Classical Rhetoric Notes 2-28-2013

28 February 2013

What are some of the characteristics of sophistic rhetoric?

Schiappa claims that any characteristics that sophists have, are fragmented, but relativism is the binding force.

Binaries associated with Sophists

Phusis (Nature) vs. Nomos (law, custom)

Phusis was the primary subject of speculation for early (pre-Socratic) Greek philosophy. In the time of the “Greek Enlightenment” (later 5th century on), attention was turned to human laws, customs, mores–hence, ethical and political philosophy, as well as rhetorical theory.

Many, but not all, sophists could be said to champion nomos. The point is, their collective efforts (and that of others, including Socrates & Plato) opened the door to reflection on this distinction and made possible critique of human customs and institutions.

nomos-as-custom could be connected to the idea of doxa (opinion) or endoxa (a settled set of beliefs common in a community). It’s a great time of thinking outside of cultures and customs.

Muthos (myth, mythic speech) vs. Logos (reason, reasoned speech)

Protagoras’s Great Speech, where he explicitly signals the fact that he will employ both modes of discoursing. Gorgias Encomium “I want to bring reason to this debate”

Sophistike (Sophist-art) vs. Philosophia (philosophy)

[add some notes]

Dissoi Logoi: a play on terms; for example, its play with lowercase ‘g’ and ‘b’ – good and bad and to whom and in what circumstance.

Gorgias’ “On Not Being” Is it a denial of essence? existence? How might Plato respond might that’s jst a play with words, nonsense, its difficult to know them. MoreOrLess, it seems to address pre-socratic thought by playing on the Greek verb to-be.

The first to right on kairos was Gorgias. Then, Dionysios picked up on it and wrote that whatever Gorgias has said on the subject, it is of little to no use.

metron measure of all things; could be interpreted in many ways; an individual’s subjective position becomes the reality, which Protagoras has been noted as being an extreme relativist.

One cannot say that all sophists were defenders of democracy, since Protagoras was sympathetic. For example, Antiphon, Theramenes, and Critias (Plato’s uncle, who was a Sparta sympathisizer and helped install an oligarchy to purge)

Is there any good coming out of the construction of sophists? Graff says it’s “a (favorable) alternative to the PLatonic & Aristotleian systems; roduce pleasure and belief through speech; suggest what is possible versus the final demonstration of certain conclusions.” Sophistic rhetoric is emancipatory, participatory, and subversive. It cannot be reduced. It is always debatable.

Graff has repeatedly noted how sophists brought to rhetoric its “shoes” but not the exposition on how to make the “shoes.” Only after their day did others respond to them and make a theory of rhetoric.

PHAEDRUS

Some context: At the time of the Phaedrus, Plato’s academy is free; Isocrates and others charge for their instruction. Plato raises isses about their claims and the commodification of thought. Also accused of being craftsmen only, selling their craft, whereas Plato et al believe such transactional-work runs counter to effective, just teaching–leisure is a necessary component for truly

I’m wondering if there’s some connections to be made between opensource and proprietary movements; a line of questioning that are you paying for certain operational logics and modes of being?”

“Socrates’ Logophilio [or, The Erotics of Oratory?]” First case of rhetorical criticism

Structure: 1. Scene-setting. Lysias’ Speech (delievered from text by Phaedrus) Discussion; go by the river of Ilissus, 100M outside the wall. 2. Socrates’ 1st speech (improvised by Socrates) Discussion. Socrates Turn Back (his daemon rebukes him and he gives a better speech) 3. Socrates’ 2nd speech: Myth of Charioteer Discussion (Socrates: now, i’m enfused with the gods, inspiration, divine, the psuche breath or air) 4. Final section: including Critique of Writing

Questions

Are the Gorgias and Phaedrus consistent treatments of rhetoric? E. Black takes this up.

Lysias was a logographer, speech writer, resident alien, famous for characrerization (ethopoieia ethos), making the texts conform to the person who will deliver it. Lysias was known as the technical speech maker of Athenians. - Is Plato’s Lysias actually representative of Lysias? Or was the character simply representative of such a group of speech makers? Some scholars suggest Lysias represents Isocrates (see the final pages of the Phaedrus, the dialogue between Socrates and Phaedrus (278b-279c). Does Plato truly respect Isocrates? Could be read in a multitude of ways. Plato wrote The Phaedrus (360-370s) after Isocrates success as a writer of speeches, so whn the text shows Socrates discussing highly of Isocrates and his craft, it indicates an ironic bent.

empsuchos —> logos (speech is a product of breadth) apsuchos —-> (writing/text is death, due it not having a breath)

Psuchagogia “Isn’t rhetoric that art of SOUL leading?” We, rhetors and rhetoricians need to give souls healthy things, not sweets! - psuche (connects to spirit and breath–life force) in rleation to Rhetoric, Love; - psuche in relation to Love: Myth of Charioteer: Divided soul (parts of the soul, the 3 horses (reminded of Freud’s id,ego,superego) - psuche in relation to Rhetoric; psuchagogia: Rhetoric is Soul-Leading; Collection/Division (“Dialectical Analysis”); discourse in the service of enobling of the soul - rhetoric is a realization of the competing appetites

What is dialectic?

Dialectical Method & A (Genuine) Techne of Rhetoric (?) (263b) 1. Division–what kind of subject 2. Understand subject 3. Organic whole of speech (taxis, proportion): organic Composition 4. Parts of the speech (conventional) 5. Eikos argument (see also 272e); probablities 6. Diction

Moving from Theory to Practice (271d-272a)

Rhetoric requires a precursor to rhetoric in the dialectic