Classical Rhetoric Theory, Essay Example 

Rhetoric defined is the art or study of using language effectively and persuasively to get an idea or group of ideas across in philosophy. It is further a special style of speaking or writing of a particular subject with a philosophical emphasis. Gorgias of Leonti (C.485-380 Bce) was a leading Greek rhetorician and Sophist of the fifth century BCE. “He came to Athens on a diplomatic mission on behalf of Leontini in 427 B.C.E. and made an enormous personal success, delivering public orations as well as his official speech.” (“Gorgias of Leonti”). He further gave speeches at the Olympic and Pythian games. It is often debatable whether he should be classified as a Sophist. His greatest contribution was that of a marvelous public speaker. The greatest contribution of a Sophist was that of virtue. He was the real founder of discipline whilst he used language full of antithesis and alliteration. “As Plato reports it, he claimed that the art of persuasion was superior to all others because it enslaves all the rest—not by force, but with their own consent (Philebus 58a–b). Plato’s Gorgias presents Gorgias as a genial, self-satisfied old gentleman, basically unreflective and blind to the morally problematic nature of such a craft.”(“Gorgias of Leonti”). Of his most notorious surviving works that is most remembered by students and practiced in universities throughout the world, Palamedes is presented as an advertisement and used as a focal point for students to study. It is based on the probability, a characteristic rhetorical form of argument.

“Plato separates the philosopher from the Sophist through the dramatic opposition of Socrates to the rhetoricians and sophists.”(McCoy, 2007). He further distinguishes Socrates from the Sophists by their moral intentions and their innate virtues. Plato for sure agrees with Socrates that what makes rhetoric is how his moral purpose develops and not through is faculty. The philosopher and sophist share the same breathtaking mannerisms in how they speak and act but they do not go to the heart of philosophy with rhetoric and sophistry. There has to be a true distinctiveness which separates the true rhetoric from the sophistic. For example, Giorgas showed great contrast with his vision and beliefs of political art and mere imitative rhetoric. “The Phaedrus seems to show philosophy and rhetoric as compatible, while Book One of the Republic presents a sophist with an intellectual position about justice alongside Socrates, with arguments that can seem sophistical. Plato’s Sophist defines the sophist but, at one point in the dialogue, the Stranger equates “noble sophistry” with a practice that sounds much like Socrates’ questioning activity (Sophist 230b–c).” (McCoy, 2007). There are many dialogues where Socrates finds himself conversing with a “Sophist, a professional rhetorician, or one of their followers” in which he discusses a particular definition of the sophist as compared to other enterprises. Other contributions seem to not contribute to the assembly or political view at all. Plato thought with the conversation with Socrates that the rhetoricians and sophists had a fine line or distinction between what a philosopher and sophist were. He further thought this distinction was extremely difficult to deduce. Plato is within the full realm of rhetorical dimensions whilst at times he associates the sophists with the rhetorician and presents Socrates philosophical practice as rhetorical. This practice was a “relatively new term at this time and shifted from dialogue to dialogue with the definition of the meaning to persuade through the use of words.” (McCoy, 2007).

References

McCoy, M. (2007) Plato on the Rhetoric of Philosophers and Sophists Retrieved June 27, 2010 from, http://www.cambridge.org/us/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521878630&ss=exc