Some questions to study: 1) What are Platos and Aristotles critiques of the sophists?

How do their respective theories try to do something other than what they claim the sophists do? They believe that Sophists practice false rhetoric, and try to persuade people for reasons other than the common good They base their persuasion off of the doxa, not episteme They both use rhetoric based on logic and rationality, and in aid of the greater good

2) What are three genres of classical rhetoric as persuasion? What are the different functions and ends (purposes) of each of these genres? Political Deliberative food supply, means and end, defense Forensic Judicial motive, guilt, innocence, trials Ceremonial Epideictic designed to exhibit rhetorical skill, any speech o These genres are part of Aristotles Specific Material Topoi

3) What was the function and purpose of Platos Gorgias? What does it tell us both about Platos philosophy, his rhetorical theory, and his style as a writer? What is the function and purpose of the Phaedrus? What does it tell us about Platos philosophy, rhetorical theory, and style as a writer? Why is it important to our understanding of Platos rhetorical theory to differentiate between Plato the writer, and Socrates the fictional character in Platos dialogues? Function: to express how Sophists use false rhetoric Gorgias tells us that Plato does not agree with the Sophists use of rhetoric (flattery), it shows that rhetoric should be used to attain GOOD, through movement of the soul Function: to express what and how true rhetoric is used Phaedrus tells us that Plato believes that you need dialectic to achieve rhetoric, in order to attain the TRUTH, and move the soul to the GOOD Plato chooses Socrates as a tool to exemplify dialectic discovering the truth of opinions, as Socrates is famous for his Socratic dialogue interrogation and discussion

4) How does Socrates make his argument against Gorgias teaching and practice of rhetoric? How does he question rhetorics importance and uniqueness? What does Gorgias see as the subject of rhetoric, and why does Socrates challenge Gorgias on this point? Gorgias says rhetoric is concerned with speech, the greatest of all human affairs, and can make a slave out of every other profession (Platos) Socrates says that Gorgias use of rhetoric is not an art, but flattery, as he is not using it for the greatest good

He questions rhetorics importance and uniqueness because Gorgias concern about rhetoric is POWER this is what he sees as the subject of rhetoric Socrates challenges Gorgias on this point because using rhetoric for power is harmful to the soul, which contradicts Platos theory of rhetoric as persuasion

5) How does Socrates finally define rhetoric in Gorgias? How does he define cookery, and how does he transfer this metaphor onto rhetoric? How does this metaphor make rhetoric a form of flattery? Why is rhetoric, then, not an art, according to Socrates? How does Socrates define rhetoric in the Phaedrus? How does his medicine/rhetoric analogy change from one dialogue to the next? What are the conditions for a true art of rhetoric according to Socrates? Gorgias: True rhetoric is based on TRUE KNOWLEDGE (episteme) not opinions and beliefs (doxa) the movement of the soul through words, on any occasion, to the GOOD to point out what is just Cookery is the false art of medicine, the cure of the body. False arts provide a hollow image of something more moral and good. Thus, the false art of rhetoric is a hollow image of justice (the cure of the soul, this is why rhetoric is used) a false art is a flattery Rhetoric, as flattery, is not an art because it is not being used for justice, and what is good Phaedrus: Rhetoric is the art of influencing the soul through words towards the good, and is obtained through dialectics The medicine/rhetoric analogy changes in that rhetoric in the Phaedrus is true, not just an appearance of what is true A true art of rhetoric must be attained through dialectic, must have a rational account, and must lead to truth in order to move the soul to GOOD

6) What is Platos theory of the soul? How does that theory help us to understand his view on rhetoric? How does the metaphor of the charioteer and two horses help to clarify these connections? Platos theory of the soul is based on the metaphor of the 2 horses and the charioteer he believes the soul is a sort of composite, comprised of many pieces working together to achieve enlightenment The soul is the agent in proving rhetoric 2 horses and charioteer: describes how the human soul must control and work through two opposing forces of human nature in order to reach the GOOD, not to be distracted by flattery and easier solutions, the transcendence of the soul is key in rhetoric there IS a truth, according to Plato

7) How are Aristotles rhetorical theories an outgrowth and a response to both the rhetorical handbooks of early Greek democratic public life as well as the sophists? How is Aristotles rhetorical theory an outgrowth and a response to Platos dialogues on rhetoric? It is a response to the Sophists in that rhetoric is only used rationally for the good Aristotles rhetorical theory is an outgrowth and response to Platos dialogues in rhetoric in that Aristotle believes that the truth cannot be known, as Plato does. Also, Aristotles theory of rhetoric is precisely methodical, whereas Platos is precisely morally driven

8) What is Aristotles classic definition of rhetoric? How do we explain such a definition? How does he prove that rhetoric is indeed useful, universal, and an art? Rhetoric is the faculty of observing any particular case the means of persuasion. It is a META approach to persuasion, a method in which investigates the WAYS in which persuasion can and should be used Rhetoric is useful and universal because it occurs in everyday conversation, and that it applies to all kinds of speech It is an art, because it as a techne, which implies episteme: a true and distinct body of knowledge

9) What are Aristotles three means of artistic proofs? Artistic proofs: influential and GOOD means of effecting persuasion o Ethos character of the speaker/audience o Pathos emotions o Logos rational account

10) What is the difference between inductive logic and deductive (syllogistic) logic? How are examples and enthymemes used as devices for these respective logics? How do each of these affect a speakers construction of arguments? Examples and Enthymemes stem from the artistic proof, mean of persuasion LOGOS, they are modes of persuasion in which express rhetoric rationally and logically

11) How does the audience play such an important role in the construction of enthymemes? How does this form of argument potentially aid democratic structures of government? In order for enthymemes to be effective, the speaker must know his audience o Ie, the elderly are cynical and wise, whereas the young are optimistic and impulsive

This form of argument would aid democratic structures of government in that it would make communication and understanding between the audience and the speaker clearer, as does the correct uses of ethos and pathos.

12) How is Socrates idea of rhetoric an idealistic one? How do these ideas both enable and constrain democracy? How is Aristotles idea of rhetoric a pragmatic one? How do these ideals both enable and constrain democracy? Socrates idea of rhetoric is idealistic (aiming to pursue perfection) in its notion of the transcendence of the soul, and TRUE knowledge. Aristotle would argue, who determines what is true, from what is not? We can only be as rational and precise as possible in investigating the truth o I think Platos theory would be problematic in democracy because people want concrete outcomes, not soulful/moral solutions Aristotles idea of rhetoric is pragmatic in that it is sensible in probable. We cannot determine the truth; we can only rely on logic and what is good, as described in the doxa. The method-base makes it pragmatic. o I think Aristotles theory is better for democracy, in that it is realistic, not ambiguous.

13) What is the relation between rhetoric and dialectic according to both Plato and Aristotle? Plato: rhetoric is achieved THROUGH dialectic o In order to know the truth, one must analyze and then synthesize OR discover the truth of opinions, which is dialectic Aristotle: rhetoric is the counterpart of dialectic rhetoric is closely related to dialectic o Both concerned with more than one subject, both investigate both sides of an argument, both deal with arguments from accepted premises

14) What is the relationship between a moral based rhetorical theory and a method based? Use Plato and Aristotles text to demonstrate. Plato is moral based Aristotle is method based The relationship between the two is that they both revolve around the idea of truth. Plato believes that there is an attainable truth (episteme), and Aristotle disagrees, we cannot know the truth, we can only know by probability (doxa)

15) How does Aristotles system of topical invention work? Aristotles method-based theory on the topics of which rhetoric can be used a) 3 Specific Material Topoi; ethos + pathos + 3 genres b) Universal Topoi; past/future, possible/impossible, more/less

c) 28 Lines of Reasoning; a fortiori, etc 16) How does Aristotles rhetorical theory of pathos avoid what he describes as measuring with a crooked ruler? Metaphor: Persuading a judge by stirring him to anger (relying too much on pathos) would be like using a crooked ruler. Especially in the case of law where the legislators have made the laws and the facts either make it so or not so. Relying too much on any of the artistic proofs is not efficient or moral use of rhetoric

17) How does studying rhetorical theory via Plato and Aristotle help us identify and critique rhetorical dimensions of public texts? In what ways is studying rhetorical theory via Plato and Aristotle significant for considerations of contemporary politics, law, and culture? 18) What does rhetoric have to do with love? Draw your response from Platos Phaedrus. Plato portrays rhetoric ostensibly as love, and explains how it should be practiced A Sophists approach encourages that the non-lover should be favored, rather than the lover, since the non-lover has more power and opportunities Platos true rhetoric approach suggests exactly the opposite, that the lover should be favored, rather than the non-lover, because the lover acts selflessly, and out of the GOOD of his heart o He goes further to explain the erotic and moral forces of love, in comparison to the vice and virtuous forces of the soul