Essay about Speechmaking vs. Oration

The fight to do what is right is not an easy path to traverse, but is one which demands a noble and enduring character. Defending principles of justice with logic and reason in the face of political opposition, is a difficult task to take, but the elusive Socrates boldly undertook this endeavor. In Plato’s Apology, he recalls the daring defence of the principles of truth that Socrates took against all odds. Plato’s recollections, much like the trial of Socrates at the time, has sparked numerous debates amongst scholars who seek to understand the events of the trial more deeply. One such debate has centered on what Socrates meant when he said his speech was nothing more than words spoken at random. Brumbaugh and Oldfather, in their scholarly analysis, contend that Socrates’s speech is riddled with fine polish and organization suggesting that his speech was not random. As will be discussed, there are several examples of organization in Socrates’s speech such as when he provides his jurors with an outline of his speech. Additionally, masterfully woven throughout his defence, Socrates employed many diverse modes of argumentation in a logical and consistent manner lending credence to the notion that he planned his speech beforehand. This skillful use of these modes in Socrates’s argument, all vindicate an intentional design and premeditation. Despite Socrates’s humble assertions

Socrates makes a more compelling argument throughout the writing of Gorgias and puts Gorgias in the spotlight numerous times. Throughout Gorgias Gorgias is simply answering Socrates’ questions that actually contradict what Gorgias said about rhetoric and knowledge before his conversation gets intense with Socrates. Socrates compels his argument in his usual manner by obtaining acceptance in certain propositions that Gorgias cannot deny, and then Socrates shows that they lead to conclusions very different from what he had imagined. Socrates says at the beginning that he does not want to hear a speech by Gorgias, but instead wants to engage in a conversation with him. Gorgias makes wonderful claims for the power of rhetoric, Socrates wants

First, he said a leader must be liked by enough of his people to avoid any type of uprising. He believed that anyone who spoke out against the prince must be gotten rid of. This is a major violation of one’s rights and something Socrates would have been outraged by. Plato starts The Apology by discussing how Socrates would teach the youth about his ideal government while openly criticizing the government of Athens. Socrates believed this type of free speech was necessary to form a fair and moral nation. Socrates also uses his trial as a symbol of free speech as he continued to speak out against the government there. He certainly would not have supported Machiavelli’s attempts to suppress free speech. Socrates goes so far as to say, “I made my defense speech like this: I much prefer to die having made my defense speech in this way than to live in that way” (The Apology 20). Here we see that Socrates is willing to die if it means he can speak freely. He truly thought free speech was the only way to check the government’s power and for the people to have a voice. At the time of his trial, speaking out against the Athenian government was almost unheard of and was considered a form of treason. Socrates wanted to use his trial as a way to criticize his leaders in the hope that more people would follow his lead. He believed free speech was necessary to

Socrates opened his case by asking the jury to listen to him openly and to pardon him if he went into his usual style of speaking. His accusers had already spoken against him in the flowery manner common in courts of law. Socrates said that his accusers' speeches contained great refinement and skill, and he lacked the ability to speak so well. However, he said that he would speak the truth while his opponents lied. Socrates also stated that while his accusers’ speeches were

We should note briefly the basic form of the Platonic dialogues: Plato, Socrates' student, has written a kind of play, re-enacting the way in which Socrates practiced his philosophy (he did not write it down, but simply argued on the streets). In reading the summary contained on this site, it may not always be clear that Socrates is constantly asking questions of Meno, and only rarely offering

Being great at discussion does not facilitate an effective method to teaching. As a philosopher Socrates would have been an ineffective teacher. Socrates' teaching are mostly involves through him questioning an individual. In the Euthyphro Socrates wanted to teach about the general meaning of piety he started philosophizing in the hope of finding an answer which did not happened. For instance Socrates questions Euthyphro about “what kind of thing do you say that godliness and ungodliness are, both as regards murder and other things;" (5). This action illustrates that as a teacher Socrates would only instruct by asking students question. In "The Inferno" when Dante lost hope after seeing the three beast he cried "Have pity on me" and Virgil told him to "follow me and I will be your guide" (canto1.

He uses phrases such as, beg of you and grant me this favor trying to win the mercy of the court. Socrates wanted the audience to be in his frame of mind by understanding the "language" in which he spoke. He made the assumption that the accusers were the ones that were lying through their eloquent words and phrases and he was just using plain style because he was telling the whole truth and was not hiding anything. Here he was insinuating that the accusers were manipulative and can not be trusted. Because there were so many people in the court he also used plain style so that everyone would be able to understand him and that he could talk to each member of the court. In the conclusion to Socrates's speech, he said that if he were destroyed, he would be destroyed with the other good men who have died and would probably be the death of many more. Socrates ends with this because he wanted to leave the court with a heavy heart and to insinuate that innocent men, such as himself, have been sentenced to death and he is sure that he will not be the last. Socrates almost seemed to have an arrogant tone in his speech in which he didn't seem to fully show respect for the court. It almost seemed as if he was talking down to them. He was interrupted several times in

Thesis Statement: I think Socrates’ message behind his speech to his interlocutors was to both state his superior wisdom and gain the attention while doing so.

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.

However, Socrates denies this by claiming how his questioning serves the purpose of trying to find more wisdom and figuring out who in his society bears more wisdom than him (Apology,44b). In addition, he assures the court that he will speak in an honest manner to portray his truthfulness and sincerity to the courts and the rest of the state. During his trial, Socrates claims, “When I leave this court I shall go away condemned by you to death, but they will go away convicted by Truth herself of depravity and injustice” (Apology, 68b).His portrayal of loyalty and honesty reveal his thoughts on how political leaders should compose themselves, behaving in a

Socrates’ refusal to do what the rhetors do separate him and his craft from the rhetors and their trickery. He neither asks for nor accepts payment from people; instead of attempting to profit off of those who listen to him, he engages them in thoughtful conversation to try to mutually find better answers to metaphysical, epistemological, and ethical questions. He uses a logical, rational approach to questioning his listeners and leading them towards a better understanding of the truth, rather than telling people what to believe based on what he believes to be the truth. However, Socrates acknowledges that these actions are unpopular among the Athenians, and draws a parallel between himself and a doctor: “...I’ll be judged [in court] the way a doctor would be judged by a jury of children if a pastry chef were to bring accusations against him... That’s the sort of thing I know would happen to me, too, if I came into court” (522a-c).

Socrates was a fierce believer in dialogue. He believed that if something was not a one-on-one, face-to-face communication, then it was impossible to attain knowledge. However, as Peters points out “Dialogue is a bad model for the variety of shrugs, grunts, and moans the people emit (among other signs and gestures) in face-to-face settings.” (Peters et al 34). Because Socrates was only interested in using dialogue as a means of finding the truth, his version of the truth is impossible to obtain.

While his defense would not be considered a successful one in today’s world, Socrates’ speech does not sacrifice his dignity which Socreates believes

Plato goes a long way in attempting to distinguish Socrates from the likes of Protagoras, a self admitted sophist. In Protagoras, Socrates is depicted as a street smart, wisdom dispensing young man, brash with confidence and a bit of arrogance that goes a long way when confronted with the old school rhetoric of Protagoras. Plato begins to separate the two at the hip right from the get go. The dialogue between Socrates and his inquisitive friend Hippocrates went a long way to show that Socrates had more questions than answers about Protagoras, the sophist, especially when it came to talk about what it is exactly that he offers. Socrates' companion is eager to hear the words of

Socrates faces a lot of opposition from the public because of the nature of his teachings as he attempts to demonstrate the value of knowledge and justice. In his apologia, having been charged with “corrupting the young” (Aen. 24b), Socrates questions Meletus mercilessly, forcing him into contradicting himself and leaving him speechless with “nothing to say” (Apo. 24d). Much of Socrates’ teachings revolve around making others aware of their own ignorance, as he does with the politician, “[trying] to show him that he supposed he was wise, but was not” (Apo. 21c). Plato’s Symposium recounts the speech of Alcibiades in which Alcibiades describes “what an extraordinary effect [Socrates’] words always had” (Sym. 215d). According to Alcibiades, Socrates “makes it seems that his life isn’t worth living” (Sym. 216a). These kinds of lessons