Plato's Arguments Against Rhetoric

If someone was asked to define Rhetoric, they would likely equate it to public speech; thus, defining it as the ability to convey a point accurately, and convincingly for others to understand. This art of public speaking is widely accepted and commonly taught, in modern society and education systems. However, this seemingly harmless technique was a point of contention among the ancient Greeks. Yes, ancient philosophers are probably rolling over in their graves knowing that children are being taught the art of persuasion. From a modern perspective, it seems silly to denounce rhetoric; after all, what could be wrong with learning how to best convey a point? On one hand, philosophers like Plato argued that rhetoric, or oratory, was a tool for

One major aspect of Plato’s argument against rhetoric is that it cannot be a skill as it has no specific dealings. In Gorgias, Socrates argues against definitions that are subject to individual thoughts and experiences and instead is seeking a universal definition. For example, when Gorgias argues that oratory is concerned with “the greatest of human concerns” (Plato 451d), Socrates retorts that the greatest of human concerns is defined differently by different individuals. Socrates uses the example that a doctor would argue that health is the greatest human concern, a trainer would argue that physical strength is the greatest human concern, and a financial expert would argue that wealth is the greatest human concern (Plato 452a-c). This same argument could again be applied to Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric. Dealing with persuasion is much narrower than dealing with the greatest of human concerns, yet it still lends itself to questioning. If rhetoric can be defined as the ability to speak a certain way, then what stops other ways of speaking from being defined as crafts? Narrowing it down to persuasion leaves room to argue that lying could also be considered a craft, but that does not validate the practice of lying. Furthermore, Plato presents the argument that rhetoric in itself is telling lies. Often, lies are validated by saying they are only twisting the truth. However, this way of viewing lies is similar to the way rhetoric twists the truth to make it more palatable for some audiences. These arguments highlight valid reasoning against Aristotle’s defense of