a talent to persuading people based on what they want to hear, not arguments based in facts or truth. A rhetorician isn’t improved or made virtuous by telling someone what they want to hear. As for Gorgias, the text is structured around Plato’s attempt to build a rhetorical framework that accords with Socrates’ usual style. Socrates seems to be focusing on a relatively narrow issue here, and he mistakenly generalizes from a certain sort of situation to a larger collection of circumstances. The type of situation he envisions is one involving someone who knows the answer to a particular issue going up against someone who doesn’t. If they are arguing about something publically or individually important, they do so in a rhetorical fashion. Public or private wealth would be diminished if the rhetorician emerges victorious in the debate. This is because appealing to an individual’s desire for what they want to hear rather than what is correct cannot mean that eloquence in speaking is akin to seduction without arguments and facts. Rhetoric and education both make use of the same strategies. The result is what matters, whether it is a concept, action, or thing, even if it is false or bad. There are several perplexing aspects to the Phaedrus's interpretation. Rhetorically, it is difficult to see the organic unity it seems to endorse. Philosophically, it shows a critique of

dialectical writing. Its self-commentary on its set speeches is perplexing, largely because of the degree to which it endorses associations between mania, eros, poetry, and philosophy. The Palinode (p. 262) "exemplifies the rhetorical and persuasive qualities which Socrates expects of the real orator in the second half of conversation" because of this, Socrates enacts in the discussion the many variations in good madness presented by Palinode (p. 257). Socrates himself admits (265b) that he has not "created a faultless and uniform work such as that which he regards as the ideal," and Rutherford contends that "the same is true of Plato's accomplishment” (or purposeful underachievement) in the Phaedrus as a whole. Both the "imperfections of the written word," the incomplete character of this and every exposition of philosophical subjects and the "complex and non-simple natures of the participants" are emphasized by this aspect. It is said that Phaedrus is "complicated and split." Phaedrus' answer to the Palinode is 'mostly aesthetic,... he does not interrogate Socrates about the conclusions he arrived' (p. 258). If the second half fails to live up to the promise of the Palinode, it may be because Socrates ultimately failed with Phaedrus. (pp. 267–268).

3. Which is rhetorically superior, speech or writing? What are the argument's pros and cons? How can they usefully be applied to current disputes over new technologies? This may be observed most clearly in day-to-day conversation—both the speaker and the listener process speech in real-time. Thus, "speech is generally unrehearsed and resembles an unedited first draught" that cannot be revised after it has been spoken since "the text is no longer accessible for editing." (Halliday, 1989) A lot of the time, we do not even think about how we are going to respond verbally, much alone including cues or linguistic nuances. It is only via video and audio recording that spoken language may be released from "the dominance of time and be preserved for future generations”. When it comes to written language, on the other hand, "it has a definite life outside of our thoughts" and is "waiting to be triggered in someone's mind." In terms of the processing of written and spoken language, this disparity in degrees of permanence has "immediate effects." Speech comprehension depends on both the ability to hear speech sounds and the ability to store them in the working memory while processing sentences. Since "speaking is taxing on working memory in a manner that writing is not," it follows that "different mental processes for speech and writing" are used by each individual (Repo.komazawa-u.ac.jp). While written and spoken language is separate, there is a middle ground where they merge. It may be more fitting to convey the differences between oral and written language not as a split division but more so on a spectrum where the distinction between the two varies. “This transitional stage exposes a flaw in more typical conceptions of the distinction between oral and written communication.” (ibid) Definitions tend to obscure "an even more crucial divide within the category of spoken language, between 'one-way' speech and 'two-way' speech," which is a major problem.

According to Halliday (1989), one-way communication is often more closely associated with writing than with other forms of two-way speech. The parallels between written texts and monologues, such as lectures or news broadcasts, cannot be overlooked when considering these types of events. The same logic may be used in writing; there are as many constraints on what we can be verbally said or written. As a result, a text's audience must be taken into consideration in the same manner that an author should be.

4. Aristotle was a student of Plato. How does he adapt and/or depart from Plato's ideas about rhetoric? Start with Aristotle's definition of rhetoric. A tremendous effect on rhetorical growth may be seen in Aristotle's Rhetoric. Cicero and Quintilian, two of the most prominent Roman masters of rhetoric, regularly used Aristotelian principles in their teachings. Although they claimed to be Aristotelian scholars, these writers had little interest in the philosophical roots and backgrounds of the terminology that Aristotle had contributed to rhetorical theory in his works of scholarship. Aristotelian rhetoric has been seen for two millennia as a history of rhetoric rather than a philosophy. To be sure, Aristotle's writings on rhetoric and even written speeches were often found alongside those of other classical writers, but it was rare for these works to be read in the context of the whole Corpus Aristotelicum. Only in recent decades have philosophers rediscovered Aristotelian rhetoric's theoretically significant qualities. Aristotle employs a wide range of ideas and arguments that are also discussed in his logical, ethical, and psychological works in his theory of persuasiveness. Syllogism is the underlying principle of his comprehensive philosophy, which includes dialectic and logic as well as rhetorical arguments and his theory of demonstration. Even though emotions are a central theme in Aristotle's ethics, the Rhetoric is the only place where the Aristotelian presents such a detailed description of individual emotions. Rhetoric, as well, teaches us about language and style's cognitive properties. Both Plato and Aristotle, two of history's greatest rhetoricians, left their mark on the discipline. The way they used rhetoric and what they meant by it differed, even though they were identical in many respects. Plato employed rhetoric as a way of teaching to pass on his ideals and the art of rhetoric to his pupils in a more traditional manner. In his opinion, technology should be utilized to spread knowledge by stimulating discussion and conserving the information that was

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help