More handpicked essays just for you.
Ancient greece influence on western culture
Ancient greece influence on western culture
Ancient greece influence on western culture
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Phaedrus is a dialogue written by Plato regarding three characters: Socrates, Lysias, and Phaedrus. While it appears that the topic at hand is about love, the discussion really revolves around the true art of rhetoric and how it should be put into practice. The erotic action in the Phaedrus that comes from the erotic relationships of its characters causes the dialogue to resemble the true art of rhetoric. This can be seen through Plato’s dialogue as his plot and characterization consequently establishes the foundation regarding the true art of rhetoric.
Plato introduces the story on a peculiarly nice day as the characters Phaedrus and Socrates, meet just outside the walls of Athens. Phaedrus had just come from the house of Epicrates and
…show more content…
had listened to a speech written by Lysias. Intrigued with Phaedrus’s infatuation with Lysias’s speech, Socrates demands to hear the eloquent speech. Synchronously, Socrates suspects that Phaedrus has not only had the speech read to him multiple times, but that he liked it so much that he took the speech with him as well (Hamilton 22). At Phaedrus’s suggestion, they move towards a more comfortable location where they can sit in peace to hear and discuss the speech. As they stand near the Ilissus river, Phaedrus recalls the myth of Boreas, the God of Wind, abducting Oreithyia. The allure setting in the dialogue is deceiving as it superficially portrays a sense of peace, yet, the sense of the supernatural and danger, conversely, hovers around the ever-present dangers regarding the art of persuasion. As Phaedrus and Socrates approach their destination, Socrates encourages Phaedrus to relax and to recite the speech to him. Eagerly, Phaedrus begins to recite Lysias’s grand speech. In his speech, Lysias is attempting to seduce Phaedrus.
At the time, it was believed that Lysias was the best living writer, nevertheless, his speech turns out to be no good. After Socrates finishes both of his speeches, he bashes in on Lysias’s speech when conversing with Phaedrus near the end of the dialogue. Socrates begins by saying, “You see how far Lysias is from doing what we are looking for… his speech begins where it should have ended… don’t the various parts of his speech give the impression of being thrown together at random?” (Hamilton 78). While at the beginning of the dialogue Phaedrus had been impressed by Lysias’s speech, Socrates has brought him to his senses in order to make him realize how bad Lysias’s speech actually is. Ultimately, Plato’s purpose in having Phaedrus recite Lysias’s speech is to demonstrate an unethical and poorly written speech by using opinion-based arguments through the pleasure-principle of Eros to prove his point. Lysias main goal is to seduce Phaedrus during his speech, which is what eventually leads towards his ethos being compromised. Lysias’s interest in the realm of base desire and appetite grant Socrates the opportunity of not only creating a speech as good as Lysias’s, but the chance of articulating a speech only a connoisseur of rhetoric is capable of delivering. After hearing the speech, Socrates explains this phenomenon through his two
speeches. Before Socrates is forced to make a speech, he sarcastically makes fun of Lysias’s speech. This causes Phaedrus to challenge Socrates to make an equally, if not better, speech than the one they have just heard. Socrates denies the challenge and claims that he does not know how to formulate speeches. Phaedrus, knowing Socrates’s love for speeches, swears to the tree that they are sitting under that if Socrates does not recite his speech now, Phaedrus will no longer give him another speech ever again. Perhaps to his bawdy attraction to Phaedrus, Socrates chooses to cover his face with a cloth before beginning his speech (Hamilton 34). While Socrates does cover his face because of the romantic dalliance between Phaedrus and him, the covering of the face also symbolizes the idea that Socrates has to overcome the appetite of his Dark Horse in order to free himself from the selfishness that impairs his judgement. In his first speech, Socrates compares love to an irrational desire for the enjoyment of physical beauty. Alongside with this, Socrates declares love as being a form of madness that leads to negative outcomes such as jealousy. As soon as Socrates wraps up his speech, he is struck by a divine sign that makes him repent and reflect as to what he has been saying. This can be seen when Socrates says, “… I received the supernatural sign which sometimes comes to me… a voice declaring that I had committed a sin and must not go away till I had expiated it” (Hamilton 43). This is the exact moment in which Socrates becomes a true master in philosophy by accurately discussing the concept of love in both physical and emotional levels. Rather than denigrating what has been given to us by the Gods, we must respect the god of erotic love: Eros. After having been enlightened and brought to his senses by his divine sign, Socrates delivers his great speech about the charioteer and Eros. Socrates’s second speech ultimately establishes the ethical foundation for the art of rhetoric. In his speech, Socrates explains the true nature of love and how it relates to the human soul. To briefly sum it up, the concept of love is an evolution that was given to us by the gods. The Charioteer myth describes the idea of a Dark Horse, a Charioteer, and a White Horse. The dark horse resembles a sense of appetite or opinion. The charioteer attempts to guide and control the dark horse in order to lead it towards the white horse and its principle of excellence. The white horse represents what is left of our divine nature. It is through that divinity that we are able to reach up towards the realm of forms and true knowledge. Alongside with this, Socrates also states that a ladder of love exists, ranging from erotic love to moral love and all the way up to a divine form of love. It is through this ladder that we can get a glimpse of the truth into the realm of forms. While the ladder is intended to represent levels of love, it also represents a ladder of intelligence. Such stages of the ladder come at a given amount of intelligence, as not everyone can reach the top of the ladder towards a divine form of love if their soul moves towards the direction of appetite, a sophist, and opinion. Socrates wins the argument by being the only character to have significantly changed as the dialogue progressed. Socrates discredits Lysias since Lysias’s main interest lies in the realm of basic desire and selfish appetite. Lysias is not wrong in describing love as being erotic, instead, he has yet to move up the ladder of love in order to see more than just erotic love. Lysias is still stuck arguing through the form of opinion, which is opposite of what Socrates has been able to achieve. While Socrates might have struggled in the beginning of the dialogue, he was enlightened by a divine sign that allowed him to move up the ladder of love towards the idea of divine love. It is for this reason that Socrates has not only won the argument, but he has become a masterful rhetorician through his elevated character symposium throughout the dialogue.
Of Aristotle’s three modes of rhetoric, Audre Lorde’s essay is comprised largely by logos complemented by pathos and the least by ethos. Ethos is obvious when she describes herself in terms of social groups, giving credibility to herself to justify her assertions. In her words, Lorde is a “forty-nine-year-old Black lesbian feminist socialist mother of two, including one boy, and a member of an interracial couple.” She explains at the beginning of her essay that she has been identified as an active member of these socially taboo groups and thus has the right to demand attention to her claims. Logos is seen throughout her essay, often following a bold statement. Her arguments not only consist of reasoning but also personal experiences and real-life occurrences, such as Lorde’s question of the lacking representation of poetry by Back women and the horrifying female circumcision supported by Jomo Kenyatta in Africa. Lorde’s use of logos is very effective because it gives the reader a relatable narrative to better understand her bold conclusions. The third mode of Aristotle’s rhetoric is pathos, which Lorde uses to a slightly lesser degree than logos but just as effectively. Examples of Lorde’s use of pathos are her descriptive language, metaphors and lists.
ABSTRACT: I analyse the dramatic setting of the Gorgias by contrasting it with that of the Protagoras. The two dialogues are closely related. In the Gorgias Socrates states that the rhetorician and the sophist are basically indistinguishable in everyday life. In both the Protagoras and the Gorgias, his confrontation with his interlocutors is metaphorically related to a descent to Hades. However, while the events in the Protagoras are narrated by Socrates himself, the Gorgias has readers face the unfolding events without mediation. The temporal and spatial framing of the Gorgias is indeterminate, while both aspects are described in detail in the Protagoras. I maintain that the magical passage from an indeterminate "outside" to an indeterminate "inside" in the Gorgias is significantly related to the characters' attitude towards the boundaries of each other's souls, which are constantly ignored or attacked. As a matter of fact, the dialogue presents a very impressive amount of anger and exchange of abuse, which never ceases until the end. I suggest that the temporal framing demonstrates that the beginning and the end of the dialogue are closely connected. Socrates unexpectedly arrives and refutes Gorgias by asking him unexpected questions. The last myth of judgment indicates that Gorgias' attitude is comparable to that of the mortals who lived during Kronos' age, while Socrates brings about a liberation from appearance which is analogous to the innovations brought about by Zeus.
Persepolis is a inspirational story written by Marjane Satrapi in the perspective of a young girl’s life during a powerful, historical moment in Iran. The Islamic Revolution was a life-changing moment that impacted her view on the world around her and her innocence shaping her into the woman she is today. Not many people understand what it feels like to feel pain, hurt and abandonment as a child from major and minor things. The author writes this story and decides for it to be a graphic novel to allow the not only young readers, but also for those who do not understand what happens everyday in the world they live in. Satrapi uses all rhetorical stances, ethos, pathos, and logos to show problems, purpose and emotions.
Within the many layers of Aristophanes’ comedic play Clouds, the ceaseless conflict between human nature and political virtue is unmistakable. After being expelled from the Thinkery, Strepsiades refuses to give up his cause to evade his creditors and sends his reluctant son Pheidippides to learn the art of rhetoric in his place. Even before venturing to the Thinkery, Pheidippides warns his father that he will severely regret his decision to coerce him into learning with Socrates, a correct prediction. When both Strepsiades and Pheidippides enter the Thinkery, Socrates introduces both the Just Speech and Unjust Speech. Yet, he immediately exits and leaves Pheidippides to observe and “learn them [just and unjust things] himself” (886). The two
For these two articles that we read in Crito and Apology by Plato, we could know Socrates is an enduring person with imagination, because he presents us with a mass of contradictions: Most eloquent men, yet he never wrote a word; ugliest yet most profoundly attractive; ignorant yet wise; wrongfully convicted, yet unwilling to avoid his unjust execution. Behind these conundrums is a contradiction less often explored: Socrates is at once the most Athenian, most local, citizenly, and patriotic of philosophers; and yet the most self-regarding of Athenians. Exploring that contradiction, between Socrates the loyal Athenian citizen and Socrates the philosophical critic of Athenian society, will help to position Plato's Socrates in an Athenian legal and historical context; it allows us to reunite Socrates the literary character and Athens the democratic city that tried and executed him. Moreover, those help us to understand Plato¡¦s presentation of the strange legal and ethical drama.
In Plato’s Phaedrus, Socrates encounters Phaedrus who has just come from a conversation with Lysias. Phaedrus invites Socrates to walk with him and hear what he has learned from his conversation with Lysias. The two read and discuss Lysias’ speech, and then enter into a discussion on how one can become an expert in rhetorical speaking and on whether writing is beneficial and acceptable or the contrary. Socrates’ thoughts on the subjects of rhetoric and writing will be the main points of this paper.
In conclusion, Plato’s dialogues the Apology gives readers an idea of Socrates character from the viewpoint of someone who dearly admired him. Each person will have a different opinion about the truth value this dialogue shows about Socrates true personality. The
It takes one person to begin expanding a thought, eventually dilating over a city, gaining power through perceived power. This is why Socrates would be able to eventually benefit everyone, those indifferent to philosophy, criminals, and even those who do not like him. Socrates, through his knowledge of self, was able to understand others. He was emotionally intelligent, and this enabled him to live as a “gadfly,” speaking out of curiosity and asking honest questions. For someone who possesses this emotional intelligence, a conversation with Socrates should not have been an issue-people such as Crito, Nicostratus, and Plato who he calls out during his speech.
Rhetorical Analysis and Persuasion Every day we are victims to persuasion whether anyone can notice it or not. Logos, pathos and ethos are the types of persuasion. Logos persuades by reason, pathos by appealing to emotion and ethos by the credibility of the author. The characters in The Iliad employ the use of these techniques to sway another character into doing or feeling something else.
Aristotle on Rhetoric Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) was a Greek philosopher, educator, and scientist. He was able to combine the thoughts of Socrates and Plato to create his own ideas and definition of rhetoric. He wrote influential works such as Rhetoric and Organon, which presented these new ideas and theories on rhetoric. Much of what is Western thought today evolved from Aristotle's theories and experiments on rhetoric. Aristotle's Life Aristotle was born in 384 B.C., in Northern Greece.
Plato's rhetoric uses dialogue and dialectic as a means of making meaning known. Anthony Petruzzi says that Plato’s “Truth is neither a correspondence with an "objective" reality, nor does it exist solely as a coherent relation to a set of social beliefs; rather, truth is concomitantly a revealing and a concealing, or a withdrawing arrival” (Petruzzi 6). However, for Plato truth becomes a matter of correspondence or correctness in “the agreement of the mental concept (or representation) with the thing” (Petruzzi 7). In other words, the tr...
Imagine the time just after the death of Socrates. The people of Athens were filled with questions about the final judgment of this well-known, long-time citizen of Athens. Socrates was accused at the end of his life of impiety and corruption of youth. Rumors, prejudices, and questions flew about the town. Plato experienced this situation when Socrates, his teacher and friend, accepted the ruling of death from an Athenian court. In The Last Days of Socrates, Plato uses Socrates’ own voice to explain the reasons that Socrates, though innocent in Plato’s view, was convicted and why Socrates did not escape his punishment as offered by the court. The writings, “Euthyphro,” “The Apology,” “Crito,” and “Pheado” not only helped the general population of Athens and the friends and followers of Socrates understand his death, but also showed Socrates in the best possible light. They are connected by their common theme of a memoriam to Socrates and the discussion of virtues. By studying these texts, researchers can see into the culture of Athens, but most important are the discussions about relationships in the book. The relationships between the religion and state and individual and society have impacted the past and are still concerns that are with us today.
By writing Symposium, Plato uses six characters to convey his idea of Love, the process of learning and thinking in a philosophical way. Each of these characters has a particular mission to elaborate different spheres of Love. However, these speeches given by six characters are not totally independent. They, to some extent, are connected; some of them agree or disagree with the previous one; some of them improve the idea of the former speakers. In conclusion, according to Symposium, Love is multi-faced.
In Plato’s Gorgias, Socrates discusses the nature and uses of rhetoric with Gorgias, while raising moral and philosophical perspective of rhetoric. Socrates believes that rhetoric is a kind of false knowledge whose purpose is to produce conviction, and not to educate people about the true extent of knowledge (Plato 15). On the other hand, Gorgias argues that the study of rhetoric is essential in any other professional fields, in order to provide an effective communication (Plato 19). After their discussion of rhetoric, Socrates seems to understand the true extent of rhetoric better as compared to Gorgias, as he is able to use rhetoric appeals as a device to dominate the conversation. During their discussion, Socrates seems to have use rhetorical appeals, such as ethos appeal and pathos appeal to connect and convince the crowd of audiences, and logos appeal to support his claims. His speeches seems to have shown sarcastic aspects and constantly asking questions in order to keep Gorgias busy, at the same time preparing an ambush. Since rhetoric is the art of effective communication through the form of speaking and writing, with the appropriate knowledge and virtue, it can be used for good purposes. On the other hand, rhetoric also can be used as an act of conviction because rhetorical appeals can be defined as an act of persuasion as well. Learning the true extent of rhetoric can help an individual strengthen their verbal communication skills. Socrates uses rhetorical appeals of ethos, pathos and logos appeal to win his argument against Gorgias, as he is able to get the audiences’ attention through rhetoric and cornered Gorgias into revealing the true extent of rhetoric.
In classical Greek literature the subject of love is commonly a prominent theme. However, throughout these varied texts the subject of Love becomes a multi-faceted being. From this common occurrence in literature we can assume that this subject had a large impact on day-to-day life. One text that explores the many faces of love in everyday life is Plato’s Symposium. In this text we hear a number of views on the subject of love and what the true nature of love is. This essay will focus on a speech by Pausanius. Pausanius’s speech concentrates on the goddess Aphrodite. In particular he looks at her two forms, as a promoter of “Celestial Love” as well as “Common Love.” This idea of “Common Love” can be seen in a real life context in the tragedy “Hippolytus” by Euripides. This brings the philosophical views made by Pausanius into a real-life context.