2,417 words
Part 3 of 14 (Part 1 here, Part 2 here, Part 4 here)
When Socrates finally speaks directly to Gorgias, he asks a simple, straightforward question: ‘What is your art (techne)?’ To which Gorgias gives a simple, straightforward answer: “Rhetoric [rhetorike] is my art, Socrates.”
Socrates continues: “Then is it best to call you a rhetorician [rhetor]?” Gorgias agrees and amplifies: “Yes, Socrates, and a good one too, if you want to call me what, as Homer puts it, ‘I boast myself to be.’” Earlier Gorgias said nobody has asked him anything new in years. He’s heard it all. Now he says that he is not just a rhetorician, he boasts of being a good one. Later, when Socrates asks him to confine himself to short answers, Gorgias says that long speeches are sometimes necessary — as Socrates clearly knows, since he uses them himself — but, still, Gorgias is better than anyone else at short answers.
In short, Gorgias thinks very highly of himself. But he has every reason to. He is highly accomplished. But is it right to brag about such things? The Greeks thought it was impolite to show off to one’s inferiors. But they saw nothing wrong with frankness among friends. Thus Gorgias may simply think that he is among peers, not inferiors.
Rhetoric & Logos
Remember, however, that Socrates wants to know more than the name of Gorgias’ art. He wants to know its power (dunamis). First, he asks if Gorgias is able to teach his art to others. Gorgias says yes.
Then Socrates asks, “What is rhetoric about?” Weavers make garments. Composers make music. What is rhetoric about? Gorgias replies that rhetoric is about “speech” (logos).
But aren’t speeches about something? Rhetoric is about speeches, but what are those speeches about? Thus Socrates asks Gorgias to distinguish the speeches rhetoric deals with from the logoi of other arts such as medicine and physical training.
At this point, Gorgias could introduce a distinction between the form and content of speeches. Rhetoric could deal with all kinds of speeches, but it could focus on their common formal qualities rather than their particular contents. Aristotle, for instance, takes this route, focusing on the formal properties of all persuasive logoi: logic, dialectic, and rhetoric. For Aristotle, rhetoric can be defined as the study of the techniques of persuasion about human affairs.
Gorgias, however, does not take this route. Instead, he claims that rhetoric differs from other technai because it consists entirely of speeches, without any grubby hands-on work. Doctors deal with speeches, but they also deal with blood, phlegm, and pus. Physical trainers deal with speeches, but they also deal with flabby and sweaty bodies. Rhetoricians, however, deal only with speeches. Their hands are clean. Thus it is a perfect art for gentlemen.
At this point, Socrates introduces a distinction between two kinds of art. Socrates is assuming that all true arts are teachable. They are teachable by means of speeches (logoi). Thus all true arts involve logoi. But they involve them in different ways. For instance, such arts as sculpture and painting primarily involve physical actions. Yes, logoi are involved in teaching them. But once taught, they can be carried on in silence. Gorgias agrees that these arts do not fall into the province of rhetoric.
However, other arts don’t just have logoi annexed to them for teaching. They also take place entirely through the medium of logoi. This is how Gorgias describes rhetoric. But the problem with this account of rhetoric is that it does not distinguish it from other arts that take place entirely through the medium of logoi, such as mathematics. Beyond that, to say that rhetoric takes place entirely in the medium of logoi still does not make clear what the logoi are about.
Rhetoric & the Greatest Good
Gorgias then says that rhetoric is about “[t]he greatest [megista] of human concerns, Socrates, and the best [arista].” But Socrates points out that experts in other arts — physicians, trainers, moneymakers — say that their arts pursue the greatest and best for man: health, fitness, money, etc. Besides, Gorgias doesn’t actually say what the greatest and best is, so Socrates asks “. . . what is this greatest good [megiston agathon] for mankind of which you are the craftsman [demigurge]?” (452d).
Gorgias replies: “. . . personal freedom for mankind and at the same time the source of rule over others in one’s own city” (452d). For Gorgias, the greatest good is freedom for oneself and power over others. But isn’t the acme of freedom for yourself and power over others tyranny? Gorgias, of course, doesn’t openly teach tyranny. That would be disreputable. But as we will see, some of his students draw precisely that conclusion.
Rhetoric produces the greatest good by teaching you how to persuade the law courts and the legislative assemblies to give you power over other men:
What is greater than the speech that persuades the judges in the courts, or the senators in the council, or the citizens in the assembly, or at any other political meeting? — if you have the power of uttering this speech, you will have the physician as your slave, and the trainer as your slave, and the money-maker of whom you talk will be gathering treasures, not for himself, but for you who are able to speak and to persuade the multitude. (452e)
The art of rhetoric gives one the power literally to enslave the practitioners of all the other arts, because rhetoric allows one to grasp the levers of political power, which allows one to regulate the whole of society.
The Art of Persuasion
At this point, Socrates thinks that Gorgias has given an adequate account of rhetoric, namely that “rhetoric is the craftsman of persuasion, this is the whole of its business and its sole purpose.” Gorgias agrees.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c7d40/c7d40bac9f703d438840ec4060bcd1716007a88c" alt=""
You can buy Greg Johnson’s The Trial of Socrates here.
Then Socrates begins to butter up Gorgias, saying that he is obviously motivated purely by the love of truth. Gorgias, to his credit, reacts warily, wondering where this is leading.
Socrates then asks if rhetoric is the only art that persuades, or do others persuade as well. For instance, do teachers persuade? Gorgias agrees that they do. The same is true of mathematicians. The same is true of all arts, because all arts can be taught. So what distinguished rhetoric from all the other arts, if all of them produce persuasion? Clearly, what differentiates them would have to be that about which they persuade, the object of their persuasion. So about what does rhetoric persuade us?
Gorgias answers that “rhetoric is the art of persuasion in courts of law and other assemblies . . . and about the just [dike] and unjust [adike].” At the mention of justice and injustice, I imagine Socrates’ ears pricking up like a dog’s, for now we are entering the territory of philosophy.
Knowledge vs. Belief
But before Socrates talks of justice and injustice, he introduces another philosophical distinction between knowledge (mathesis) and belief (pistis). You can have true or false beliefs, but you can’t have true or false knowledge. If you know something, it is true. If your putative knowledge turns out to be false, it was only a belief. If you put forth a view as a belief, you are saying, “I believe it, but I could be wrong.” Gorgias accepts this distinction.
Then Socrates asks if there are two kinds of persuasion: one that yields belief (which may or may not be true) and the other that yields knowledge. Gorgias agrees. Then Socrates asks whether rhetorical persuasion produces knowledge or belief. Gorgias readily agrees that rhetoric produces only belief. Then Socrates draws his conclusion: “Then rhetoric, it seems, crafts a persuasion that creates belief about the just and unjust but not knowledge about them.” Gorgias agrees.
Then Socrates makes an important concession to Gorgias. He argues that rhetoricians are forced to impart beliefs about justice, rather than knowledge, to law courts and legislative assemblies, because it is impossible to teach deep ideas to large numbers of people in a short time. Gorgias agrees emphatically.
But if rhetoricians don’t have the option of imparting knowledge of justice to the many, then they can’t be blamed for merely imparting belief.
Moreover, the same limits would apply to philosophers when they address law courts and legislative assemblies. This implies, for one thing, that when Socrates addressed the jury in his trial, he was trying to invoke belief rather than impart knowledge. He was acting as a rhetorician, not a philosopher.
Rhetoricians vs. Experts
Then Socrates poses an objection to Gorgias. When the legislative assembly meets to choose a physician or a shipbuilder or any other artisan, do they really consult rhetoricians, or do they consult experts on medicine, shipbuilding, etc.? When walls, harbors, and docks are constructed, the assembly consults with expert builders, not rhetoricians. When generals are chosen, military experts are consulted, not rhetoricians. What does Gorgias have to say to this?
But before Gorgias can answer, Socrates puts him on the spot. He reminds Gorgias that they have an audience. Many of the people who attended Gorgias’ speech followed him outdoors and stayed to watch his conversation with Socrates. Socrates points out that many of these young men are potential students of Gorgias. Of course they are also potential students of Socrates. Which one they choose might depend on the outcome of the present conversation. Socrates suggests that these young men are too shy to challenge Gorgias themselves, so he will speak for them .“‘What good is it to come to you, Gorgias?’ they will say — “What will you teach us to advise the city about? Only the just and unjust, or about these other things that Socrates has just mentioned?’ How will you answer them?”
Gorgias is game for this challenge, pointing out that the walls, docks, and harbors of Athens were built because of the oratory of Themistocles and Pericles, not because of the expert testimony of the builders. Socrates accepts this. Indeed, he saw Pericles speak about the middle wall of Athens. Gorgias also points out that when decisions are being made on such issues, those who have rhetoricians advising them usually win.
The Daimonic Power of Rhetoric
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4ca4d/4ca4d86f0dddfda4a9915259419e6712ac769065" alt=""
You can buy Greg Johnson’s From Plato to Postmodernism here
Socrates agrees, saying he finds the “power” (dunamis) of rhetoric “wondrous” (thaumazon). For Plato, “wonder” (thaumazein) is the experience that gives rise to philosophy. Socrates also characterizes the power of rhetoric as nothing short of daimonic.
Gorgias says, “Yes, Socrates, if only you knew the whole of it, that it [rhetoric] encompasses and subordinates to itself just about all powers” (456a). Beyond that, Gorgias claims that rhetoric makes all the other arts effective. Without rhetoric, none of the other arts can achieve their ends.
Gorgias then gives a striking example of this. On certain occasions, he accompanied his brother Herodicus, a physician, to see his patients. Sometimes, when a patient refused the treatment Herodicus prescribed, Gorgias would use rhetoric to persuade the patient to comply. He adds that if a rhetorician or a doctor were to speak to the assembly about medicine, the people would more readily believe the rhetorician than the doctor. For rhetoric allows people to speak persuasively to the public on any subject, regardless of expertise. Such is the power of rhetoric.
Philosophy vs. Technocracy
At this point is becomes clear why Socrates regards the sophists as rivals. Gorgias has basically defined rhetoric as the art that allows one to make use of all things. Rhetoric comprehends all other arts, subordinates all other arts to it, and makes them effective, i.e., persuades people to accept their fruits.
The sophists are the teachers of rhetoric; therefore, they possess what can be called the master art: the techne that rules over all other technai. Because this master art rules over all other arts, it is the political art. This is why the sophists were also understood as teachers of what one could call “political science.” We have a word for rule by techne: “technocracy.” Sophistry is technocracy.
The Socratic philosopher pursues wisdom, which is defined as the ability to make right use of all things. Like rhetoric, wisdom is practical. It is about using things, making them effective. Like rhetoric, wisdom is comprehensive. It is about using all things.
But there is a crucial difference. Rhetoric is simply concerned with effective use, whereas wisdom is concerned with right use. The Greeks thought that every techne is morally neutral. The same medical techniques can be used for good or evil ends. Thus every techne needs something else—something outside or above it—to direct it toward good ends and away from bad ends: this is wisdom, which can make right use of all things because it has knowledge of the good.
The problem with technocracy is that it makes the use of techne into another technical problem. All arts are problematic, because they can be misused. The technocrat mistakes this for another technical problem, to be solved by a higher-order art, until one arrives at a master art, which holds supreme power over society. How can we be assured that this supreme art itself is not misused? The short answer is: We can’t. For the master art, being an art, is also morally neutral.
Every art is a form of power (dunamis) to do things. But no power is unconditionally good, because arts can be used for good or evil ends. Only the good is unconditionally good. Thus, for the arts to be good, they must borrow their goodness from outside them. Wisdom is based on knowledge of the good, which gives it the ability to direct all things to good ends. The standard of right use is: promoting human well-being.
The only solution to the problem of techne is to step outside of techne altogether. One must bring in practical wisdom, which uses its knowledge of the good to ensure that all arts are used rightly.
Technocracy is dangerous, because it thinks that the accumulation of more power is the solution for the problems of lesser forms of power. But the wider the empire of technique, the greater the concentration of power, the greater the danger of its misuse, for power is never unconditionally good.
Because both philosophy and sophistry are concerned with the use of all things, they are easily confused. Only the moral factor separates them. Because sophistry focuses on power, regardless of right and wrong, Socrates regards it as a dangerous rival, philosophy’s evil twin.
Notes%20on%20Platoand%238217%3Bs%20Gorgias%2C%20Part%203%0APhilosophyand%238217%3Bs%20Evil%20Twin%0A
Share
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate at least $10/month or $120/year.
- Donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Everyone else will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days. Naturally, we do not grant permission to other websites to repost paywall content before 30 days have passed.
- Paywall member comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Paywall members have the option of editing their comments.
- Paywall members get an Badge badge on their comments.
- Paywall members can “like” comments.
- Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to editor@counter-currents.com. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, please visit our redesigned Paywall page.
1 comment
Very interesting. Thank you.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.