Paedrus Plato's Canons Of Rhetoric

There are many ways to convey a message to readers. Often times authors, speech writers, etc., refer to Aristotle’s three main concepts of rhetoric, Ethos, Pathos, and Logos. Ethos is considered to be the, “credibility,” of the author. Pathos is the idea of, “emotional appeal,” to the audience. Finally, Logos is the translated as the, “logic,” involved when making a point. All forms of rhetoric have at least one of these concepts, while good arguments incorporate a well balanced mixture of the three.

First of all, both the nurse and Jason in “Medea” describe Medea as a “lioness” and Homer describes Achilles from “The Iliad” as a “lion, whose cubs a hunter just snatched away…” Euripides also writes “...her eye like a wild bull’s... “And Homer uses animals once again as a description for Achilles and refers to him as a wild horse in the process of being tamed. This use of strong animals in such similes highlight how powerful and strong both characters are. The audience of the texts read about how beastly and defiant these protagonists become when their pride is stepped

Direct proofs are tangible evidence used to support the speaker’s argument. Direct proofs serve as evidence for the speaker’s proposition. These proofs range from the overall argument, to facts and statistics or simply the words within the speech. Direct proofs also contribute to the logical reasoning of the argument. Logos is a form of a direct proof. Logos describes a mode of persuasion based on logical reasoning. This uses reasons to back up the speakers ideas. These reasons make a logical appeal to the truth. According to Aristotle (3) logos is an “apparent proof, provided by the words of speech itself.” Logos stands for all physical parts of the speech and its arguments, such as the content, words, and logic of the speech.

Persuasion consists of artistic and inartistic proof. This theory comes from the great Greek philosopher Aristotle. Artistic proof is controlled by the persuader who can control the choice of evidence, the organization of the persuasion, style of delivery, and language choices. Aristotle believed that there were three main types of artistic proof, ethos, pathos, and logos. Ethos is persuasion depending on a source’s credibility. Pathos uses the emotions to appeal to people. Lastly, logos uses the idea of logical and rational appeals. By implementing the three artistic proofs when raising awareness for the disease Lupus it can create great dividends for the cause and rally people to raise awareness.

In Plato’s Republic he has many examples of rhetoric. In regards to the controversial topic of women and eugenics in which Plato is almost forced into mentioning because of Adeimantus and Glaucon, he uses various rhetorical statements to portray his view on the matter. His readers believe women should be equal, so Plato attempts to persuade his readers into thinking he believes the same. For example, in the passage on women and family Plato states, “we shall assign these to each accordingly; but if the only difference apparent between them is that the female bears and the male begets, we shall not admit that this is the difference relevant for our purpose, but shall still maintain that our male and female Guardians ought to follow the same occupations” (164). He uses the women are equal and can do the same things as men strategy in order to make Athenian men understand what he is trying to say while still stroking their egos by using rhetoric. Men are in general are hard to persuade when it comes to power, so as a result Plato gives a sense of gender equality while at the same time still giving men the upper hand.

Socrates vs. Gorgias There are many definitions of rhetoric and an argument for each angle. In Gorgias we are able to view two very different interpretations of the word. Socrates challenges Gorgias in his expertise and draws his own rendition of the word. While Gorgias teaches what he believes the word means, Socrates picks out every point and questions it in order to create his own understanding of it.

In speaking of effective rhetorical persuasion, we must appeal to our target audience in a way that will get them to accept or act upon the point of view we are trying to portray. Aristotle said that we persuade others by three means: (1) by the appeal to their reason (logos); (2) by the appeal to their emotions (pathos); and (3) by the appeal of our personality or character (ethos) (Corbett and Connors 32). When Socrates, an infamous rhetorician, gave his “apology” to his fellow Athenians after being accused of atheism or not believing in the gods and corrupting the youth with similar teachings, he employed all three modes of persuasion to prove his innocence. Despite the

In Phaedrus, Plato expands on the social implication that those who wield rhetoric ought to be just and act justly when utilizing it. This recurring theme is clearly portrayed through his analysis of love, the soul, and rhetoric itself. Phaedrus is written as a dialogue, with Phaedrus and Socrates discussing their views on rhetoric. Plato structures his writing so that Socrates is the one bestowing knowledge upon Phaedrus, his young and playful pupil, by asking pointed questions to which Phaedrus replies. The relationship between Phaedrus and Socrates is both one of a student and teacher but also one of lovers, made clear by Socrates’ soft attitude and affection towards Phaedrus.

Plato and Aristotle are two rhetoricians than had a great impact on the history of rhetoric. Although they were similar in many ways, their use and definition of rhetoric were different. Plato had the more classical approach where he used rhetoric as a means of education to pass down his beliefs and practice of rhetoric to his students. He believed that it should be used to educate the masses, provoking thought, and thereby preserving that knowledge. Plato thought that rhetoric should be used to convey truth, truths already known to the audience, revealed through that dialectic critical thought. Plato also operated on absolute truths, things that are right or wrong, black or white. Aristotle was more modern in that he used rhetoric as a

Aristophanes’ Clouds tells the tale of a man named Strepsiades who is in dire financial straits due to the lavish lifestyle his son, Pheidippides leads. A great lover of horses, Pheid spends all of his father’s spare money and then some purchasing riding horses and equipment. This leads to the realization by his father Strepsiades that he will soon be faced with creditors knocking on his door. Waking up from a tormented sleep Strep expresses his worries, “I can’t sleep, wretched me, I’m being bitten-/by expenses and stables and my debts/ because of this son of mine. He with his long/ hair rides horses and drives a chariot, and dreams of horses, while I am ruined” (Clouds 12-16). Strep pleads with his son to ease his spending

My two most memorable scenes from this dialogue are Socrates’ idea of the soul and his story of Theuth and Thamus. Socrates described the soul as “the innate power of a winged team of horses and a charioteer”. In a man’s soul, one of the horses is of good stock and the other is not. The better the stock of the man’s horses, the higher his soul can fly, and the better his vision of things as they really

In Aristotle’s Rhetoric, Aristotle argues that rhetoric should be used to portray the truth and to persuade people to follow the truth, not to manipulate the audience. According to Aristotle, rhetoric is both a natural method of persuasion and something that can be learned. Aristotle says, “ordinary people do this either at random or through practice and from acquired habit” (Rhetoric). There are three modes of persuasion, logos, ethos, and pathos, each used in a unique way. “The modes of persuasion are the only true constituents of the art: everything else is merely accessory,” according to Aristotle (Ibid). For rhetoric to be effective each mode of persuasion must be used correctly - ethos to exhibit ethics, logos

The character traits of Phaethon drive the story to its tragic conclusion. In the passage “Phaethon” it says, “‘I do, I do!’ cried Phaethon. ‘Stand away, sire! The dawn grows old and day must begin! Go, horses, go!’” This shows, that Phaethon is eager trying to drive the sun chariot so he does not listen to his father's instructions. In the passage “Phaethon” it says, “I must show him that it is I driving the chariot of the sun—I alone. Apollo said not to come too close to earth, but how will he know?” This explains, how Phaethon is selfish because he chooses glory over the lives of the innocent and he doesn't even get the glory. In the passage “Phaethon” it says, “‘I’ll go to the palace of the sun right now and hold my father to his promise.

Regardless of the time frame, Virgil’s Aeneid and Homer’s epic the Iliad share both a copious amount of similarities and differences. For example, many common themes such as heroism, fate, and destiny are apparent in both works. Within the Aeneid and the Iliad, it is seen that the wars going on during that time were glorious that is why the role of gods were significant in leading both Aeneas and Achilles and influencing fate. In both texts, it is clear from the beginning that the role of the gods is to make Aeneas and Achilles fulfill their journey The Iliad focuses on the end of the Trojan War and the damaging power, while the Aeneid is focused during the aftermath of the war and underlies the foundation for the new civilization. This paper will address and argue the comparison of the role of gods and how each of the authors representation of the gods have influence on the lives of mortals.

The white horse represents all that is divine and the search for divinity is part of a person’s superego. “The chariot symbolizes a person’s or any object it can be used to best explain” (Kessler). Likewise working together to remain good and wholesome occurs when the chariot never falls apart, according to the Buddhist Smile of the Chariot. In other words, both analogies are similar because they show how to become the best version of yourself and the process to becoming whole. They also give great comparison for how one cannot be successful. The Buddhist Smile of the Chariot claims the chariot is not a chariot when missing a piece or in multiple pieces. Similarly, Plato’s Chariot Analogy claims that without the white and black horses determines whether the Chariot stays in the heavens or crashes on earth. To be successful in both analogies the chariot must not have issues and the horses must not be driven to despair because of evil.