History Of Persuasion

Socrates was a man who spent most of his time talking to people. He would ask them hypothetical questions, and make them think for themselves about the true answer they believed in, by serving as a guide for the conversation. Many people, including the accusers, believed that while Socrates did this, he was serving as a Sophist. A Sophist is a person who talks to people, and teaches them how to argue a point, whether the point is right or wrong. A Sophist would collect money for this lesson, and go on with their teachings (Xenophon 42). This accusation is inaccurate because Socrates did not collect any money for his conversations with people. Instead, Socrates was a very poor man, who happened to have rich friends. Talking to these people was a way for Socrates to try to spread his way of life to the Athenian's. He enjoyed conversing with people about ethical issues, and moral beliefs. In his argument, Socrates refutes Meletus' charge that he corrupts the young. One crucial point deals with the idea of Socrates as a paid teacher. This would imply that Socrates was actively seeking students and teaching "corrupting" ideas. This plays a part in the argument, by Meletus, that Socrates has deliberately corrupted the youth. Socrates says that, "the young men who follow me around of their own free will, those who have most leisure, the sons

The sophists were rhetoric teachers in Athens who lived at the same the as Socrates. They were major intellectual figures, and the term “sophist” means “wise person.” At that time “sophistry” was roughly equivalent to “rhetoric,” and rhetoric is the art of persuasion using language. However, the term ‘sophistry’ is now generally used to refer to manipulative forms of rhetoric.

Today, one can see the tactic of persuasion being used as a standard avenue to influence a person’s attitude or beliefs by presenting them with different messages that encourage things like using certain brand name products, vote a certain way, or where to take a vacation just to name a few. There are four types of people that include gullible people, skeptical people, firm believers, and people who are leaders who trust others as well as make others follow their ideas. Persuasion is a widespread topic of social psychology and may be done in different ways. There are two types of cognitive processes by which to persuade someone, which are the central route or the peripheral route. For this assignment I used mostly the central route approach as well as using a little of the peripheral route approach. To reinforce the peripheral route approach the use of pathos was also used during the video to play on the emotions of the watcher. This PowerPoint is effective at using the central route of persuasion, peripheral

Gorgias is a Socratic dialogue that aims to determine what rhetoric truly is. Socrates seeks the true definition of rhetoric, attempting to pinpoint the essence of rhetoric and unveil the flaws of the sophistic oratory popular in Athens at this time. The art of persuasion was widely considered necessary for political and legal advantage in classical Athens, and rhetoricians promoted themselves as teachers of this fundamental skill. Some, like Gorgias, were foreigners attracted to Athens because of its reputation for intellectual and cultural sophistication. In Gorgias, Socrates argues that philosophy is an art, whereas rhetoric is a skill based on mere experience. To Socrates, most rhetoric in practice is merely flattery. In examining the role advertising plays in our

All around our society we witness persuasion. Whether it is a certified dentist selling a toothpaste brand in between our favorite shows on TV, or a church group coming to the door and asking for donations. We see little children begging their parents for a toy, promising they will behave, and the parents give in because they just want peace, quiet, and some time to relax. We have heard of college graduates expressing their qualification for the job, and stating facts about the type of service they are applying for. We look right past it, but in our everyday lives we experience, or even use, the three modes of persuasion. These methods to persuade people were made by a greek philosopher, Aristotle. The first mode is known

Gorgias was a Sophist by nature of that time but rejected the title to be a “Rhetorician” and had the beliefs like the Sophist that rhetoric was a universal right. He believed that the common man deserved to learn rhetoric from teachers if they could conjure up the large amounts money needed to learn from renown teachers of Gorgias status. Many from outside of rhetoric would say it was incredibly wrong to charge people who couldn’t afford to pay for teaching and spend all their money just to learn rhetoric. What Gorgias would argue is that those outsiders who found it wrong to charge money did not understand the power and influence rhetoric gave to someone in Ancient Athens. Rhetoric gave the common man the ability to yield conversation in the polis, debates, and

Gerard A. Hauser covers a plethora of details on how to create a well-made persuasive argument in his book, an Introduction to Rhetorical Theory; however, he covered three specific essentials that are necessary for persuasion: the components logos, pathos and ethos; purposive discourse and rhetorical competence; identification. I will argue for each constituent, respectively, to prove that persuasion cannot thrive without the aforementioned essentials.

Persuasion is an essential skill for rhetoricians. Since all a rhetorician needs is not the truth but his own opinion, persuasion is necessary to address the assembly. While persuasion could be used to lead a city to making the right decisions and gaining glory, the power of persuasion could be also abused or used by the wrong person. Demosthenes uses his rhetorical skills to push Athens away from its course of destruction. He also advocates for policies which are beneficial to Athens. Demades and the other orators were supportive of Athens becoming allies which was the wrong course of action because it led to the destruction of Athens. Someone could misuse their skill of persuasion due to lack of knowledge and morality. Good orators can also have flaws, like Demosthenes and his susceptibility to bribery. The negative potential can be reduced if the rhetoricians are philosophers and knowledgeable of ethics. Socrates and Phaedrus’s discussion shows how truth is relative to whoever is most persuasive. While Plutarch does not state any solutions to reducing negative potential in rhetorical speeches, Plato’s method for giving a persuasive speech worthy of praise is by dialectic speech. Both Plato and Plutarch acknowledge the power of rhetoric and persuasion to affect the course of events in both a positive and negative way and recognize the problem that comes with it.

Socrates went on trial for allegedly disrespecting the gods and corrupting the youth of Athens, even though he was very religious. It is clear from the Apology that Socrates’ real “crime” was severely embarrassing Wealthy and Important people in the Athens by his habit of questioning them in public places with respect to matters about which they claimed expertise, exposing them as frauds, while providing amusement to the onlookers who gathered to see the supposed experts confounded. Socrates regularly insisted that he was merely a philosophical inquirer after truth asking those who supposedly knew the answers. In this insistence he was only half sincere. He was pursuing the truth, but he knew that his shallow debaters would fall victim to his superior logical and rhetorical skill. He chose the questioning method as an effective way of developing and presenting his own philosophy.

In the Apology Socrates is accused of being a sophist. A sophist is someone who will argue for any cause using rhetoric for money, a sophist makes a weak argument strong. Socrates disputes this accusation, he claims that if he is guilty he simply is ignorant of it. In the Republic, Socrates has a dialogue with various people with one main objective, to determine what is justice. Following the dialogue, the reader can start to see that Socrates is not a sophist. His arguments seemed to be weak but is strengthened by Socrates use of rhetoric. However, his arguments are logical, he isn’t arguing just for fun, and he is not being paid. Socrates is not a sophist. He is a great speaker and uses rhetoric to his advantage, that does not make him a

Socrates explains to Phaedrus that “the most ambitious politicians love speechwriting and long for their writings to survive” after Phaedrus states that most politicians are afraid of making speeches for the fear of being called sophists. Socrates challenges Phaedrus’ belief of the sophistic view of rhetoric. Socrates goes against this argument of persuasion being the most important than the truth in a speech by talking about the significance of using philosophy in reasoning. He claims that the sophistic view of rhetoric is “not an art but an artless practice.” Socrates view of rhetoric’s relationship to the soul deals with enchanting the soul through it. He believes that the orator should learn the differences of human souls. Socrates claims that rhetorics is a way of “directing the soul by means of

According to Socrates, rhetoricians misuse their skill in persuasive speech. Instead of using rhetoric to improve the condition of their audiences’ souls, they use it as a means to achieve their own goals. They charge their audiences, and teach people how to He says that they “are servants, satisfiers of appetites! They have no understanding whatever of anything that’s admirable and good” (518c). Rhetoricians pander to their audiences, control their beliefs, and take advantage of people for wealth and power.

Socrates is accused of being a sophist. A sophist is someone who teaches people to be cleaver speakers, sophist’s charge money. Socrates claims that he is not wise enough to be a sophist, he merely speaks out about his thoughts and beliefs and if the youth of Athens listen and are intrigued, it is not his fault. In fact, Socrates mocks sophists saying that they almost brain wash young men, “to leave the company of their fellow citizens, with any of whom they can associate for nothing, attach themselves to him, pay money for the privilege, and be grateful into the bargain" (19e-20a) Socrates thinks that it is intriguing that

The rise of Sophism, and subsequently Socrates and Plato to counter the Sophists, came from a changing geopolitical landscape in ancient Greece, which saw power shift from the elite few to the common man. Examples of such shifts in power include the removal of the debtor-slave system, the canceling of debts, and giving the lowest class citizens, the thetes, a place in the jury. The most important change to the political structure of ancient Greece for the rise of the Sophists was the right of speech before the assembly, or isegoria. This change created a sudden need for persuasive speech and gave rise to the Sophists and their ideas of rhetoric. The rise of democratic power came out of not only the newfound skills in rhetoric, but also from their redefinition of virtue from a genealogical characteristic to one that could be taught and acquired by anyone.

In Gorgias, named for the Sicilian sophist and rhetorician featured in the dialogue, Socrates speaks with Gorgias concerning the nature of rhetoric as compared with philosophy; also, he speaks with Gorgias’s pupil Polus concerning the tyrant and how he truly is the most unhappiest of all, despite any ill-gotten gains they may have attained. Socrates’ distaste –