Essay on The Three Modes of Persuasion: Socrates Apology

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

In this reading Plato tells the story of Socrates and his trial which ultimately lead to his death sentence. Socrates was a 70 year old man at peace with his own mortality yet willing to face his accusers with an almost definite possibility of death to maintain his own integrity and beliefs and morality. He fully understood from the beginning of his trial what the sentence handed down would be yet on a level of honor and courage not seen in abundance in modern society he maintained his stance and delivered a compelling and convincing argument. He openly stated that he knew his actions had offended Meletus and

In the Apology, Socrates aimed to do three things: defend his ideas and principles, continue to teach those who will open their mind and state that he knew regardless of what he said he was aware that all five hundred and one jurors knew who he was and disliked him. Socrates was well aware of the fact that he had made multiple enemies, he knew that the politicians, poets, rich and craftsmen all

Aristotle has an idea that there are three rhetorical appeals people can use to persuade someone else – ethos, pathos and logos. Each of them is very useful and the persuasion will be most effective when three of them are all used. Amy Tan used all in “Mother Tongue.”

The Apology was written by Plato as an account of the defense that Socrates presented during the trial in which he was condemned to death. Socrates gave this apologia, or defense of one’s actions, against the accusations that he did not believe in any gods, and that he was corrupting the young men of Athens. Not being as skillful in the art of oratory as his accusers, Socrates admitted that he would, as plainly as possible, present only truthful and logical refutes to the accusations that were against him. Being wise in the way of rhetoric, Socrates used pathos, ethos, and logos to argue in his defense. Although ultimately executed, Socrates masterfully defended himself in court and proved that he was a man of both virtue and wisdom.

There are many ways to convey a message to readers. Often times authors, speech writers, etc., refer to Aristotle’s three main concepts of rhetoric, Ethos, Pathos, and Logos. Ethos is considered to be the, “credibility,” of the author. Pathos is the idea of, “emotional appeal,” to the audience. Finally, Logos is the translated as the, “logic,” involved when making a point. All forms of rhetoric have at least one of these concepts, while good arguments incorporate a well balanced mixture of the three.

After reading “The Apology,” I decided to respond about how Socrates used the Socratic Method during his trial. Socrates, using this method, crafted a personal defense against the allegations laid upon him and, at the same time, Socrates led Miletus to trap himself as a part of that defense. I believe that Socrates’ decision to defend himself in this manner brings up some important considerations. First, Socrates using the Socratic Method as an integral part of his defense not only unraveled most of Miletus’ support, but Socrates was able to showcase his wisdom to the people of the court to show them what kind of person Socrates was when he acted as he usual did. Secondly, Socrates, through his attack on Miletus showed the people of the court the potential threat that Socrates could have been this entire time had that been his focus. Both of these considerations are possible only because Socrates’ used his method of questioning to craft a defense for himself.

According to the majority of the jury members of Athens, Socrates is a corruption to the youth, doer of evil and does not agree with the gods of his people. In the Apology, written by Plato these are the assumptions and accusations Socrates is held in court for. In court, he is faced with what most men fear, being wrongly accused leading to the death sentence. Socrates argues and strives to prove that he has no fear of being hated, being accused of serious crimes, being threatened with punishment, or being put to death.

In order to determine whether or not Socrates was wise about God, we must first define the term “wise” in this context. What is the definition of wisdom? What makes someone wise? The literal meaning, or etymology, of the word is derived from the Indo-European stem woid which means to see. It also relates to similar words such as the Greek idein and the Latin videre, both also meaning “to see” (Mohr, pg. 3). Whereas, in English and Germanic languages the verb “wit” took on the meaning of knowing, because of the likeness to knowing to seeing, and thus resulting in the modern word “wisdom” which is defined as a type of knowledge (Mohr, pg. 3). So, the literal meaning of wisdom is to see and to know, which typically means same they are substitute of each other. As I mentioned above that wisdom is a type of knowledge, then what is knowledge? It is defined as a union of the consciousness of a subject, the knower, and an object, the thing known by means of an idea. Similarly, vision is a union between a seer and a thing seen by means of an image. (Mohr, Pg. 3). But, there are two kinds of knowledge. There is theoretical knowledge, such as knowledge of what love is, and there is practical knowledge, such as knowing how to love somebody. Wisdom could be described as a union between these two kinds of knowledge.

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.

Socrates is considered to have been one of the best to ever use logos in a speech. However, his use of ethos and pathos is nothing to be scoffed at. When analyzing the speech for the use of ethos one huge point pops out. Socrates says that “And I must beg of you to grant me a favor:, If I defend myself in my accustomed manner, and you hear me using the words which I have been in the habit of using in the agora, at the tables of the money-changers, or anywhere else, I would ask you not to be surprised, and not to interrupt me on this account. For I am more than seventy years of age, and appearing now for the first time in a court of law…”(2). This statement lends itself to the accusers to feel bad for Socrates because he has not been in court before. This statement also establishes that

In order to do this, he goes about Athens questioning those he believes to be wiser than him, including politicians, poets, and craftsmen. Upon this questioning, he discovers that even those perceived as the wisest actually know far less than one would expect. Even the craftsmen, who have much practical wisdom in their respective fields, see their success as merely a tribute to their vast knowledge of many subjects. This, Socrates claims, is not true wisdom. Human wisdom can be described as the acknowledgement and acceptance that one does not know everything, nor is one capable of knowing everything. This, however, does not mean that people should sit idly by, never pursuing wisdom, for it is still vital to the attainment of a good life, which should be the ultimate goal of mankind.

Throughout The Apology, Socrates shows his true philosophical standpoint of not knowing anything, he provides his form of questioning to prove that no one actually has wisdom. Those who think they are wise, have subjective and human wisdom. Basically, they do not have any wisdom, like those Socrates refers to, the Sophists. While he refutes his charge of not acknowledging the gods, he proves this further by explaining that the Oracle simply used him as an example to show he views wisdom. He claims to not know anything and this is considered subjective, superhuman wisdom.

In Plato’s Apology Socrates explains to the jury the reasons he should be found not guilty against his accused crimes. Although none of the accusations have any true merit Socrates is forced into the courtroom. During his defense Socrates states, “A man who really

The second mode of persuasion is pathos which “is the appeal to our human emotions” (Modes of Persuasion). According to Kristof, the enrollment of students in the humanities subjects is decreasing, while the enrollment  in science and business subjects are increasing. The decrease in enrollment for the humanities subjects is emotional because the humanities offer numerous benefits towards people, like increasing our value as a worker, developing people diverse in thinking and creating critical thinkers. Without students enrolling in the humanities, these benefits are not developed creating emotions of sadness. Meanwhile, a new scientific technique referred to as germ line gene modification is becoming available to the populations, but is it